|
Tree Blog
Douglas Fir: Icon of the West
By Matthew Mega, Conservation Director, Seattle Audubon
 According to the Urban Forest Management Plan about 40% of the trees in Seattle are small flowering fruit trees. Only 30% of the trees in Seattle are conifers.
When we think about an icon that represents the Pacific Northwest, it is the Douglas Fir or the Western Red Cedar that often comes to mind. These majestic trees remind us of our history in logging and a rugged survival-of-the-fittest mindset. Conifers frame the views of the Puget Sound and Mount Rainier, and, most importantly, give ever-green life to our dreary, wet winters.
Some say we can still see a bit of this history in Schmitz Park. Remaining old-growth trees stand next to giant stumps with “springboard” notches, vestiges of logging days. Of course, we don’t expect to see 100-year-old Douglas Firs along the streets of Seattle today. But maybe we should plant more of these historic conifers for our future. Why can’t we someday have streets lined with Douglas Firs?
 Spend a few minutes as you walk through your neighborhood, and locate one of these icons of the Pacific Northwest. There aren’t many of these giants left, but I guarantee that when you stand next to one and really grasp its grandeur you will do a double-take. If you need a place to start, come by the Seattle Audubon Nature Shop at 35th Avenue NE and NE 82nd Street in Wedgwood. You’ll see three mature Douglas Firs and one Douglas Fir snag, all of which provide food and shelter for many birds and help to represent the imagery and history of the Pacific Northwest. Hopefully, after you see a few of these great trees in your neighborhood you will begin to see additional places where they should be planted.
Share a comment on this blog posting
Comments
Commenter: Steve Zemke Save the Trees!
, 5/19/08
As majestic as Douglas firs are, it is still not enough to prevent them from disappearing in Seattle. Because of their size, they have an expansive root system, that needs protection and is easily damaged and cut down as larger developments are placed on lots. And we keep losing the few remaining groves of Douglas fir trees around the city. Currently threatened in North Seattle is a grove of 108 trees called the Waldo Woods in the Maple Leaf community.
In addition a second grove of 130 large Douglas fir, western red cedar and madrone trees is threathened to be reduced by 2/3 by the Seattle School District as it builds a new classroom addition to replace decaying portables at Ingraham High School. Other sites exist on the campus for building the addition without cutting down any large trees but the School District does not seem to be listening.
In both cases if people want to help preserve urban forests in Seattle they need to speak up. To help save the Ingraham trees people should contact the Seattle School Board. To help save the Waldo Woods trees, people should contact the Seattle City Council and Mayor Nickels.
It is one thing to say we want to protect urban trees and forests - it is another to actually do it. Since 1970 the forest canopy in the city of Seattle has gone from 40% to 18%. We are losing the battle. It's time to start more aggressively saving our existing trees as well as planting new ones.
Let your elected officials know what you think.
|
Commenter: bigtrees
, 6/3/08
I am the owner of a 30 acre forested woodlot and am a huge proponent of forests and the environment. However, I disagree that the Waldo Woods should be saved. These trees are not native, they were planted by former owners of the property. The entire parcel of land was cleared to make room for the hospital and the woods there are not in prime condition for hydrology, wildlife habitat, or other environmental benefits.
In addition a second grove of 130 large Douglas fir, western red cedar and madrone trees is threathened to be reduced by 2/3 by the Seattle School District as it builds a new classroom addition to replace decaying portables at Ingraham High School. Other sites exist on the campus for building the addition without cutting down any large trees but the School District does not seem to be listening.
We all need to understand that the Puget Sound grows more lumber per acre of woodland than anywhere else in the world. We truly are the best situated to provide lumber for housing projects all over - houses that people keep wanting and buying. It makes no sense to preseve trees here like a landmark when more acreage of trees elsewhere has to be cut instead.
Also, people need to recognize that, in our American way, the landowner is the one that decides how to use his land. The landowner purchased the land, the landowner pays taxes on the land, and the landowner is responsible for the land. It's his choice on what kind of vegetation (and where) should grow on his land. How is Waldo Woods different than any farmer?
|
Commenter: Fremonster
, 6/6/08
Hi, Matt: Please, don't tell the city, but we have a Western Red Cedar in our parking strip; planted it from an itsy bitsy shoot that came from a Wenatchee front yard of all places about 8 years ago; it's now about 30-35 feet tall.
Also, there is a Doug Fir in our neighbor's yard which was planted from a small start in 1948. I don't know how tall it is, but it is a beauty! We have been enjoying it for 44 years.
Yes, I agree, there should be more evergreens in the city. What can we do to make it so?
|
Commenter: Steve Zemke
, 7/20/08
Bigtrees does not seem to understand that trees are not just for timber for building houses. Trees provide value to a city by removing pollution from the air, by reducing water runoff, acting as wind breaks and providing restful areas for people to walk in and as habitat for birds and other wildlife.
Cutting down 75 to 100 year old trees irregardless of whether they were planted by someone is removing a valuable asset in the city and drastically altering the neighborhood.
In the case of Ingraham High School it is not private property but owned by the taxpayers. The school district however choose not to involve the neighbors and surrounding community in picking a site to build a new addition. They have betrayed the neighborhood by acting in secret and refusing to consider the value of the tree grove as a natural area, as a park area and as a unique asset to the school campus.
|
|
