U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-21-2010, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Long Island/NYC
11,329 posts, read 17,036,532 times
Reputation: 6070

Advertisements

Me too.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2010, 04:13 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, United States
4,230 posts, read 9,109,758 times
Reputation: 1406
Don't coconuts grow in extreme parts of Texas?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2010, 04:19 PM
 
Location: Upper East Side of Texas
12,521 posts, read 23,043,139 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA View Post
Don't coconuts grow in extreme parts of Texas?
They've been grown successfully on Galveston Island in micro climates before.

Mostly in extreme South Florida though.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2010, 04:23 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, United States
4,230 posts, read 9,109,758 times
Reputation: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
They've been grown successfully on Galveston Island in micro climates before.

Mostly in extreme South Florida though.
That's what I thought as well as in the Rio Grande Valley. They're supposedly some in extreme south LA and I believe they grow in parts of CA.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 02:20 AM
 
14,111 posts, read 22,686,575 times
Reputation: 4203
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA View Post
That's what I thought as well as in the Rio Grande Valley. They're supposedly some in extreme south LA and I believe they grow in parts of CA.
Yeah, I've heard that to. But outside of SoFla, they don't grow very easy at all in other parts of the US.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 03:18 AM
 
Location: Savannah GA
13,420 posts, read 16,873,599 times
Reputation: 9511
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur View Post
... there is nothing wrong with planting trees not natural to an area like Newsboy suggested ...
By point was that those towering palms that line the streets of Beverly Hills, Bel Air, etc and which people so easily associate with California and which the tourist agencies so eagerly use to promote the state (and which I think actually appear on some license plates) are NOT native to the Los Angeles Basin. They are cultivated, just like the everything else in the region. And none of it would exist if Los Angeles hadn't hijacked and stolen the water out of the Owens Valley nearly 100 years ago, turning a once lush agriculture region into an arid desert.

This was done so L.A. could have PALM TREES:
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,412 posts, read 8,201,918 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsboy View Post
By point was that those towering palms that line the streets of Beverly Hills, Bel Air, etc and which people so easily associate with California and which the tourist agencies so eagerly use to promote the state (and which I think actually appear on some license plates) are NOT native to the Los Angeles Basin. They are cultivated, just like the everything else in the region. And none of it would exist if Los Angeles hadn't hijacked and stolen the water out of the Owens Valley nearly 100 years ago, turning a once lush agriculture region into an arid desert.

This was done so L.A. could have PALM TREES:
You seem to be writing about 2 different issues. Water from the Owens Valley was not solely to water palm trees! By the early 1900's the entire LA Basin & adjacent valleys were dependent on another source of water beside local rivers due to the huge increase in population. Also whole areas were cultivated for agriculture, primarily citrus groves in the early 20th century. Palm trees generally don't require a whole lot of water, especially the native California palm. The import of water was the main reason for Los Angeles' significant growth. But aqueducts are not a new thing to civilization since the Romans built some of the first water systems known to mankind and some still exist. Nearly every major city has aqueducts since local sources of water are often inadequate. In California, the Sierra Nevada Mountains are the primary source of the state's water and why reservoirs were built. The reason California is the most prosperous state for agriculture is due to these reservoirs and aqueducts. California produces the bulk of fresh vegetable and fruits for the entire nation; this would never have been possible without aqueducts.

The Owens Valley situation was litigated nearly 20 years ago and the amount of water LA gets from Mono Lake has deceased considerably. In-fact the Lake has risen to levels not seen in many decades since the water is no longer being exported as it was. The Owens Valley is still feeling the effects of the loss of water but the state of California reversed this situation and the recovery of the valley is now occurring.

All the states in the Southwest depend on sources of water beyond what is available locally and why the Colorado river water is divided up between Nevada, Arizona and California. Phoenix, Las Vegas, San Diego, LA, etc could not exist without the Colorado River.

But this topic is on palm trees and to suggest that LA shouldn't have all the palms it does because of imported water is silly.

Last edited by californio sur; 09-22-2010 at 11:39 AM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 02:48 PM
 
235 posts, read 251,749 times
Reputation: 97
LA wouldnt have ANY palms if not for imported water. At least here in the SE coast our palms are native. Palms look just as stupid and out of place under a glass airport atrium in Chicago as they do in LA in my opinion. At least the palms in Miami were there before the people were.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,412 posts, read 8,201,918 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLnSAV View Post
LA wouldnt have ANY palms if not for imported water. At least here in the SE coast our palms are native. Palms look just as stupid and out of place under a glass airport atrium in Chicago as they do in LA in my opinion. At least the palms in Miami were there before the people were.
You are wrong. You think those coconut palms along the beach in Miami are native? Miami was basically a wetlands with native scrub trees and some native Florida palms like you see in the Everglades. Anywhere along the Gulf Coast the native palms were scattered here and there and not in any large numbers. The palms in New Orleans, Houston, Galveston, Tampa, Savannah were not there along the streets when these cities were developed. They were planted. Same thing in Los Angeles and southern California. The native habitat for California fan palms are the oases in the desert where maybe a few hundred palm trees are found along artisan springs. LA has more palm trees than any city outside southern Florida because they grow so well and don't require a lot of care. Some species of palms don't do well in California just like some don't grow that well in Florida depending on the variety and if their native growing conditions are desert or subtropical wetlands.

This whole discussion about palm trees not being native to Los Angeles is ridiculous if one doesn't understand how trees are planted in any American city.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Long Island/NYC
11,329 posts, read 17,036,532 times
Reputation: 6070
Palm trees look good mostly anywhere they can survive.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top