Why do trees in North America look so prosperous? (bugs, beetle, cold)
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.
I have this impression since long, in North America trees look really like they're thriving, they're tall, large, well structured, even the young ones and even in the arid areas, may they be in the countryside or cities.
This is not the case for the other continents, in Russia for example you'll notice small poor trees, birchers with a narrow trunk, drooping branches and small leaves.
Of course sometimes there are tall exampled but they're not fully widespread as in America.
I'm not kidding since I like trees and during my spare time waste my time using GoogleStreetView and the difference is staggering, it seems, for some reason trees grow taller in North America.
check out Joyce Kilmer who wrote the poem, 'Trees'. Kilmer was killed in BE or FR? during WW1.
Perhaps the diversity of soil types and natural selection play a part as well as the proliferation of a large variety of hardwoods and evergreens vs the monoculture typically seen in EU.
Depends on where you look. The northeast, all the way to the Mississippi was covered by what was called the Eastern Woodlands. Plenty of farms existed and each had its own woodlot mangaed for timber.
Cities often have tree lined streets where certain species are selected. some hybrids and some alien, locust and euro sycamore cpme to mind. No one picks up forest litter so the trees have a ready supply of nutrients.
All depends on what region you are looking. Temperate regions produce larger trees than the far north, generally.
Where water is scarce tree roots will travel along the surface or very near it to find water instead of just going straight down. Travellin thru the hardwoods you can find old fields depending on the structure of the tree and what side of the tree produced the most branches.
Of course your and my observations are anecdotal and provide fun to speculate.
EU also faced 'the little ice age' around the 10th century? which may have limited or eliminated some species.Fop love the giant beech trees in EU along with spruce trees further north. Many countries were denuded to build ships, keep warm
Enjoy your misperceptions about American forests ... which vary greatly as to species across the country.
you apparently haven't seen the huge swaths of downed/damaged trees from the pine beetle infestastion out West.
Hundreds of thousands of acres of dead/dying trees. Some downed in wind gusts, and all just fuel waiting to be ignited by natural (lightning) or by man-made accidents (had one fire recently started by sparks from a railroad car wheel bearing failure). Some of these fires are so large that they cannot be put out but only contained to some extent. We are depending upon the seasonal change to cooler and wetter weather to put these fires out.
As well, some species that were extensively planted for shade and shelter are now under attack from other bugs/diseases. For example, Elm trees are dying out in huge numbers and are having to be replaced. These were not native to the area but brought in during the settlement/development of the region.
We are a younger nation than other countries. Perhaps after a few more centuries, our forests will look worse too.
I think America still has so much vast, unspoiled country, that plants, including trees, have not yet been affected by civiliztion.
that looks like a cemetery so , beside a high amount of rains that the Oceanic climate gives them the trees should benefit a well fertilized soil...
yet they ain't that tall and are thin, like their branches, with leaves being small
not really thriving...
now let's go to Boston, in the middle of the city, surrounded by cars and pollution, same latitude,same climatic zone, yet trunks are large and trees tall, powerfu
I have this impression since long, in North America trees look really like they're thriving, they're tall, large, well structured, even the young ones and even in the arid areas, may they be in the countryside or cities.
This is not the case for the other continents, in Russia for example you'll notice small poor trees, birchers with a narrow trunk, drooping branches and small leaves.
Of course sometimes there are tall exampled but they're not fully widespread as in America.
I'm not kidding since I like trees and during my spare time waste my time using GoogleStreetView and the difference is staggering, it seems, for some reason trees grow taller in North America.
What's the reason?a better soil?better species?
Depends onwhere you live. The Central States are predominantly open plains and desert.
For example my farm is on the extreme eastern edge of the NorthernHigh plains and there are no native trees of any size. All of the large trees were planted as wind breaks to protect the farms from the fierce winter blizzards. The farm I have was built before 1920 and the trees were planted at about the same time. but many of those trees have already died or are dieing
that looks like a cemetery so , beside a high amount of rains that the Oceanic climate gives them the trees should benefit a well fertilized soil...
yet they ain't that tall and are thin, like their branches, with leaves being small
not really thriving...
now let's go to Boston, in the middle of the city, surrounded by cars and pollution, same latitude,same climatic zone, yet trunks are large and trees tall, powerfu
this is not an exception, it's almost an universal rule
The Boston scene looks like fancy Beacon Hill where there is tons of money to care for everyone and everything. Besides that, Boston is not polluted. It's a city on the seacoast and the air is fairly fresh. Summers are hot and humid; winters are cold and snowy.
New England has poor soil, yet when the early settlers arrived, it was dense forest. The colonists cleared the land for farming and used the wood for building and keeping warm. Now much of it has returned to forest. The trees are primarily oak and maple with a lot of white pine as early growth before oaks and maples spring up and shade them out. As you go further north, there are more birches and more fir trees such as hemlock. They're surviving in poor soil and very cold temperatures.
Probably these trees are the ones that are adapted to living in poor, thin soil. If you go to certain areas of Massachusetts, like Cape Cod, the main tree is the pitch pine and they are stunted and windblown. The soil is sand and that's what can grow there.
Maybe that other scene is a place with rocks instead of soil? Or maybe it doesn't get enough sunlight? And does it have the hot summers that Boston has? In Boston the trees go dormant in winter but the hot summers allow time to grow. The northeastern US is a land of extremes--hot, hot summers and cold, cold winters. Siberia doesn't seem to me to have the summers that we have.
Woodrow LI, when I look at StreetView even the cities in the Plains have tons of very tall, large-trunked, healthy trees
when I look at Russia I got these thin emaciated, they look like toothpick rather than real trees
shot very closed
while in Kansas City you've got these giants, shot from far away, their trunks are large, solid
it seems to me in North America trees don't have to struggle to grow tall and pride while if I would want to have here, where I live, the same trees I should spend years od hardworking, fertilzing and money for a good landscaper
when I StreetView even the woodlands that probably have never been plowed in colonial America, looks very healthy, like they were the perfect trees for that soil.
Woodrow LI, when I look at StreetView even the cities in the Plains have tons of very tall, large-trunked, healthy trees
when I look at Russia I got these thin emaciated, they look like toothpick rather than real trees
shot very closed
while in Kansas City you've got these giants, shot from far away, their trunks are large, solid
it seems to me in North America trees don't have to struggle to grow tall and pride while if I would want to have here, where I live, the same trees I should spend years od hardworking, fertilzing and money for a good landscaper
when I StreetView even the woodlands that probably have never been plowed in colonial America, looks very healthy, like they were the perfect trees for that soil.
The Eastern States to the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River Basin have ideal growing conditions for Trees and they do thrive. By the time you reach the High Plains (North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming) the conditions become more like the Russian Steppes. Little rainfall, very high elevation above sea level, far from any ocean, long cold winters.
Very few tree varieties can survive naturally on the high plains but some city parks manage to cultivate some large oaks and Maples etc. But for the most part any trees will resemble those found in the Black Hills of South Dakota and Wyoming
[youtube]
Last edited by Woodrow LI; 09-16-2016 at 03:03 PM..
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 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.
