Yeah it is a real neat idea, if I was to win the lottery or pull of a nice heist, after putting the money to some good humanitarian causes I'd probably try and pull something off like that. The guy who does it seems perhaps like a bit of a wingnut judging from some of his writings on there, but sometimes wingnuts can make really COOL things. Also, I share dude's obsessive compulsive-ness about this tree, as do a lot of others it seems.

As far as space goes, yeah it's a case of humans remodelling the land but this is the South - better to remodel the land into a "natural" preserve of a certain species of tree (which isn't invasive in the slightest and is technically native to this continent anyway, if you account for time) than to turn into another Wal-mart or themepark or something terrible.

It'll be interesting to see what this guy does with this and if he actually pulls it off.

Also, you check out the picture of the old, original temple tree in China, the one that Dr. Chaney got his picture taken in front of with the Maoist Official. He's got a current photo of it somewhere on that website - it's awful! The tree's still lookin good but now theres some concrete soviet-style block complex (looks like cabrini green) behind it. I imagine the rest of the area is longer quite rural like it was seventy years ago, and it's pretty developed.

China's such a model environmental steward...

Dawn Redwood, as in Metasequoia glyptostroboides was never native to North America. Our fossils belong to the extinct species Metasequoia occidentalis, of which I have local fossils of.

Still, an interesting idea. But it is not a preserve if you simply plant a bunch of trees... we call that a plantation... you would have to have a self-sustaining amount of natural regeneration.

I disagree. One wouldn't call it a plantation, because they aren't planting the dawn redwoods as a cash crop. Not sure how one can't see it as a preserve. I guess everyone has their own definitions.

Fledeling, unless you were around during the eocene and can vouch for it, I'm going to just stick with the premise that it's "native". I have a sandstone fossil of metasequoia occidentalis, too, which resembles taxodium more than it does today's metasequoia. Most likely there were three (defined by north american fossils) species of metasequoia, probably many more, "native" to North America.

Three of the main fossil beds that Metasequoia has been discovered are the John Day Beds in Oregon, various locations throughout Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming, as well as as far east as Tennessee. All were deciduous, all had oppositely-arranged leaves.

A deciduous conifer with opposite-arranged needles? I'll stick with what I've been saying - for all intents and purposes, Metasequoia can be said to at one point have been "native" to the United States. It's also been hypothesized that the current species - Metasequoia Glyptostroboides - has not changed much in millions of years. It is not a "new" species. But I'm not a paleobotanist and apparently neither are you so I don't think either of us is an authority on this.

Also, I believe that I read on the website somewhere that that dude's plantation IS self-sustaining, at least that's the point of his efforts, that's what he's going for. We'll see if he can actually pull it off.

lkz5ia, I suppose I consider a planting of any species to just be a bunch of trees some guy planted until they start planting themselves.
sequoia_stiffy. I am just raising the possibility that the species itself might not have never been native. Not that I necessarily care either way, but there is little evidence that the current species ever lived here. Not that the did not, but it always could have been a species exclusive to Asia. Where do you draw the line at nativity if you can consider any one species the same as any other as long as they are in the same group? By that logic, African lions, sloths, and everything else that was native to this continent at any point in time is "native" as long as it has living relatives somewhere. And yet that cannot be the case. Where do you draw the line? It seems much more abstract than most other uses of the definition.

I am not saying that only natives should be planted or that this tree should not be here or anything, so please don't go off on any assumptions. I am simply curious and puzzled that you can say any genus is native as long as it has a history here. It is not a mere reintroduction, the where I am the places where Dawn Redwood fossils have been found have not supported forests for millions of years and could not support the species now.

"But it is not a preserve if you simply plant a bunch of trees... we call that a plantation..."

"I disagree. One wouldn't call it a plantation, because they aren't planting the dawn redwoods as a cash crop. Not sure how one can't see it as a preserve"

Definitely not a preserve. That's where something is boiled up with a lot of sugar and put in a glass jar.

Plantation . . . yes. The trees are planted. It doesn't have to be for a cash return, though no doubt they hope to make one some day on admission fees.

Resin

Here is a link that might be useful: Preserves

Obviously you are just playing with words since you are jibber jabbering with even the word 'preserve'.

Hell Yeah blueberry's my favorite. But contrary to popular myth you gotta put that sh*t in the fridge or else it gets moldy. "preserves" is different from jelly. Ixnay on the high fructose corn syrup.

I aint' perfect myself but I know when I am wasting my time...
Thanks for the reminder on the futility of trying to engage in a productive discussion with you. Always rude!

just @ sequoia_stiffy, to clarify.

Ah, I didn't pick up on the full difference in the names during my previous readings (Metasequoia Occidentalis). It'll be interesting just to see if that many Metasequoia Glyptostrobides near each other will sustain themselves in our climate.

I know a fair number of botanical gardens seem to have started off as private affairs. Shaw's people here have a large amount of land out of the city they're using for a park to show Missouri Natives in a more natural setting. Nice hiking area too.

Any other...preserves....reserves...plantations....no.... "Private Big Tree Zoo's" dedicated to one species ever work out?

Here is a link that might be useful: Shaw Nature Reserve/Preserve/TreeZoo

Once the trees begin to reproduce naturally, then I suppose it could be called a 'preserve,' since the goal would then be the preservation of a naturally regenerating grove/stand/woodland.

Great idea, regardless of word-choice.

Josh

"Any other "Private Big Tree Zoos" dedicated to one species ever work out?"

I've posted this before so you've probably all seen this pic, but here it is again just in case . . . Sequoiadendron giganteum, 40-48m tall:

{{gwi:330110}}

Resin

* Posted by fledgeling_ 4b SD (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 27, 08 at 4:16

"I aint' perfect myself but I know when I am wasting my time...
Thanks for the reminder on the futility of trying to engage in a productive discussion with you. Always rude!"

Man you get butt-hurt too easily. We ever meet I'll buy you a martini.

As the above-mentioned "wingnut," let me try and address each question/objection/grievance that you may have.

First, I don't understand why you would call me a wingnut, unless it's because I'm an actor. Let me assure you, my symbiosis with these trees has nothing to do with environmentalism.

Second, this is NOT a plantation. These trees are not in neat little rows to be sold. They are planted randomly, to study in a natural habitat, for future generations to visit and enjoy.

Third, many of the fossils that you have seen, are photos that I have taken. There is no distinction between M. occidentalis and M. glyptostroboides, other than time and space. I challenge anyone to prove they are two different species (and you'd better be thorough. The John Day fossils are not true fossils; they are imprints, and I can scrape samples of woody material for DNA comparison against M. glyptostoboides).

Fourth, anyone who wishes to debate me, may do so by emailing me via the link on the CRDRP website. I will be happy to answer any of your questions.

Fifth, we will be holding a tour/working project the week before Halloween (2009). Anyone who is interested can contact me for further info.

Toronado3800, thank you for the link. Since CRDRP's inception, we have learned many things about Metasequoia that were previously unknown. If I can ever get the site updated, I will include this info. Until then, let me know if you want our newsletter, that covers all of this, including the history of the site. All the best,

D.A. Hänks

D.A., regardless of label, I find your venture quite interesting. M. glyptostroboides is a great tree-I think on that we can all agree. If, through your efforts, a self-sustaining population were to develop, I see no problem from an environmental standpoint. But that brings up my one question: Why do you distance yourself from environmentalism in your project?

On my land, I am working to establish two species (Well, one is a hybrid) that are not native to N. America-Norway spruce and hybrid larch. I have also planted some ponderosa pine which is not native to this part of N. America. But in this case, these trees are intended to blend in with the existing native species there. I have been an "environmentalist" since the mid 1970's, but have no qualms with introducing select exotic species into the mix. They won't harm anything.

I would love to get your newsletter.

+oM

PS...I also have three dawn redwoods growing there..doing nicely, I might add. I wonder if anyone is trying to grow this species further north than say, the 45th parallel that my land straddles.

I've seen some in Montreal's botanical gardens. That's right around the same latitude as you: 45.68 N

Thanks, ricon. Do you happen to know the approximate age of these Montreal trees? General condition and vigor?

+oM

Sounds like they have significant dieback in the winter, 10m tree height max. I haven't seen them in about 10 years, but I seem to recall that they had some from the original seed source in the 1940's.

I'm no expert on French, but 'gelivures' seems to translate as 'frost crack'

Here is a link that might be useful: Montreal Botanical Garden-metasequoia information

Thank you much. I dern near wrote mine off this spring. Just didn't seem to have much life in them. But doing fine now. And this after a cussedly dry summer. Water inputs by me are slim to none.

+oM

@ wisconsitom, I must apologize for the three year delay in answering your question. I stumble upon these sites from time to time, and three years happens to be the time frame involved with this one.

My apparent distance with "environmentalism" is due to those who use Thermite on tractors, or ram into ships. The sole purpose of this project is to reintroduce a once-native tree into its original habitat. This is no different than finding a small population of mastodons and turning some loose in South Dakota to reproduce and form a new native parade.

As for other remarks regarding the status and classification of this project, these trees have been planted on random centers, and are registered with the State of North Carolina as managed forestry, but are also listed as Green Areas, so that they may never be cut down or otherwise harvested.

Finally, this has been "pulled off," borrowing some previous posters' own language. CRDRP is registered with NC, and we have a few assigned rangers with uniforms, patches and badges. The original tree is now producing both male and female cones, and we expect this trend to continue.

This is only Stage 1 of 3. We have many more goals in sight, and it is my hope that you will continue to monitor our progress.

All the best,

D.A. Hanks

My understanding is that beavers got into Crescent ridge preserve a few year back and "chewed" / destroyed most of the dawn redwoods that had been planted and that the preserve has been abandoned. Haven't heard anything in a couple years.

Let me clarify what is going on at CRDRP-

Beavers took out everything along the creek, but the 200 on higher ground are still doing quite well. It has not been abandoned, but I will never have the cash to get the visitor's center open as I had envisioned. Once I am able to move up there, I will be able to get the trails cut in, and about 1,500 more trees put in. It's a setback yes, but this is still my life's work. I have been at this since I was 26, and I have no intention of abandoning such a unique project. Upon my death, my research, notes, fossils etc., will be left to the State of NC to continue the vision.

As for the idiocy of the discussion of this being a preserve, here is the definition that best applies: to maintain and reserve (game, fish, etc.) for continued survival or for private use, as in hunting or fishing.

Metasequoia glyptostoboides was recognized by the State of PA in a landmark case in Exton several years ago, as a native species. The dawn redwood is now listed there as a native tree, so that's the end of that argument. So what we have at CRDRP is around 200+- native dawn redwoods flourishing and reproducing to maintain a self regulating PRESERVE. Anyone can email me using the link on the website that is still up because the project is still active, or by contacting me on Facebook if they have any further questions.

D.A. Hänks

Just to bring this discussion to the other side of the country, I live slightly north of the 47th parallel and dawn redwoods grow like weeds here!! So less of a question of specific geographic location but rather one of a suitable climate. I am further north than just about anywhere else in the US but enjoy a very mild climate due to marine influences.

C Man, I said the discussion of what constitutes preserves was idiocy. There's a huge difference. If anyone should be offended, it should be me for the guy who called me a wingnut. Unlike most people nowadays, I don't get my feelings hurt when someone uses a mean word that isn't PC.

GardenGal48, it sounds like you are in the Pacific Northwest, and they do very well there. The trees at Peavey Arboretum in Corvallis, OR are the biggest and tallest in the world. They will definitely top 200 feet before too long.

This is not an insult, lest someone take it that way, but these trees are not Dawn Redwoods or Dawn redwoods. They are dawn redwoods. They were named for the dawn of time; not someone's name. It's a common mistake, but it irks me to no end. Hope I didn't offend anyone with that...

Hello all,

Just checking in to see if there are any updates?

I think at age 40 this would be as impressive to see as a HMS Warspite museum.

To Dehanks. Just out of curiosity, when you did the initial plantings did you clear cut and then plant the Dawn redwoods seedlings? Or did you underplant and then selectively thin where the new trees were planted? If so I would imagine this was a lot of work through the years to keep them from getting crowded out before they achieved significant size. Deciduous hardwoods are quite aggressive and part of the reason they took over most of Earth's forests in temperate climates during the late cretaceous.

"Deciduous hardwoods are quite aggressive and part of the reason they took over most of Earth's forests in temperate climates during the late cretaceous."

That is interesting. Why do conifers seem to dominate in cold temperate climates (Canada) and also some subtropical climates (in the US, anywhere from the NJ Piine Barrens on south in coastal areas. I am just north of the pine forests of the southeast coast, so mostly deciduous trees, conifers definitely a minority, a few broadleaf evergreens (Magnolias). Dawn Reds seem to LOVE the local climate though and probably would outcompete native conifers here (NJ/zone 7b).

In very cold climates the hardwoods don't do as well as conifers. In the far north of Canada as you approach the tundra and artic circle, fir and spruce become the dominant species although eventually they reach their limit and appear stunted.

Along the south-east coast (South Carolina, Georgia, and into Florida), Pines do better where the soils are very sandy, but hardwoods still eventually crowd them out. I am not familiar with the Pine barons in NJ but assume it's very sandy acidic soils which Pines like. Pines down south tend to be first generation reforestation trees aka pioneer species. Most of the areas you pointed out have been heavily logged several times over the last 200-400 years and the first trees to regenerate naturally (assuming there's a seed source) are pioneer species such as Loblolly pine, or long leaf pine. In the Appalachians its typically a mix of Tulip Poplar, Birch, and White Pine. Those trees eventually are crowded out (except the Tulip Poplar). At one point the American Chestnut was the dominant climax species in the Appalachians along with Oaks, but the Chestnut blight (came from China) wiped out 10's of millions of those trees and they are virtually extinct (although their has been ongoing research for the past 25 years to develop a hybrid resistant to the blight).

Hardwoods eventually succeed any pines as the mature forest trees (Oaks, Hickories, Maples, etc.). I studied silviculture. Up north you will often see White pine intermixed with hardwoods but never the dominant species and where they are dominant, it's only temporary. These areas typically have had flash burns in the past.

I am curious how Dawn Redwoods will compete with other hardwoods in a natural forest setting. Do they start seeding out or do they behave like ornamentals and simply live through their life cycle without producing offspring and eventually die out.

C Man, OIKOS had some backcrossed F4 or F5 hybrids (mostly Amer) chestnuts, of which I have one remaining. Other efforts continue to work on these hybrids. My chestnut gets some blight on a few branches, but resists the trunk-girdling cankers that killed the original Amer chestnuts. After 15 yrs, mine is finally putting out some flowers, but no nuts yet.

Interesting. I wonder how big it will eventually get. The original American Chestnut tree was a HUGE tree.