Dear Editor: I?EUR??,,????'???m making reference to your editorial in the November 2003 issue in regard to planting in fire zones. I have a home in Alpine Meadows, Calif. near Lake Tahoe, and served for 27 years on the local architectural review board (ARB). When the valley was opened for development in 1962, we had trees that were attacked by bark beetles. We removed those trees prior to the adult beetle leaving the trees and for several years had rather good control of the problem; the ARB could insist that applicants had to remove infected trees, cut them into firewood lengths, and cover them with heavy poly. Unfortunately the ARB did not have control over existing house. The community grew and trees became infected by the bark beetle; people didn?EUR??,,????'???t remove them, so now there are more problems with infected and dying trees.

There are several homeowner associations within the Alpine Meadows Valley. Where our house is located, the association does remove the trees, so we have reasonable control within the associations 85 acres. Still, it does take a lot of effort to convince the board to invest the money for tree removal and take down infected trees before the adult beetle leaves the tree. Most people do not know enough about the bark beetle and don?EUR??,,????'???t realize that different beetle species attack different conifer species.

This year, we had an early spring and the beetle may emerge very shortly. I have a difficult time convincing the board to remove the beetle trees right away. Although drought has something to do with it, we have seen perfectly healthy trees attacked during heavy snow years. In Northern Calif. along the coast we have seen Monterey pines in the landscape being attacked. For several years we have not planted Pinus radiata due to beetle problems. This pine was used en masse for many years and created wonderful effects. If the government had acknowledged the problem the bark beetle could have been stopped in the landscape. The problem does go much deeper than what you covered so well in your article. I believe we have to provide much more education to not only landscape architects, landscape contractors, and nurserymen, but also to the customers and general public. How this can be done is a real problem.

We like to plant tress to give shade, which saves air-conditioning and gives comfort to the house. We try to enhance the house with tress and shrubs. In Alpine Meadows we plant native plant materials like Arctostaphylos, which does well. However, it is not recommended because of the oil in the plant fuels fires. There is a long list of plants that should not be used because of the fire danger, but then we are told to use natives because of water conservation. We did not wish to introduce plants not native to the Tahoe area.

In short, we have many regulations and recommendations that are in direct conflict with each other. A developer is required to seed grass on newly created slopes. This grass will seed itself and become invasive. Here, it will cover slopes that have Ceanothus prostrata (a very low-growing Ceanothus), or a low Phlox, Eriogonum, or Penstemon newberryii; all these plants are two to six inches high and will be covered by the grass that seeds itself. I am trying to convince the county planning commission to ask for different erosion control solutions, and have encouraged nurseries to propagate native plants that could then be used in erosion control. It is a tough battle. How can the young landscape architect become aware of these problems? How can we teach the landscape architectural professors about what is taking place in the field?