2005_Volume12_Issue2

Tre e C a re A d v i s o r N ew s l e t t e r http:// www.mntca.org

Dave Hanson and Gary Johnson, Managing Editors

Inside This Issue:

Volume 12 Number 2 Spring 2005

Ah! Spring or is this summer?

What are these shrubs?

By Dave Hanson

1

Quick Hits / Volunteer Opps

By Dave Hanson

2 April since 1910… That is probably going to change since this April has been no

Putting Down Roots:

By Cliff Johnson

3 The freight train was slow to get moving , again. Refer back to the winter newslet-

Please Welcome,

5

The last record breaking news that I heard was that this has been the warmest where near average. ter when the hours reported for 2004 were way behind… See the good news on

TCA Class of 2005 Restoration + Buckthorn

By Dave Hanson

6

page 2.

Janet Larson has raised an issue to Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Council concerning “over zealous” buckthorn removal - and I am following up on that…

Roundup™ and amphibi- 12 So, lets look at buckthorn identification and some of the native shrubs that are ofans… Research Report

ten confused with it.

A Roundup of Thoughts

by Alex Levy

13 Keep your eye on http://www.mntca.org for upcoming activities - I

Planting Native a Trend?

by Colin Moore

15

Looking for Paul Bunyan

by Marty Hair

try to keep these up to date. Also, this is a good web site to check for - this newsletter in color and take a look at the tree identification pages

18 - some good stuff ...

Thank you by Gary!

Factoid by Rebecca

20

Contacts

24

Wild plum blossoms below.

What are These Shrubs?

By: Dave Hanson

Similarities get these plants in trouble… The lenticels in the bark, the slender twigs, thorns, and the black fruits all lead to frequent mis-identification. Typically, this is not a problem. However, during buckthorn busting season these shrubs often have nowhere to hide and definitely nowhere to run.

Many of our native shrubs have a tough time when buckthorn gets established in their midst. Then comes a buckthorn bust and the situation can turn downright ugly. Often, with little regard for true identities, all of the understory is removed in an effort to control one species in the mix, buckthorn.

The shrubs or small trees that are most often confused – members of the cherry clan – wild plum (Prunus americana), black cherry (Prunus serotina), pin cherry (Prunus pennsylvanica) and choke cherry (Prunus virginiana). Buckthorn removal projects are underway in many locations – so, this is a good time to dig out your favorite tree book and get familiar with the cherry clan.

Continued on Page 21

Page 2

Quick Hits Tree Trust and Home Depot: A three part initiative with the first part being an “Ask the Expert Day” at a Home Depot near you!

When: May 15th from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.

Where: 16 Metro Home Depot locations.

Call Kirsten at 651-644-5800 or email to kirstena@treetrust.org

TCAs and an Education Opportunity: An evening with Tom Prosser of Rainbow Tree Care. In anticipation of more Dutch elm disease and understanding that TCAs answer a lot of homeowners questions, Tom has generously offered to spend an evening on DED Where: Linden Hills Park - Community Center Building When: Thursday May 19th, 7-9 p.m.

TCA Hours for 2004 - 5,500 total hours! So far...

In 2004 TCAs contributed in excess TCA Hours

of 5,500 volunteer hours to Urban and Community forestry efforts.

6000

This is an increase of more than 600 hours over 2003’s total.

5000

Kudos to the group! The reputation

4000

of the TCA program continues to

3000

Series2

2000

build and the TCAs are a respected group!

In the past eleven years TCAs have recorded over 37,400 Hours.

1000

I believe the number exceeds that !

0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Have you reported your hours?

Keep up the good Work!

Putting Down Roots - A column in the Chaska Herald.

Frequently, we receive calls about encroaching trees - When someone asks, “What can I do about that tree in my neighbors yard?” Proceed with caution, typically there is a history between the neighbors! Fortunately, the answer is usually an easy one - Unfortunately, it is the solution that can be difficult…

Lorrie Stromme (Hennepin County TCA) helps Cliff address that issue in this article…

Read on!

By Cliff Johnson 'CHAT BEFORE YOU CHOP' NEIGHBOR'S OVER-HANGING BRANCHES Branches from the neighbor's huge willow tree drooped over into her yard, smothering her shrubs and littering her car, garage and driveway with twigs and leaves.

I emailed her some articles on homeowner rights relative to neighbors' trees and informed her that she had a legal, not a horticultural, problem.

Judging by the number of phone calls I've received over the years, contending with invading limbs and roots of neighbors' trees is a bigger problem than most realize, particularly in established neighborhoods where trees were planted decades ago and now tower above rooftops and adjoining lots.

Dave Hanson

space is to take the law into your own hands.

"The law in Minnesota can answer some of your questions," explains Lorrie Stromme, an attorney and University of Minnesota Extension Service master gardener and tree care advisor, adding that the law isn't always clear on every issue.

To determine whose tree it is, Stromme says to follow the trunk; the location of the tree trunk determines who owns the tree, including the branches, flowers, fruit, and all. The tree is also your neighbor's responsibility if a weak limb blows down in a windstorm, crushing your garage. Stromme adds that your neighbor can decide to cut down the tree that partially shaded your yard and you have no recourse against your neighbor for suddenly exposing your shade-loving perennials to all-day sun.

Trees that grow on the boundary line between two properties have special What's a homeowner to do when a rules, according to Stromme. In Minneneighbor's tree invades "your space?"

What are your rights when a neighbor's sota, a tree is a boundary tree if it was planted jointly or treated as common 50-year-old elm roots cause your sidewalk to buckle? If your neighbor's apple property by agreement, acquiescence, or tree produces juicy, red apples that hang course of conduct. For example, adjoining owners who split the costs of prunon your side of the fence, can you pick ing and maintaining a boundary tree or them? hedge would probably be considered coThe one thing you shouldn't do when a owners of the tree or hedge. So, when a broken limb or a tree disease becomes a neighbor's tree interferes with your

Page 3

Page 4

Putting Down Roots... problem, the co-owners share responsibility for fixing the problem.

Stromme says that Minnesota property owners have the right to use "self-help" Branches that overhang your property to prune branches or roots of a or tree roots that push up a sidewalk or neighbor's tree that encroaches onto clog a sewer are considered a nuisance. their property but that the self-help reA nuisance in Minnesota is defined as quires discretion. Guidelines for self-help "anything which is injurious to health, or include: indecent or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of prop- Prune only up to the boundary line, at erty, so as to interfere with the comfort- your own expense. able enjoyment of life or property."

Don't trespass. Get permission to enter One of Minnesota's leading cases on nui- onto the neighbor's property to do the sance trees involved a Minneapolis pruning, unless the encroaching branches homeowner who planted an elm tree or roots threaten to cause imminent within 15 inches of the property line. harm to your property.

Over the next 26 years, the tree grew to 30 inches in diameter and 75 feet tall.

Don't cut down a tree whose trunk is The trunk grew across the boundary located on the neighbor's property, even line, pushing the fence out of alignment. if the branches stray onto your property.

The roots extended into the neighbor's yard and caused the sidewalk to tip to- Maintain, don't destroy. Don't jeopardize ward the house, resulting in a drainage the health of the tree or cause foreseeproblem in the neighbor's basement. The able injury. For example, pruning an oak court found that the tree was not a co- tree from April through September owned boundary tree but was a nuicould make the tree vulnerable to oak sance, because the tree roots obstructed wilt, a virulent disease. Or pruning a the neighbor's free use and enjoyment of tree's roots could destabilize the tree their property. and cause it to topple over.

The neighbors sued for monetary damages and an injunction to prune the roots or remove the tree. Experts for both sides acknowledged that corrective action to restore the grade would damage the roots and either kill the tree or make it dangerously unstable. The court ordered the tree cut down because the alternative -- severe root pruning -would have weakened the tree or caused the tree to die, endangering the neighbor's home if the tree blew over in a windstorm.

A common frustration for many property owners is tree debris from a neighbor's tree: leaves, acorns, fallen fruit, branches seeds or sap. Stromme suggests that, just because you are sick and tired of cleaning up the debris is not cause for a lawsuit, at least in the eyes of the court.

What about over-hanging fruit? "The rule of thumb is that if the tree trunk stands in a neighbor's yard, all of the fruit wherever it is hanging belongs to the

Page 5

neighbor," Stromme says. "Picking the fruit may not be so simple, however.

Ownership of the fruit does not give the neighbor any right to trespass onto your property to retrieve the fruit. Courts would probably weigh the right to keep trespassers out of your yard against the tree owner's right to harvest the fruit of her tree."

"Many of these problems can and should be worked out between neighbors, rather than becoming legal issues" Stromme says. In other words, "chat before you chop" those irritating overhanging branches.

Each time I listen to another caller anguishing over a neighbor's tree, I ask if he or she has discussed the problem with the neighbor. Too often, the answer is "No."

Welcome the Class of 2005!

Please join me in welcoming the class of 2005! As you run into these folks at Master Gardener meetings, volunteer events or TCA updates please welcome them and help them get a handle on what it is that TCAs are up to‌ Marc Battistini Margaret Brough Ginger Cannon Joyce Clarin Kathleen Davies Polly Drangeid Dave Guyot John Jirak Chris Johnson Kristie Martinka Colleen Mengelkoch Carolyn Metcalf John Schmahl Elizabeth Spedaliere Margaret Sweeney Paul Trcka Kathryn Urberg Verna VonGoltz Mary Zeleny-Arimond

Dakota Anoka Hennepin Dakota Hennepin Anoka Carver Le Sueur Dakota Hennepin Dakota Dakota Ramsey Dakota Dakota Olmsted Hennepin Hennepin Hennepin

Page 6

Restoration and Buckthorn...

Restoration?

Many woodlots, scientific natural areas, and parks are being overrun by exotic terrestrial plant species! There are numerous examples of exotic species in research articles, daily newspapers and in various newsletters. So, what are we waiting for?

Let’s get out there and remove some _________________ ! (fill in your favorite exotic species) There is a lot of energy involved in a volunteer project, the hype, the organization and the day of the event… Are we properly preparing people for the task at hand?

Invasive?, Exotic?

Maybe everyone reading this article has been involved in a buckthorn bust or a loosestrife lynch. Yet, how many of us understand what the terms “invasive”, “exotic species” mean? Why the effort to remove these species? According to Invasivespecies.gov (yes, there is a website; http://www.invasivespecies.gov/): An "invasive species" is defined as a species that is 1) non-native (or alien) to the ecosystem under consideration and 2) whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. (Executive Order 13112).

Invasive species can be plants, animals, and other organisms (e.g., microbes). Human actions are the primary means of invasive species introductions.

Frankly, the list of invasive species is getting longer every year. Why? Look at the last line of the definition from invasivespecies.gov provided above – human actions!

Minnesota Statues 2004, 84D.01 definitions - provide a very similar wording to this definition: Subd. 9a.

Invasive species. "Invasive species" means a nonnative species that

can naturalize and: (1) causes or may cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health; or (2) threatens or may threaten natural resources or the use of natural resources in the state.

Those definitions of invasive species, in a sense, spell out a need for action and provide reason to control exotic, invasive species in order to protect or economy, our environment and our health. So, on the flip side of the equation are the restoration process and a myriad of questions. Let’s look at a few of the questions.

Restoration and Buckthorn...

What is Right?

In every arena involving humans there are two sides to every discussion and the restoration game is no different. With the concern for our economy, our health and the health of the environment there comes a motivation to act. But, the concerns and motivations should be tempered by the following arguments. For instance; “Isn’t this simply mother nature’s process of change? Survival of the fittest, if you will?” Another question that can be heard out there is; “What are we restoring this area to? What model tells us what vegetation is right? What book or diagram describes the plants that should be here?”

These questions are valid to this discussion and should not be ignored. For Minnesota we have a fair idea of some of the species that were here prior to man and the disturbances that man perpetrated on the land. Fossil records, pollen records and records from various land surveys have been studied to produce maps such as the Marschner map and the ecosystem maps from Minnesota DNR. These are landscape level maps and inherently rather broad in scope; thus, leaving some question about the details of the flora and fauna of early Minnesota. An effort begun in 1987, called the Minnesota County Biological Survey (MCBS) is providing a good picture of what is in our landscape now and will provide a good knowledge base for future generations.

Page 7

Page 8

Restoration and Buckthorn...

On the large scale our actions are dealing with eco-systems (most exotic species projects are micro-scale) and we should have a vision, we should have a plan in the form of a management plan for our yard, park, woodlot, city, forest, on up to the landscape level State management plans. A project should not move forward if there isn’t a plan for the future on paper. The plan may be as simple as a landscape design for a small yard or it might be a complex management plan for a large National Forest. The bottom line is, it is not simply good enough to remove “_____________” the exotic species and assume all will be right in that eco-system. What will take the place of the exotic species?

Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn

A focus…

For the sake of continuing this discussion lets focus and zero in on everyone’s favorite exotic invader… Rhamnus cathartica, Common European Buckthorn! While we’re at it we might as well consider its cousin Rhamnus frangula (also see: Frangula alnus) - glossy, columnar buckthorn and its cultivars also… These species are considered noxious weeds in Minnesota, thus there are efforts to control them.

Minnesota’s Noxious Weed Law and Minnesota Rules state: 1505.0732 RESTRICTED NOXIOUS WEEDS. The plants listed in this part are restricted noxious weeds whose only feasible means of control is to prohibit the importation, sale, and transportation of them or their propagating parts in the state except as provided by Minnesota Statutes, section 18.82.

Common Name Botanical Name: Buckthorn, common or European Rhamnus cathartica

Rhamnus frangula Some sources list as: Frangula alnus Glossy buckthorn Below: Rhamnus frangula var. ‘asplenifolia’

(L.) Buckthorn, glossy, including all cultivars *Rhamnus frangula (L.), (columnaris, tallcole, asplenifolia and all other cultivars) *Rhamnus frangula is a restricted noxious weed effective December 31, 2000.

Buckthorn raises concern not so much for human health reasons, but for environmental health and some concern for Minnesota’s soybean industry.

Buckthorn is an amazing competitor in our natural areas and has the ability to outcompete other plants for light, space and nutrient resources. The herbaceous layer under buckthorn is usually eliminated by the buckthorn canopy and its alleleopathic traits. This loss of the herbaceous layer not only leads to erosion problems on sites with steep slopes, but also reduces the diversity of the natural area.

Lack of diversity in the herbaceous layer and in seedling production (trees and shrubs) has long term effects for the site. Not only is the plant community affected, but eventually songbirds and other wildlife find little value in the resources and dis-

Restoration and Buckthorn... continue use of the area.

The fact that buckthorn is an alternate host for some crop pests also raises some concern.

So, buckthorn busting becomes a pastime for volunteer groups and many of us have taken up the weapons of buckthorn busting such as: weed-wrenches, chainsaws, brush-cutters and chemicals. At the end of the day it is gratifying to see the pile of brush that was removed and to gaze into the woods where previously stood an impenetrable thicket of buckthorn brush.

A Reason to Pause…

Yet, recently, a red flag was raised. Janet Larson, (Hennepin County TCA and famous buckthorn buster) placed a very pointed topic before the Forest Health SubCommittee of the Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Council (MnSTAC).

Janet is a strong advocate for educating the public on buckthorn and for the following reason is raising an alarm, “Overzealous ‘brushing’ without protection of the native shrub layer, ground cover layer, and soil is ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater.’ In essence, buckthorn removal projects are moving ahead without a good plan in hand. What plants need to be removed? Why? And, how can the task be accomplished in an environmentally safe manner?

The pause needs to happen right up front and needs to be in the form of education.

Education of the project leaders and supervisors needs to cover a number of bases.

•

Why should the invasive species be removed? o The site may or may not be at a point yet where there is true concern. Yet, buckthorn is a prolific seed producer and the seed survives in the seed bank for up to 6 years. The seed is also transported to nearby areas, thus expanding the infestation.

•

What are the best methods (for this site) to eliminate the species? o There are sites that may not benefit from complete removal of the plants. If the site is on a slope or if the ground cover is non-existent the appropriate treatment may be to kill the buckthorn with chemical applications and leave it standing.

•

What does the plant look like and are there similar plants in the area? o In Minnesota there are a number of plants with similar characteristics that project leaders and volunteers should know. The cherries,

Page 9

Page 10

Restoration and Buckthorn... black cherry (Prunus serotina) and choke cherry (Prunus virginiana) are two such plants that are relatively common.

•

What are some of the potential environmental issues following removal? o The potential for erosion events will increase. Additionally, be aware of other exotic species on the site. Garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), for example, can really become a problem after the competing buckthorn overstory is removed.

•

Everyone (not just the applicator) should be aware of any chemicals being used and should have the opportunity to read the product label.

•

The proper chemical product should be chosen for the site. Neighboring vegetation, proximity to water resources, and proximity to human activity should be noted and taken into consideration.

Dieing hackberry – sensitive to Tordon RTU

•

cut-stump treatments used

After care for the site… What becomes of the site after buckthorn removal efforts make some headway? Buckthorn will come back from a variety of

during a buckthorn re-

sources! Any plan should clearly state what follow-up treatments will be

moval three years ago.

needed. Another consideration, replanting of native species may be necessary in the tree, shrub and herbaceous layers of the site.

The removal of buckthorn, aesthetically, produces a dramatic change in a stand of trees. Where once was a wall of green foliage, following buckthorn removal a forest with individual tree stems is revealed. Where once was an impenetrable wall of green foliage, following buckthorn removal a person may be tempted to hike through the woods.

The removal of buckthorn, environmentally, produces a dramatic change in a stand of trees. Light penetration to the forest floor is increased dramatically for the herbaceous layer. Competition for nutrients, space, light and moisture is dramatically reBuckthorn returns with a

duced. Buckthorn removal allows seedlings of other plants to be released…

vengeance… Three years post treatment!

Almost all of the green here are the leaves of buckthorn seedlings

But, is simply removing the offender enough? This is where the management plan really kicks in to action. A management plan would likely have been based on an inventory or an assessment noting plants in the herbaceous layer, shrub layer, sub canopy and the dominant canopy of the plot. With this knowledge one can start to make decisions regarding replanting options or the possibility that simple control of competing species will allow desired native plants to regain a foot hold.

Page 11

Restoration and Buckthorn...

Buckthorn removal during the winter of 2004-2005.

Buckthorn seedlings from the seed bank versus a young Ohio buckeye (Aesculus glabra). Which will likely come out on top in the struggle for space, light, water, and nutrients. Probably the buckthorn!

Re-sprouting April of 2005.

Buckthorn returning (resprouting) three years after treatment. What was done wrong? Maybe nothing!

Buckthorn is a tough, tenacious plant. But, was there a follow-up plan?

Below: Buckthorn stump sprouts - 3 years after treatment. The cut stump is in the center of the five new stems‌ This stump and new growth are in the understory of the photo to the left.

Page 12

Roundup® highly lethal to amphibians

03 Apr 2005

The herbicide Roundup® is widely used to eradicate weeds. But a study published today by a University of Pittsburgh researcher finds that the chemical may be eradicating much more than that.

Warning!

Pitt assistant professor of biology Rick Relyea found that Roundup®, the second most commonly applied herbicide in the United States, is "extremely lethal" to amIf you read phibians. This field experiment is one of the most extensive studies on the effects of “Roundup Highly lethal…” pesticides on nontarget organisms in a natural setting, and the results may provide Then you need to read a key link to global amphibian declines. the follow-up on page 13,

In a paper titled "The Impact of Insecticides and Herbicides on the Biodiversity and “A Roundup of Thoughts.” Productivity of Aquatic Communities," published in the journal Ecological Applications, Relyea examined how a pond's entire community--25 species, including crustaceans, insects, snails, and tadpoles--responded to the addition of the manufacturers' recommended doses of two insecticides--Sevin® (carbaryl) and malathion--and two herbicides--Roundup® (glyphosate) and 2,4-D. This is a story and topic that we need to watch! It will be interesting to see how it unfolds in the coming months or years.

Round-up is a popular choice when it comes to buckthorn eradication efforts.

Relyea found that Roundup® caused a 70 percent decline in amphibian biodiversity and an 86 percent decline in the total mass of tadpoles. Leopard frog tadpoles and gray tree frog tadpoles were completely eliminated and wood frog tadpoles and toad tadpoles were nearly eliminated. One species of frog, spring peepers, was unaffected.

"The most shocking insight coming out of this was that Roundup®, something designed to kill plants, was extremely lethal to amphibians," said Relyea, who conducted the research at Pitt's Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology. "We added Roundup®, and the next day we looked in the tanks and there were dead tadpoles all over the bottom."

Comments by Dave Relyea initially conducted the experiment to see whether the Roundup® would have an indirect effect on the frogs by killing their food source, the algae. However, he found that Roundup®, although an herbicide, actually increased the amount of algae in the pond because it killed most of the frogs.

"It's like killing all the cows in a field and seeing that the field has more grass in it-not because you made the grass grow better, but because you killed everything that eats grass," he said.

Contact: Karen Hoffman klh52@pitt.edu 412-624-4356

University of Pittsburgh

Previous research had found that the lethal ingredient in Roundup® was not the herbicide itself, glyphosate, but rather the surfactant, or detergent, that allows the herbicide to penetrate the waxy surfaces of plants. In Roundup®, that surfactant is a chemical called polyethoxylated tallowamine. Other herbicides have less dangerous surfactants: For example, Relyea's study found that 2,4-D had no effect on tadpoles.

Medical Center http://www.upmc.edu

"We've repeated the experiment, so we're confident that this is, in fact, a repeatable result that we see," said Relyea. "It's fair to say that nobody would have guessed Roundup® was going to be so lethal to amphibians."

Page 13

A Roundup of Thoughts I'm no environmental toxicologist, but as an ecologist (and reader of HerpDigest) with an interest in resource conservation and protection, I felt inclined to gather some thoughts and feedback about the recent Pittsburgh Tribune-Review report of the University of Pittsburgh study about Roundup® being highly lethal to amphibians. Naturally, the news has created a buzz of concern among conservation professionals and land-managers who recognize the importance of Roundup's® main ingredient, glyphosate, as a valuable tool in fighting invasive vegetation to protect both terrestrial and aquatic habitats.

It should be noted that polyethoxylated tallowamine is the surfactant the study implicates in toxicity to amphibians. This surfacant is an ingredient in Roundup®. However, the important main ingredient, glyophosate, was not shown as responsible for the reported frog kills. Therefore, the report of the abstract makes what appears to be an irresponsible assertion that presumes the morbid results of using Roundup® in a tank containing tadpoles as being indicative of the herbicide's culpability in widespread amphibian declines. Furthermore, several vegetation management specialists calculated that the concentrated rate of Roundup® used in the reported experiments was seven times greater than for ordinary field application.

by --Alex Levy, Ecologist, Federal Highway Administration

Surfactants are an additive that help an herbicide adhere to, spread over and in some cases penetrate the surface tissues of a plant.

Because all Roundup® products include the precaution, "Do not apply directly to water, to areas where water is present or intertidal areas below the mean high water mark", their use in a manner such as was done in the subject study would in-fact be a violation of the law.

While I am not so naive as to believe that everyone follows the label instructions, it seems unlikely that people would accidentally apply seven times the field rate to ponds and streams.

"It is because of the surfactant [in Roundup®] that the Aqua Master® (formerly Rodeo®), formulation of glyphosate is required to be used on plants in water. There are [glyphosate] versions in the hardware stores without the same surfactant," said Marc Imlay, an invasive species control expert with the Maryland Native Plant Society.

Penn State Department of Horticulture's Art Gover, former Research & Education Coordinator for the Northeastern Weed Science Society and past president of the Mid-Atlantic Exotic Pest Plant Council, Inc., said, "the information in the abstract and the press piece do not provide enough information to know what dosage of herbicide was used, or what glyphosate product was used. Drawing conclusions and contemplating changes in vegetation management practices based on the information available in the abstract or the press release would not be prudent."

Mr. Gover elaborated, "the product Roundup® (now Roundup Original®, as well as many of the generics) contained an ethoxylated tallowamine (also known polyoxyethyleneamine, or POEA) as a surfactant. Rodeo® and its MANY equals are surfactant free. Except for the product Glyphomate 41® (mfg. PBI-Gordon), aquatic-labeled formulations of glyphosate are surfactant-free and specify the use of a surfactant approved for aquatic applications".

Roundup is produced in many formulations and with a variety of surfactants.

A complicating factor for this research.

Comment by Dave

Page 14

A Roundup of Thoughts...

continued

A response from the maker of Roundup速, Monsanto, can be found here: http://www.monsanto.co.uk/news/ukshowlib.phtml?uid=8800 According to Sue Salmons, Liaison for the Exotic Plant Management Team with the National Park Service's National Capital Region, "because news articles are necessarily brief, important details were left out. In response to Monsanto's criticisms of the Relyea (2005) study of Roundup's速 lethal effects on amphibians, there is now also a webpage that addresses Monsanto's concerns: http://www.pitt.edu/~relyea/Roundup.html " Again, it is important to note that it is not glyphosate that causes the problem, but the surfactant. This is something that is not news, contrary to the last line of the article. Just the same, it would be wise to look toward alternatives to glyphosate products. However, they are already among the most benign herbicides, if we must use one. For conservationists the discreet use of this family of chemicals is less damaging to habitats than induced erosion from mechanical weed management, and has far-fewer consequences than allowing the proliferation of invasive vegetation.

Another university researcher puts it this way, "Save the frogs, but lose the bog?"

We're probably better-off cautioning the public to use only aquatic formulations near water and reminding agricultural users to be careful.

The report on page 12 came from a variety of sources: Weed Killer Poses Dangers To Frogs (Roundup) Pittsburgh (Pa.) Tribune-Review, Apr. 2, 2005, By Jennifer Bails Posted in HerpDigest Issue Volume # 5 Issue # 39

The original Paper and Abstract: THE IMPACT OF INSECTICIDES AND HERBICIDES ON THE BIODIVERSITY AND PRODUCTIVITY OF AQUATIC COMMUNITIES Ecological Applications: Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 618*627.

Rick A. Relyeaa A Department of Biological Sciences, 101 Clapp Hall, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260 USA

Is Planting Native a Passing Trend? No, But… Has planting native trees and shrubs in the landscape become as trendy as the resurgence of Pabst Blue Ribbon among early twenties urbanites? Maybe not, yet in some senses a comparison can be made. Just as quickly as thirty packs of PBR disappear from liquor stores and gas stations, native species are being placed into residential, commercial, and a multitude of additional urban landscapes.

Page 15

By: Colin Moore

Undergraduate - Bachelor of Environmental Design.

College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture.

Are these isolated incidents benefiting the greater good of humanity? In the case of PBR absolutely not, it may be just a pop culture trend that is destined to join fanny packs, wine coolers, and fondue in the graveyard of former hot market items. When speaking of planting native species, the answer is both yes and no. The term native itself spawns good thoughts in terms of landscaping. However, there are certain guidelines that need to be met by landscaping trendsetters and followers when developing planting schemes. Apply the catch phrase “don’t believe the hype” when planting because, hold on to your yoga Refer to page 7 for more informat, native species are not always the best plant for the site. mation on our understanding of What Are Native Species?

Native species are those that have existed prior to European colonization. The United States consists of many different climatic patterns and growing conditions. The same is true on a local level in the state of Minnesota. The varying conditions determine how a plant will succeed at a particular location, or site. The problem with selecting a native plant is matching that plant with a native condition.

When selecting a plant, first determine the conditions that best suit that plant. The United States is separated into different climatic zones that are determined by the area’s average minimum annual temperature. A particular plant’s ability to survive in a given zone is referred to as the plant’s cold hardiness. In order for a plant to survive a specific site’s conditions it must be cold hardy enough, among other things. The state of Minnesota alone has 5 different plant hardiness zones. Temperatures within these zones range from –20 to –45 degrees Fahrenheit. As a result of the hardiness zones, a Basswood native to the southern/central portion of Minnesota would struggle to survive in International Falls at the northernmost portion of the state.

Native Versus Urbanized Sites Although temperature has a major impact on where plants succeed, possibly more important is the individual site the plant is growing on. Just as humans need water, oxygen, and nutrients to survive, so do trees. Many sites have been altered from their original state and no longer are suitable for native species. Soils in urban settings have been highly altered and become completely different than before the area was developed. These soils

“what is a native plant.”

Page 16

Is Planting Native a Passing Trend? No, But…

Continued

are no longer native and may not support native plants as well as before.

Urban amenities like roads and buildings contribute to altered site conditions. Byproducts of cars, concrete, and in Minnesota, de-icing salts among other factors drastically change soil quality. Pollutants enter the soil and change the natural chemical structure (acidic or alkaline), or pH balance. When the chemicals become greatly different from what they once were, trees that were once native to the site struggle to survive in these newly created conditions.

Construction around existing trees and future planting sites alters the soil dramatically.

Above Structural and compositional changes of the soil.

Below: Concrete clean-out onsite.

Urban areas and suburban housing divisions are typically very open and covered with concrete. In contrast, natural forests and growing conditions are not. When a tree that is native to a thick forest is planted in a narrow, sun exposed boulevard or next to building, its native condition has been drastically changed. Natural forests are densely populated with similar trees, have limited light, and moist soils. The urbanized areas are the direct opposite of the plant’s native conditions. Urban roads and sidewalks create a warmer climate by storing heat from the sun and slowly releasing it throughout the day.

Plants subjected to these conditions must struggle to obtain enough water, oxygen, and nutrients to maintain a healthy existence. In developed areas, it is extremely difficult to obtain the plant’s essentials without human intervention.

Much of the water that trees are using runs off sidewalks and streets directly to the root system. While the water is running across paved surfaces, it picks up pollutants like gas, oil, and de-icing salts. Trees subjected to these altered conditions often have stunted growth, lack of normal color, and wilting leaves. Overall, the trees do not look healthy because they are not healthy.

There are a variety of additional conditions that contribute to a lack of success in native trees within supposedly native conditions. Air pollution, in addition to soil pollution compromises the health of native trees. More specifically, Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and Ozone (O3) are common urban pollutants that limit a plant’s ability to photosynthesize properly.

Construction processes and even foot traffic can change the quality of a site and eventually the health of plants on the site. By constructing buildings, roads, and parking lots soil composition is drastically changed.

Salt spray damage to a young spruce.

Soil composition has several layers of varying soil types. Tree roots grow mostly in the first 2-3 feet of soil depth, within the most nutrient rich topsoil. Beneath that are varying types of soil. Construction processes often mix these different levels of soils, resulting in less healthy topsoil. Native plants that could thrive in the original topsoil now struggle to maintain in less rich soil. Soil also has a small amount of oxygen that allows for a root system to breathe. Heavy machinery and excessive foot traffic compresses the soil, driving out the oxygen, and endangering the health of native plants. When soils become compacted and overturned, drainage also suffers. Plants may basically drown. A tree for the site then becomes one that can tolerate poorly drained soils and polluted soils. In many cases the plant needed is not native.

Granted many of these altered conditions can compromise the health of any plant,

Is Planting Native a Passing Trend? No, But…

Continued

Page 17

the lack of a native condition no longer exists. Are native species a trendy choice? No. Are native species a bad planting choice? Absolutely not, however native site conditions must exist for native plants to thrive and live up to their hype as the best planting choice. And when native site conditions exist, native plants thrive. As a general rule of thumb when planting natives, Horticulturist, Dr. Linda Chalker-Scott, recommends using the following guidelines: •

Native, temperate forest plants are excellent choices for unrestricted sites with acidic, well-drained soils.

•

For sites with limited, alkaline, and/or poorly drained soils, choose species adapted to environments with similar soils. Consider especially those species that tolerate clay soils (these plants can be native).

•

For sites exposed to increased temperature, choose species adapted to hot, dry climates that can also tolerate local winters. .

•

•

Site considerations should always dictate plant selection.

For more information on selecting the best plants for your landscape: The University of Minnesota College of Natural Resources Extension Webpage at www.cnr.umn.edu/FR/extension/index.html

•

•

changes on an urban site.

Be sure to protect soils with mulch, especially where foot traffic causes comQuercus alba - white oak. paction.

Just as yoga is an excellent form of relaxation, an ice-cold can of PBR is delicious on a hot summer day, and fondue can make for a fun party, native plants are the best choice; the situation just has to be right. As for the fanny pack there never has been, nor will there ever be a good use for it.

•

Chlorosis problems due to soil

o

Click “Urban and Community Forestry” link

o

Select “Tree and Shrub Selection” and search for relevant articles

The University of Minnesota Extension Webpage at www.extension.umn.edu o

Click “garden” link

o

Select “Landscaping-Plant Selection”

o

Find articles regarding native plant selection

Dr. Linda Chalker-Scott’s report at www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20ChalkerScott/ o

Click on “Horticultural Myths” link

o

Find myth regarding native plants under 2001 heading

Page 18

AN AMERICAN LEGEND

State looking for Paul Bunyan-like people to chop trees EMERALD ASH BORERS: State looking for Paul Bunyan-like people to chop trees

Paul Bunyan is the mythi- April 4, 2005 cal king of the lumberjacks.

BY MARTY HAIR

Bunyan and Babe the Blue Ox roamed the timberlands from Maine to Minnesota when logging camps were a way of life. The tall tales that lumberjacks spun about Bunyan and Babe are bigger than life and, each year, dozens of communities in the United States and Canada hold festivals to cook up new stories. Here are a few:

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER With little cash and a big need to cut down ash trees around four outbreaks of emerald ash borers, the Michigan agriculture department is seeking a giant helping hand.

Hey, Paul!

Paul Bunyan!

This is no tall tale.

Some 900 tree-cutters, timber and paper companies received letters last month • When he was born, it took five giant storks working in relay to deliver Bun- asking them to pitch in to drop a circle of ash trees within a half mile of borer inyan to his parents. festations in Emmet, Cheboygan, Presque Ile and Alcona counties in northern Lower Michigan.

• A lumber wagon drawn by teams of oxen was BunThe problem is there is no way to pay for the removal. yan's baby carriage.

• His clothes were so large Less than half of the hoped-for federal dollars for tree removal has been released. he had to use wagon The agriculture department has spent it to get rid of ash trees around remote inwheels for buttons.

festations outside a 20-county quarantine.

• In the year of the Blue Snow when it was so cold the geese had to fly backward, Bunyan found a baby ox in the ice. Even when warmed up, the ox stayed blue and Bunyan named him Babe.

"Without full funding, we've had to get a little creative," said Jennifer Quimby, a state agriculture department spokesperson.

The state's strategy -- devised with the help of a national panel of scientists -- is to remove ash trees within a half mile of infestations to starve the local population of borers. The borers have killed 15 million ash trees in the quarantined counties and

• Babe grew so big he was in 18 so-called outliers, or infestations beyond the quarantine. Michigan has an estiseven ax handles and a mated 700 million ash trees. plug of tobacco wide between the eyes.

The wood-boring beetles, believed to have hitched a ride into Michigan from Asia

• Bunyan and Babe roamed the Midwestern woods performing feats of strength and courage. To this day Bunyan's lung power is so great that you can hear him whistling through the hollow trees of the forest.

in packing wood material, have spread to Ohio, Indiana, Ontario and isolated spots in Virginia and Maryland.

So far, emerald ash borers have not turned up in the Upper Peninsula. To keep it that way, the state agriculture department will begin inspecting all firewood at the Mackinac Bridge this spring. It is illegal to take firewood out of the quarantined counties or the outliers.

State looking for Paul Bunyan-like people to chop trees

Page 19

The agriculture department is asking arborists and other companies to determine how much it would cost them to remove the trees in the four northern Lower Michigan outliers, how they'd use the wood -- possibilities include to make paper, as boards or as fuel -- and how much it would be worth to them.

If interested, the potential Paul Bunyans would have to agree with the state on a price, on which trees to cut and sign a contract promising to minimize site dis-

EAB adult

ruption.

"The value of the wood may be equal to or less than the cost to remove it. If there is a profit, that would go to the property owner," said Gary King, a deputy agriculture director.

Last fall, the state asked the federal government for $29.5 million for its 2005 fight against emerald ash borers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recommended $22 million for all the affected states. The Office of Management and Budget has released $11 million. King said he hopes more money will be heading this way within two months. If it materializes, the state may try additional ways to remove the ash trees in the four northern counties.

The best time to remove the ash trees would be before May, when the new generation of adult beetles emerges and starts flying. However, because of the time

20 Counties in Michigan now under quarantine and 16 outlying quarantines.

required to line up contracts and arrange work at sometimes swampy sites, it may not be possible to cut the trees until summer, fall or even next winter, King said.

The state is cutting ash trees in Hillsdale and St. Clair counties, which are within the quarantine. They are considered gateways, or places where the beetle could jump into new territory. The agriculture department also set 10,000 trap trees last year to map the outer boundary of the borers' population.

For more on the insects, go to www.emeraldashborer.info.

Contact MARTY HAIR at 313-222-2005 or hair@freepress.com.

Above: Firewood tests Left: Trap Trees for population checks Photos: USDA Forest Service

Page 20

Tree Care Advisors Help Prepare New Laboratory Space On a cold and snowy April 2…actually, it was a pretty nice day, yet another Saturday when lots of volunteer work was being done. Finally, after almost 13 years of whining, there is laboratory space for urban forestry and arboriculture research and training! Room 130 in Green Hall, University of Minnesota, home of the Department of Forest Resources is now (mostly) a lab for students and Tree Care Advisors to learn more about tree care in a hands-on environment. No more vacuuming the carpeting in room 203 after core course training!!!

Getting the space was the first step. Going through and throwing away decades of "stuff," sorting through and saving the valuables, and finally, giving everything a good scrubbing was the second step. Seven of us toiled away on that Saturday, and by mid-afternoon, it was looking pretty good. Smelled a lot better, too. Now, the third step - actually moving in and setting up shop - is ready to be undertaken.

Dave will have a second office and a much better hiding place. Gary will have another space to store crap. Chad will have a new research facility. All the TCA's will eventually have the opportunity to take advantage of the facility during update training sessions.

Eventually, we'll have our slabs of wood, root system cadavers, slides, tools, stuff that you can borrow for your own volunteer teaching opportunities, but above all, a sense of place. I would personally like to thank those volunteers that helped on April 2 to get that space in order and begin a new era in the TCA program. You people work hard and are a lot of fun to work hard with: Barb Kirkpatrick, Ramsey County

Rebecca Koetter, Ramsey County

Roxanne Hardy, Washington County

Nancy Bjerke, Hennepin County

Lu Schmidtke, Dakota County

Mike Oslund, Isanti County

On occasion, you get that question… After much pondering

Rebecca’s Factoid…!

Rebecca Koetter, TCA

and researching - you just have to share what you have learned!

The acorn is actually a fruit, which is an ovary, which is the female reproductive

Below: Red Oak (Quercus ru-

part of plants. So, the bottom portion of the acorn is the ovary (outer layer aka.

bra) Acorns

pericarp) which contains a seed. The acorn cap is what attaches the ovary to the branch (a.k.a. bract or modified leaf tissues), which is a type of ground tissue. Ground tissue is composed of parenchyma, collenchyma, and sclerenchyma cells. The cap has sclerenchyma cells that can be further divided into sclereids. Sclereids occur throughout plants including shells of walnuts, hull of peanuts, or the core of an apple. In conclusion: sclereid cells make up the cap of an acorn!

What are These Shrubs?

Page 21

Continued from page 1

If you have the opportunity, head out into a woodlot and find yourself some cherry trees (wild plum, also) and shrubs to look at. In the next few paragraphs I’ll go over some of the characteristics that you should look for and then wrap this section up with a comparison to buckthorn.

The first thing to note about the plants being discussed here – Common buckthorn appears to be and is often described as oppositely branched, a better description is sub-opposite. The members of the Prunus family (cherries and plum) are alternate. Remember this trait carries right down to the bud and leaf set.

American plum: Prunus americana: Shrub to small tree 15-25 feet, Leaves: Alternate, simple lance shaped leaves with sharp doubly-toothed margins. The leaves are typically dark green in color and look to the bottom for some white hair. On the petiole or leaf stalk, look for two glands which appear as raised dark dots.

Twigs: Hairy light brown to greenish in color. Break a twig and check for the aroma of bitter almonds. This plant actually has thorn-like spur shoots that often lends to it being confused with buckthorn.

Buds: Pointed, scales with a reddish-brown color.

Fruit: Up to 3/4 to 1 inch in diameter. The fruit is reddish, yellowish, to orangey in color and maturing to a darker red to purple color. The fruit can be eaten and is often made into jams and jellies.

Bark: A smooth bark that is reddish brown to dark brown and as it matures the bark breaks up into small scaly plates that peel from the trunk.

Wild (American) plum is shade in-tolerant as a young tree and it tends to be a fast growing tree. Root sprouting is common with this species and it will form into dense thickets.

Sub-opposite leaf set of common buckthorn. Often described as opposite.

All Photos: Dave Hanson

Photos of Prunus Americana: Early spring flowers - April 25th.

Above: leaves of wild plum in June.

Far left: Peeling, almost papery gray bark on the main stem.

Left: Plums in June - nice green color.

Below: Plum thorns, hence confusion with buckthorn...

Page 22

Cherries: Note that the flowers and fruit are on racemes - not solitary or paired as on the plums. See photo to the right...

Above: Bark of a small black cherry.

Below: Compare, Top is black cherry bottom is chokecherry.

What are These Shrubs?

Continued

Black Cherry: Prunus serotina: Medium to large tree 40-60 feet, Minnesota Champion: 75 feet tall.

However, often a small understory tree – shrub-like.

Leaves: Alternate, simple lance shaped leaves with finely toothed margins. The leaves are typically shiny, with a good green color and look to the bottom midrib (center vein) for some white to orange hairs. The hairs can be clumped at the vein joints or run along the midrib. On the petiole or leaf stalk, look for two glands which appear as raised dark dots.

Twigs: Slender twigs that are typically reddish brown with white dots (lenticels). Break a twig and check for the aroma of almonds.

Buds: Pointed or blunt, scales with a bright reddish brown color.

Fruit: Berry like drupe that is fairly small – up to 3/8 inch in diameter. The fruit begins reddish in color and maturing to a dark purple color. The fruit can be eaten and is often made into jams and jellies.

Bark: On young trees and smaller stems, look for a smooth grayish to dark colored bark with light colored lenticels (short horizontal lines). Mature stems are very dark with scaly plates that peel from the trunk.

Black cherry is shade tolerant as a young tree, but as it matures it must find an opening in the canopy or it will likely not survive.

Below: Chokecherry shrub in a prairie setting.

Bottom: Nice red early season chokecherries.

Quick scan for prunus: Look for black knot, Not all cherry shrubs or trees have black knot, but its presence is a signal...

Chokecherry: Prunus virginiana: Medium to large tree 15-20 feet, Leaves: Alternate, simple leaves ovoid with finely toothed margins. The leaves are typically shiny, with a good green color. The veins are typically more prominent giving the leaf a rougher looking upper surface than those of black cherry.

On the petiole or leaf stalk, look for two glands which appear as raised dark dots.

Twigs: Slender twigs that are typically reddish brown with white dots (lenticels).

Break a twig and check for the strong aroma of bitter almonds.

Buds: Pointed, scales with a bright reddish brown color.

Fruit: Berry like drupe that is fairly small – 1/4 to 3/8 inch in diameter. Reddish in color and maturing to a dark purple color in the autumn. The fruit can be eaten and is often made into jams and jellies.

Bark: On young trees and smaller stems, look for a smooth dark brown to grayish bark. Mature stems are fairly smooth retaining a lighter color than black cherry and the bark is shallowly fissured.

Choke cherry is not as shade tolerant as black cherry.

What are These Shrubs?

Page 23 Continued

Pin or Fire Cherry: Prunus pennsylvanica: Small tree 10-30 feet, Minnesota Champion: 63 feet tall.

Leaves: Alternate, simple, lance shaped leaves with finely toothed margins and long pointed end. The leaves are typically shiny, with a good green color. On the petiole or leaf stalk, look for two glands which appear as raised dark dots.

Twigs: Typically shiny, reddish with orange dots (lenticels). Look for spur shoots on pin cherry. Break a twig and check for the aroma of almonds.

Buds: Typically clustered at the twig ends and blunt, scales with a bright reddish brown color.

Fruit: Berry like drupe that is fairly small – up to 1/4 inch in diameter. Bright red in color and maturing in the autumn. The fruit can be eaten and is often made into jams and jellies.

Bark: On young trees and smaller stems, look for a smooth reddish-gray colored bark with orange lenticels (short horizontal lines). Mature bark is papery and grayish.

Above: Fruits of chokecherry.

Keep in mind that there are strong similarities between the three Minnesota native cherries.

Pin cherry is not shade tolerant and it is typically a fast growing, short lived tree.

Those are the Minnesota natives that are often thrown on the brush pile with buckthorn. Compare these Minnesota native shrubs to European common buckthorn and you will see why the confusion persists.

Common or European Buckthorn: Rhamnus cathartica: Shrub or small tree 8-20 feet, Leaves: Sub-opposite to alternate often described as opposite, simple, ovoid shaped leaves that end in a long pointed tip. The margins are finely toothed. The leaves are typically shiny, with a good green color.

Compare the vein pattern – buckthorn has arcuate venation – the veins tend to arc towards the tip of the leaf.

Note: There are no glands which appear as raised dark dots on the petiole.

Twigs: Typically, gray with spur shoots that terminate with a spine.

Buds: Sub-opposite bud sets – brown hairy scales on the buds.

Fruit: Bluish to black berry like drupe that is fairly small – up to 5/16 inch in diameter. Fruit matures in the autumn. The fruit cannot be eaten (has cathartic or purgative effects).

Bark: On young trees and smaller stems, look for a smooth gray colored bark with light colored lenticels (short horizontal lines). Mature bark is dark in color and begins to lift in small plates.

Above: Buckthorn leaf - subopposite, arcuate venation.

Drupes or berrys of buckthorn.

Bottom: Buckthorn understory with leaves November 23, 04.

All Photos: Dave Hanson

TCAAG Members:

Contact Phone Numbers Program Contacts:

Bob Condon – 952-890-1228

Mimi Hottinger – 507-388-4838

Gary Johnson – 612-625-3765 or grjonson@.umn.edu Dave Hanson – 612-624-1226 or dlhanson@umn.edu Mailing Address: 115 Green Hall, 1530 Cleveland Ave. North, St. Paul, MN 55108

Paula Denman – 612-338-1871

Lisa McDonald - 612-721-2672,

Laurie Drolson – 651-464-9829

Betsy McDonough - 651-779-0437

Bruce Granos – 952-423-5211,

Lu Schmidtke - 651-455-6125

Contacts: Regional Extension Educators: Bob Mugaas – 651-480-7706 Patrick Weicherding, – 763-767-3836 or weich002@umn.edu Gary Wyatt, 507-389-8325 or wyatt@umn.edu County Contacts: Carver County (Jackie Smith) - (952) 442-4496 or smith515@umn.edu Dakota County (Barb Stendahl) – 952-463-8002 or stend004@umn.edu Olmstead County – 507-285-8250 Ramsey County – 651-777-8156 Scott County (Jackie Smith) - (952) 492-5410 or smith515@umn.edu St. Louis County (Bob Olen) – 218-726-7512

Additional Reference Contacts: Debby Newman (Info-U) – 612-624-3263 Don Mueller, DNR Forestry – 651-772-6148 don.mueller@dnr.state.mn.us Ken Holman, DNR Forestry – 651-296-9110 ken.holman@dnr.state.mn.us Paul Walvatne MNDOT – 651-284-3793 Paul.Walvatne@dot.state.mn.us Great River Greening – 651-665-9500 Tree Trust – 651-644-5800

The story terminator for this issue - Wild Ginger - Asarum canadense.

This plant is a spring ephemeral on the forest floor. These photos were taken on April 29th of 2004. For a number of years, I had visited this spot in the woods to see the flowers of wild ginger. In 2004, I finally ventured in on the right day and was able to see the flower first hand.

Be cautious when handling the plant - it is reported that some people suffer from contact dermatitis.

And finally, while the taste and odor of the rhizome is similar to that of ginger - this is not the source of that culinary delight.