Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Apple Park's tree whisperer (backchannel.com)
76 points by steven on June 1, 2017 | hide | past | favorite | 23 comments


There have been so many articles about the trees planted in the new Apple campus, and how this was somehow groundbreaking, but it's actually been pretty disappointing. I've seen some lists of trees, especially fruit trees, that they've planted, and it's pretty uninspired -- they didn't Think Different. Lots of pomes (Apples, Pears, etc.) and stone fruit (Plums, Cherries, etc.) -- conventional varieties too. And they talk about drought tolerance, but I haven't seen a single mention of them planting White Sapote, a fruit perfectly adapted to the local climate, delicious, and very productive (not to mention, rare). Or various Guava relatives (Lemon / Strawberry Guava, Guabiju, Pineapple Guava, etc.). And that's just scratching the surface...

I wish they would have talked to the local chapter of California Rare Fruit Growers to plan an orchard with a true diversity of interesting fruit. They had an opportunity to include a huge diversity of fruits and cultivars with the space they have, but it seems like they're not going to.


I believe they were looking only at plants native to California, and from a quick search it appears at White Sapote's and Guava's closest native populations are in eastern Mexico. I don't necessarily agree with being this strict in the requirements, but I think it's within the realm of being legitimate–although I'm not sure how "native" Apple, Pears etc. are to California.

I've also read that to some degree they were recreating a specific landscape that Steve Jobs grew fond of when growing up. That doesn't really help anybody alive today, but if I were involved in the decisions, I wouldn't interfere with his wishes unless unavoidable.


None of the fruit trees they are planting are native to California.

If they wanted to plant native edibles they'd be stuck with a pretty limited selection of berries and nuts.

Edited to add: White Sapote and Avocado are about as close to native fruit trees as you can get in California. Apples, on the other hand, are native to Kazakhstan.


Remember that Silicon Valley used to be orchards before it was Silicon Valley, and that's what I guess that Steve Jobs, who was raised in the area, was pining for.

and

> Lots of pomes (Apples, Pears, etc.)

Well, the company is called Apple...


Sure...but if they want Apples, at least they could plant some interesting Apples. Instead of Granny Smith, maybe some Brushy Mountain Limbertwig or Hawaii or Fukunishiki or ...?


Sapote makes people drowsy and sleepy. I'm not sure this is the right place for that kind of fruit.


One might think that if one were to read a wikipedia entry on it. But it's not true -- that's only a property of eating the leaves or seeds, not the fruit.


Doesn't matter: still in California.


Not sure I understand.


California law requires companies not expose their employees to such things...


Maybe the arborist considered the options you just outlined, and there are some good reasons for not deciding to go with it?

Somehow it feels like the arborist who has worked on this project for 7+ years might have done more due diligence than someone who created a HN account just to post a few sentences to complain about it.


Disappointed by your response given that I've been reading here for ages and figured I'd weigh in on something I know a lot about...but ok.

To respond to your point: I think there's probably a good reason he chose what he did -- it's what Jobs was used to (given that the fruits they planted were the commercial fruit varieties that were commonly grown in the area when Jobs was a kid). That doesn't make it an interesting orchard worthy of the press it's gotten. And I'm sure he put lots of effort into the aesthetics of it, but he didn't in the actual selection of fruits. Also, the climate of 2050 won't be the climate of 1950 (both due to climate change and the urban heat island) -- it's possible to successfully grow many fruits that only did well in Southern CA 50 years ago. (Just to highlight the lack of forward thinking: the orchard includes many citrus fruit trees, which are going to be toast in a matter of just a few years due to HLB.)


By the way, for those who are curious, here's a list of fruit trees that they planted at the new Apple campus:

http://www.cityfarmer.org/treesapple.jpg

(Edit: the list is from several years ago, so no idea if this is a complete list and/or accurate -- I've seen other lists that include a few more trees than are listed here.)


I'm not sure why the other guy was downvoted. I just read the article and it points out their choices and why: wanted to make it a microcosm of trees pre-Silicon Valley.

That being said you can be disappointed at their selection of fruit trees. It's just an opinion.


"Muffly, who had been sensitive to the native growth of the region for years, got it immediately. “That’s what I’ve been doing — planting fruit trees, oak trees,” he said."

The thing that's funny about it is that the pre-silicon valley landscape that Jobs was familiar with was not native at all. None of the fruits that they are planting are native to the region (though sure, the oaks are). Most of the old growth forests in the region had already been completely logged by the the 1950s (well before that, actually). This article talks about how the redwood forests that covered the local hillsides were all clearcut in the 1800s:

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/weekly/morgue/cover/1996_Nov_...

Just on the other side of the bay (in the East Bay hills) there used to be a stand of some of the largest redwoods ever known to have existed, that were used for navigation by ships through the golden gate because they were so large.

I get it -- the building is really a monument to Jobs, and so creating his childhood vision of the valley is fine. And it's a private company -- they can do what they want. I just guess I see this tree planting as a missed opportunity, one that is being given far more credit than it deserves.


What happened to the redwoods?


They were logged during the mid-1800s as SF and Oakland were growing and the gold rush was going on, then again after the 1906 earthquake.

Essentially no old-growth trees remain (one, I think?); but a stand of younger redwoods does still exist in Redwood Regional Park [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redwood_Regional_Park


I've visited a park here that has living trees that were planted by a wealthy retired officer, to be sail ship masts. Now would be about harvesting time, some 100 years later. It's a nice place though.

I applaud their efforts. Seems it's just impossible to let the environment be. First everything absolutely just must be destroyed, and then, years later, somebody must spend a lot of effort and time to actually try to make it "nice" again, and they won't see the results in their lifetime anyway.


"A healthy society is one where old men plant trees they'll never eat from".


A similar (probably apocryphal) anecdote about an Oxford University college: http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/oak-beams-new-college-oxf...


"Pears for the heirs"


I can't believe that this is the first time anyone's ever brought up plating a macintosh apple tree. I mean, if you have the opportunity to make a pun in tree form, how could you not?


McIntosh, isn't it?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: