We were browsing in our local used book store when a book caught my eye with the title, Eucalyptus.* Of course, I had to buy it. It is fiction, a welcome reprieve from the dry, often dense reading I must do to inform the readers of Million Trees. Now I have the pleasure of sharing this diversion with you.
A fairy tale told among the trees
We are in post-war Australia. A young man marries a mail-order bride and soon loses her in childbirth, but not before insuring her life. With this windfall, he buys a beautiful piece of land beside a river in southeast Australia. His life is spent collecting and planting hundreds of different species of eucalyptus while raising his daughter.
The hundreds of species of eucalyptus provide what little structure there is to the book. Chapters are given the botanical names of the great variety of species and their various shapes and characters are described. Our very own blue gum is mentioned at length: “The Blue Gum is easily recognizable. The name E. globulus for the shape of its fruit, now describes the imperial distribution of this majestic tree: through the Mediterranean, whole forests in California and South Africa, and all states of Australia.”
The farmer is as devoted to his trees as he is to his beautiful daughter, so when the young men start coming around to court his daughter he protects her by devising a scheme that renders her nearly unattainable. He announces that the man who wins his daughter’s hand must first name every species of eucalyptus on his property. This proves an insurmountable task, but his daughter is indifferent to the failures of a long line of men who come from all over Australia to see her legendary beauty, but fail over many years to pass the test.
Finally, a uniquely qualified botanist presents himself to the challenge. It becomes apparent that he will pass the test. While the father and this botanist tick off the list of hundreds of eucalypts, a mysterious stranger visits the daughter in the forest. He tells her stories that charm her. For the first time in her life, someone interests her. He brings to her his knowledge of a wide world full of unusual lives and human predicaments.
When the stranger suddenly disappears without explanation, she falls into a deep stupor. Meanwhile, the botanist passes the difficult test and comes to claim his bride. But she languishes in despair and he is unable to revive her.
We must leave the story here, because the end is a wonderful surprise of which we do not wish to deprive you. It was a great pleasure to read about our trees where they are respected and admired, as they deserve to be here as well.
*Murray Bail, Eucalyptus, Melbourne, Australia, 1998
Conservation Sense and Nonsense 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-novick/just-because-itll-grow-in_b_3621351.html
If you read this blog article, you may want to read a few others that refute some of the claims the author makes.
There is no evidence of loss of biodiversity anywhere in the world as a result of introduced species:
https://milliontrees.me/2014/08/15/global-increases-in-biodiversity-resulting-from-new-species/
There is no evidence that more insects use native vegetation than non-native vegetation:
https://milliontrees.me/2012/08/14/doug-tallamy-refutes-his-own-theory-without-changing-his-ideology/
The “homogenization” of landscapes is a short term issue. Dispersal of species has occurred throughout the history of the earth. When species arrive in a new location, they change in response to the new environment and will eventually be new species adapted to their new home:
https://milliontrees.me/2014/05/19/the-monkeys-voyage-how-plants-and-animals-are-dispersed-throughout-our-planet/
You are remarkably callous regarding loss of species that don’t adapt to homogenization. In particular, you need to read about butterflies and their host plants. Some butterfly larva can survive on domestic species in the same family as their native host plants. Others can’t. As for birds, some invasives produce berries birds will feed on, but are not as nutritious as the natives they have displaced.
There are very few butterfly species that are entirely dependent upon a particular species of native plants. Most use at least one family of plants as their host and that family usually has hundreds of species of plants, some of which are native and others are non-native to a particular location. There are also a few butterfly species that are now dependent upon a particular non-native plant. By the time the butterfly habitat has been poisoned with herbicide, butterflies have derived no benefit from the destruction of non-native plants.
There is no scientific evidence to support your theory that berries of non-native plants are inferior nutrition compared to berries of native plants. Here are a few examples of such studies: https://milliontrees.me/2013/09/06/no-evidence-that-birds-are-harmed-by-non-native-plants/ and https://milliontrees.me/2014/03/18/are-non-native-plants-ecological-traps-for-birds/
Every plant is native somewhere, although that definition varies widely because the definition of “native” is debatable. Nativists ask us to assume that birds are starving to death where these plants are native. The plants don’t lose their nutritional value when they are moved to a new location.
it is a wonderful book
Great novel indeed. Thanks for sharing!
Alameda official’s Urge Removal of Eucalyptus Trees in Oakland and Berkley Hills.
http://patch.com/california/albany/officials-urge-removal-eucalyptus-berkeley-oakland-hills-0#.VClG_OktA5s
on 09-26-14 First paragraph below.
{Shady eucalyptus trees growing in the East Bay hills could pose a serious fire danger and 12 area elected officials are advocating for federal funding to remove them. A letter signed by the 12 politicians was delivered to the Federal Emergency Management Agency seeking funding to remove the trees from Claremont Canyon, an undeveloped area between Strawberry Canyon and state Highway 24 that straddles the University of California at Berkeley campus and the Oakland Hills.}
Tom & Goldie (14)
I cannot tell if this posted : http://patch.com/california/albany/officials-urge-removal-eucalyptus-berkeley-oakland-hills-0#.VClG_OktA5s
The Alameda Official’s are seeking federal assistance to remove Eucalyptus trees from Berkley and Oakland Hills…
Here is the first paragraph.
{Shady eucalyptus trees growing in the East Bay hills could pose a serious fire danger and 12 area elected officials are advocating for federal funding to remove them. A letter signed by the 12 politicians was delivered to the Federal Emergency Management Agency seeking funding to remove the trees from Claremont Canyon, an undeveloped area between Strawberry Canyon and state Highway 24 that straddles the University of California at Berkeley campus and the Oakland Hills.}
Tom (14)