For Release March 27, 2001

AGRI-VIEWS
by Chuck Otte, Geary County Extension Agent

There is a movement under way to have a tree named as our national tree. I won’t try to understand the logic behind this move. After all, we do have a national bird and a national this and a national that, so why not a national tree? The National Arbor Day Foundation is involved and have set up a web page on the Internet where you can vote for your choice. If you are interested, the address is http://www.arborday.org. Look for the link on their home page.

Well, this started me thinking about what tree should be our national tree. On the Arbor Day Foundation web page, they have 21 species listed for you to vote on. In good American fashion, they have also left room for your own write in candidate. Currently, the five species receiving the most votes are, in no particular order, Dogwood, Maple, Oak, Pine and Redwood. The other species listed are: Baldcypress, Birch, Buckeye, Cottonwood, Douglas Fir, Elm, Hemlock, Holly, Kukui, Magnolia, Palm, Paloverde, Pecan (Hickory), Redbud, Spruce and Tuliptree.

Okay, I’ll be blunt. I don’t think much of this list. There are a few possibilities on there, but you can discard most of them right now, in my opinion. All of the trees listed are very nice trees or shrubs, in their own right and in the right location. But, if we are going to have a national tree, it should be a species that is a stately or noble tree. It should be able to be grown, well, in at least the 48 contiguous states. Here’s what I think of the list, as well as one or two possible write in candidates.

For starters, several of them are barely trees. They are large shrubs or small trees at best, in most settings. This would include Buckeye, Dogwood, Holly and maybe even Redbud. I hate to kick out Redbud so soon since it does so well in much of Kansas, though. Secondly, some of these trees have such limited range I don’t even think they are practical. So, let’s toss out Douglas Fir, Kukui (this must be a Hawaiian species, I couldn’t find it in any of my books), Paloverde and Redwood.

Several species I have a problem with because they simply are not well adapted to Kansas (and in some cases most of the country). So now we can discard Palm, Pine and Spruce. Birch falls into this same category. Nice trees but tough to grow. Elm is a troubling one. American Elm would truly be my first choice IF it hadn’t been so decimated by Dutch Elm Disease in the last forty years. So Elm is gone. Magnolia and Tuliptree are out also. Stately trees, granted, but tough to grow west of the Mississippi River.

Several of the species listed are really just broad families of trees. If we are going to have a national tree, it should be a single species. A couple of maples and oaks came to my mind, but I think we need to delete those two completely (but let’s leave Burr Oak as a dark horse write in candidate.)

With what’s left we can start looking at broad native range and adaptation. Hemlock and Baldcypress are okay, but limited range and Hemlock is not the good for Kansas. Pecan may not be bad, but for me the obvious choice is Cottonwood, Eastern Cottonwood to be precise. Native to most of the eastern United States and if you include a half dozen close cousins, that are virtually indistinguishable, it’ll grow almost anywhere.

My write in candidate is going to upset quite a few people, but it is Eastern Red Cedar. This hardy juniper is a tough survivor, will grow nearly anywhere and is Kansas’ only native evergreen. So there you have it, my pick for a national tree. Now, go to the web site and cast your vote!

-30-

Return to Agri-Views Home Page

Return to Ag Home Page