3 ms·

In Texas, local governments plant trees all the time. The problem is that they don't water them and they die.

by jmugan 1y ago

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
90s_dev 1y ago
Isn't that what rain and rivers are for? I mean, the trees you cut down were alive somehow, right? Or, are they planting them in places there never were trees?
- bell-cot 1y ago
  Trees vary considerably in their water needs. And even if you're planting species which fairly recently grew in the area - it's easy for a year or few of drought to kill off young trees, if those are not watered correctly and encouraged to establish large, deep root systems.
  - moralestapia 1y ago
    With that said ... it's completely possible to have trees within a city, even in arid places. I've seen it with my eyes!
- ac29 1y ago
  I live in a climate with a 6 month dry season. Established trees are fine with only rain, but new trees need 10-15 gallons a week of watering when its dry. Las Vegas only gets 4 inches of rain a year, so I imagine supplemental water is likely needed nearly every week for several years.
- defrost 1y ago
  In some parts of the world clearing trees results in conditions that make it very hard to grow trees again for a considerable length of time. Large established trees with deep roots draw up large volumes of water from deep down. Once those trees go the water table rises, bringing salts from deeper down up to near ground leavel, the increased salt near surface inhabits young tree growth. eg: https://www.uwa.edu.au/news/article/2024/march/even-far-from-the-ocean-australias-drylands-are-riddled-with-salty-groundwater-what-can-land-managers-do https://www.uwa.edu.au/news/article/2024/march/even-far-from...
mingus88 1y ago
> Daseler is bringing in mostly nonnative plants that provide shade and are drought tolerant, like oak trees from northern Mexico and eucalyptus trees from Australia. Choice of tree matters. These areas are deserts and it just seems wrong minded to plant trees if the land can’t support them. Then again building a city like Las Vegas in the first place was a mistake imo. Seems a little late to try and make it sustainable and livable for humans. All that water could be used for much better things
- footlose_3815 1y ago
  This is the best point. Creating a city in the middle of a desert that requires you to spend extra resources just for it to exist is an affront to nature. Not-only do we need to destroy nature to exist up until now, but places like Vegas and Qatar are exponentially more expensive for the environment because the earth already naturally abandoned those places. Our engineering, at every turn destroys nature by default. We have the ability to stop this if we try hard enough.
  - manquer 1y ago
    Doha isn't a shining example of sustainable city development but it still better positioned than Vegas, there are few key differences between the two. The population is roughly the same ~ 2.2 Million each[1], however Doha proper is very small at only 50 sq miles, compared to Las Vegas metro area of 1600 sq miles , even all of Qatar is only 4700 sq miles and most of that is empty desert. Doha is right next to the sea, desalination plants supply 99% of its water supply reliably. Vegas on the other hands gets bulk of its water from Colarado river(via Lake Mead) and rest from ground water, both come with its own set of problems. Colarado river water is weather variable and also sharing the water is complicated by the pact between the 7 states that share the water. Qatar is very gas rich and can run those desalination plants pretty cheaply, plus they have no choice but to live where they are i.e. there aren't other alternative locations they can live at, Vegas residents have freedom of movement to rest of the U.S. and with tougher climate may find those cheaper/ attractive. [1] Out of the 2,000,000 only 300,000 or so are citizens/permanent residents, rest are immigrant workers without permanent residency rights, meaning they would leave when there is less work or visa is not renewed if the government desires to reduce the population of the city, they wouldn't need to convince/pay and provide alternative location foreign workers - who rarely are allowed or bring their family with them and would leave if there is no money to be made without a movement's regret.

In Texas, local governments plant trees all the time. The problem is that they don't water them and they die.

by jmugan 1y ago

In Texas, local governments plant trees all the time. The problem is that they don't water them and they die.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

90s_dev 1y ago

Isn't that what rain and rivers are for? I mean, the trees you cut down were alive somehow, right? Or, are they planting them in places there never were trees?

bell-cot 1y ago
Trees vary considerably in their water needs. And even if you're planting species which fairly recently grew in the area - it's easy for a year or few of drought to kill off young trees, if those are not watered correctly and encouraged to establish large, deep root systems.
- moralestapia 1y ago
  With that said ... it's completely possible to have trees within a city, even in arid places. I've seen it with my eyes!
ac29 1y ago
I live in a climate with a 6 month dry season. Established trees are fine with only rain, but new trees need 10-15 gallons a week of watering when its dry. Las Vegas only gets 4 inches of rain a year, so I imagine supplemental water is likely needed nearly every week for several years.
defrost 1y ago
In some parts of the world clearing trees results in conditions that make it very hard to grow trees again for a considerable length of time. Large established trees with deep roots draw up large volumes of water from deep down. Once those trees go the water table rises, bringing salts from deeper down up to near ground leavel, the increased salt near surface inhabits young tree growth. eg: https://www.uwa.edu.au/news/article/2024/march/even-far-from-the-ocean-australias-drylands-are-riddled-with-salty-groundwater-what-can-land-managers-do https://www.uwa.edu.au/news/article/2024/march/even-far-from...

mingus88 1y ago

> Daseler is bringing in mostly nonnative plants that provide shade and are drought tolerant, like oak trees from northern Mexico and eucalyptus trees from Australia. Choice of tree matters. These areas are deserts and it just seems wrong minded to plant trees if the land can’t support them. Then again building a city like Las Vegas in the first place was a mistake imo. Seems a little late to try and make it sustainable and livable for humans. All that water could be used for much better things

footlose_3815 1y ago
This is the best point. Creating a city in the middle of a desert that requires you to spend extra resources just for it to exist is an affront to nature. Not-only do we need to destroy nature to exist up until now, but places like Vegas and Qatar are exponentially more expensive for the environment because the earth already naturally abandoned those places. Our engineering, at every turn destroys nature by default. We have the ability to stop this if we try hard enough.
- manquer 1y ago
  Doha isn't a shining example of sustainable city development but it still better positioned than Vegas, there are few key differences between the two. The population is roughly the same ~ 2.2 Million each[1], however Doha proper is very small at only 50 sq miles, compared to Las Vegas metro area of 1600 sq miles , even all of Qatar is only 4700 sq miles and most of that is empty desert. Doha is right next to the sea, desalination plants supply 99% of its water supply reliably. Vegas on the other hands gets bulk of its water from Colarado river(via Lake Mead) and rest from ground water, both come with its own set of problems. Colarado river water is weather variable and also sharing the water is complicated by the pact between the 7 states that share the water. Qatar is very gas rich and can run those desalination plants pretty cheaply, plus they have no choice but to live where they are i.e. there aren't other alternative locations they can live at, Vegas residents have freedom of movement to rest of the U.S. and with tougher climate may find those cheaper/ attractive. [1] Out of the 2,000,000 only 300,000 or so are citizens/permanent residents, rest are immigrant workers without permanent residency rights, meaning they would leave when there is less work or visa is not renewed if the government desires to reduce the population of the city, they wouldn't need to convince/pay and provide alternative location foreign workers - who rarely are allowed or bring their family with them and would leave if there is no money to be made without a movement's regret.