Midnight Photo Blogging: Raccoons in Brooklyn

Oh, yeah. They’re here.

I happened to go into the kitchen and heard noise out in the garden. I went out into the tree fort and heard lots of rustling around, sounding like it was along the back fence. I went back inside and got a flashlight to shine down in the yard.

The first one I saw running along the bottom of the reed screen I put up along the back fence. It was so fast, it could have been a cat. I kept hearing noise, so I kept looking. That’s when I saw something on the reed screen. With the flashlight, it was clearly a small raccoon.

Now I know why my screen keeps falling down. It’s a raccoon ride.

By this time a light was on from our tenants downstairs, and I saw a flash of light from a camera. Grabbed my camera, keys, flashlight and went outside to the backyard. One of our tenants was in the backyard with a camera, and I joined in, using the flashlight to spot them – in the trees, along the phone lines, behind the fence – and take pictures. I only have the flash in my camera, which isn’t very powerful. The shot above is the only one in which I got all three of them. [2006.07.31-16:28 EDT: Replaced with photo adjused for brightness.]

They’re clearly young, they seem well-fed, and they were having a lot of fun with each other. They didn’t seem interested in my compost bins at all. They did seem to like rustling around in the leaves. I know there’s lots of earthworms in there, and probably other good eats. Gnawing on phone junction boxes also seems to be a pastime, not one of which I approve.

They were back the following night. There were three, again, but one of them seemed larger than the other two and stayed on the ground. The three photographed above were all about the same size, and all up and down the threes, along, behind, and on the fence and screen, and so on. That time my partner got to see them, which was great fun.

It’s been too hot since then to keep a raccoon vigil.

Related posts

Raccoons

Invasive Species News, July 20, 2006, Brooklyn, NY: “Brooklyn” Parrots Taken from the Wild

Monk Parakeet Munching on Young Apples

On his Web site, Brooklyn Parrots, Steve Baldwin reports that Brooklyn’s most charismatic potentially invasive species, Myiopsitta monachus, Monk Parakeets, have been poached from at least one, possibly two, locations:

Several residents of Marine Park [a neighborhood in southeastern Brooklyn, adjacent to JFK Airport] have approached me recently, asking what happened to their once-thriving colony of wild parrots. I have been able to verify through a source that these parrots have been stolen by thieves. According to this source, two men, one with a long pole, have been taking live parrots from the pole nests in Marine Park. They work at night, and have been seen by residents. If this is the same operation that has stolen parrots in Midwood [a neighborhood south of me], their MO is to sell the parrots to local pet stores for $25 a piece, where they have value not as pets, but as breeding pairs.

Baldwin goes on to urge people to report suspicious activity to the police, and to ConEd, the power provider for New York City, since the birds commonly nest around transformers.
He continues:

The Monk Parrots of Brooklyn enjoy no special protections under New York State Law. They are classified, along with pigeons and starlings, as birds that can be “taken” at any time, unlike protected species. They are vulnerable to poaching, and because Quakers are legal in New York, there is a ready market for captured birds.

There’s a good reason Monk Parakeets are not “protected”: they’re not native to the United States, let alone Brooklyn. They were introduced, accidentally or deliberately, a few decades ago.

This is an emotional issue. Monk Parakeets are attractive, gregarious (with each other, at least), big, loud birds commonly sold as pets. They’ve appeared in my backyard, and whenever I see them, I find myself crying out “Parrots!” But make no mistake: Monk Parakeets are a potentially, at least, invasive species. They are reproducing, and spreading, in the wild. Not just in Brooklyn, or the NYC Metropolitan Area, but in over a dozen states.

To get a taste of how emotional this is going to get, read on:

They are considered unworthy [of] protection because they are classified as “introduced.” This stigma is equivalent to “illegal alien” in the human world – “introduced” species don’t have the same rights, protections, and privileges. When bad things happens to them, society feels free to turn its back. Do the wild parrots of Brooklyn, which have been in the borough for 40 years, have a right not to be captured and sold into captivity? I think so.

Sturnus vulgaris, the European Starling mentioned earlier, was deliberately introduced to this continent by Eugene Schiefflin in the 19th century. His “acclimitization” society wanted to introduce all the birds mentioned in the works of Shakespeare. The epicenter for this invasion was in New York City’s Central Park. You probably know the rest. They compete with native species for nesting cavities, and have been known to displace the residents of active nests.

Before we get all teary-eyed about the plight of the parrots, we need to understand the impact they’ve already had, and what will happen as they continue to expand their range. What native species have the parrots already displaced? What species might be able to get re-established, if the parrots were not already here? What ecological niches are they occupying?

I’ve seen the parrots mobbing and driving off crows, which are twice their size, so I know they can be aggressive towards other birds. I’ve observed them eating apples from our neighbors’ tree, which reaches into our yard. Are there no native fruit-eating birds which could be supported by such bounty? I’ve never seen them here, but Orioles come to mind. I’d rather see Orioles eating the apples. But that will never happen as long as the parrots are around.

Baldwin also announced that he will be campaigining for protective legislation for the parrots. As much as I am also fond of the little darlings, I will oppose such legislation.

Links:

Wildlife sighting: Raccoons in Brooklyn.

Sorry, no pics. I did not see them. But our tenants, while eating dinner in the backyard last night, saw two raccoons, which came within about six feet of them. From their description, they sound like juveniles.

To set the stage, here’s a photo of the backyard:

The tenants were seated in the Adirondack chairs. The raccoons were at the log in the foreground.

Melanie, a next-door neighbor, has been vindicated. Several months ago, I saw an opposum in our backyard. Right out the back window, nosing around the leaf litter and bags of mulch. And all the neighbors said “Oh, yeah, we’ve see the opposum.” Like there would only ever be one. Where there is one opposum, there be much opposa. In that conversation, Melanie said that she’d seen a raccoon in her backyard. At which the neighbors scoffed “Maybe it was a cat.” For none but Melanie had seen a raccoon.

Until last night.

Note the compost bin in the photo above. There is another directly behind where the photographer is standing, against the garage. I think this is what is attracting the raccoons. The tenants were very excited about being able to compost their kitchen scraps, and I’ve encouraged this. I’ve let them know what not to compost (meat, bones, fats or oils) and what to compost (vegetable, fruit, coffee grounds, eggshells, and so on). But the bins do not have secure lids; I sometimes even leave them unlidded if they’re dried out.

I’ve never had to contend with raccoons in 25 years of urban gardening. We live one block from Coney Island Avenue: a seven-lane thoroughfare lined, at our latitude, with auto shops, car washes, gas stations, row houses, and Pakistani restaurants. Granted, we also only live four or five blocks from Prospect Park. But raccoons?!

Is this a problem for you suburban and exurban composters? Should I do anything? What do you do?

Related posts

Raccoons

Field Trip, June 8, 2006: Brooklyn Botanic Garden

This past Saturday, my partner and I and a mutual friend visited the Brooklyn Botanic Garden, which is just three subway stops from our house.

Descriptions and more photos available on flickr.

Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Native Flora Garden, Pickly-Pear Cactus in bloom

Lilium canadense, Canada Lily

Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Mixed Perennial Border and Palm House

Beetle on Rose, Cranford Rose Garden, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, July 8, 2006

Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Lily Pool Terrace, Lotus in bloom


CORRECTION: The insect I off-handedly identified as a “butterfly” on flickr is actually Epargyreus clarus, the Silver-Spotted Skipper. They were quite common the day of our visit. I saw them both in the Mixed Perennial Border, and in the Native Flora Garden.



In response to Black Swamp Girl‘s comment and question: The Cranford Rose Garden was disappointing. This was definitely past peak rose season. I had wanted to go during June – the peak month – but was unable to get there at that time. Most of the roses were not blooming. In addition to scant bloom, the plants overall were a bit the worse for wear. We had over a week of heavy rain every day until this past weekend. We had pea-sized hail on the 4th of July. So the poor things were not looking their best.

I’m not a fan of “rose gardens” where there’s nothing but. Monocultures are rarely a good idea. I do want to have some roses in my mixed borders at home, though. I wanted to research some possibilities during the visit. I just didn’t see anything I would have wanted in my garden!


Related Content

Flickr photo set

Links

Meta-Blog Entry: A Garden Outing

meta-blog entry: a blog entry about blogging

Kati, who hails from Ontario, Canada, and writes the Realmud Garden and Spirit Doors blogs, outed me yesterday by using my real name in her blog. As much as I enjoy seeing my name in “print,” I was initially startled. I’ve intentionally not used my real name for this blog, nor in my blogger profile. Nor have I provided any reference in this blog (other than this sentence) to my personal Web site. 

 But it’s not something I expected, or needed, to keep “secret.” The links, however indirect, are available (again, intentionally) for anyone who wants to pursue them. In this instance, Kati’s curiosity was piqued by my feedback about a formatting problem on her blog which prevented me from reading her profile:

[Xris] who writes about gardening at the Flatbush Gardener blog, kindly pointed out that what I set up on my computer, may not look the same on your computer — hopefully I have fixed that problem! So I had to satisfy my curiosity as to who [Xris] was, of course, and visited his very interesting and informative blog. It seems many of his concerns are similar to mine, particularly as to how we can live (and garden) without making too much of a detrimental impact on the natural world around us. I was also very interested in [Xris’] website. …

… which led her to my real name. I’m also naturally curious about the other gardening bloggers (blogging gardeners?) I read. Especially so when non-garden interests and information “leak” into the garden space. The Web in general, and blogging in particular, has a huge capacity for supporting dissociation and fragmentation of our lives, both in viewing and publishing. I’ve noticed several people whose gardening blogs I read, such as Kati, have multiple blogs. 

I’ve been tempted to do the same. There are risks and benefits to both mono-blogging and multi-blogging. One risk of mono-blogging is turning off readers who don’t ascribe to the sentiment of some “off-topic” post. 
I recently unsubscribed to an upstate New York gardener’s blog when she posted for July 4 with, to my sensibilities, a most vile graphic which combined the images of a waving U.S. flag, two children (white, naturally) gazing vaguely heavenward (or looking up to “Big Daddy”), and the text “God Bless America” emblazoned across the bottom. I just don’t have the stomache for soft-core nationalist pornography when I just want to see pictures of pretty flowers. 
 On the other hand, a risk of multi-blogging – or of cropping the mono-blog a little too close to the stem – is missing opportunities for delineating the deep connections, subtle or glaring, among the multiple dimensions of our lives. I’ve organized my blogrolls by topic, but some blogs challenge that linear, left-brain approach. 
Looking at my own blog entries, would I categorize my blog as gardening, nature or science? The division is often artificial, and purely for my convenience. Then there are the more personal connections, the real reasons why we (I) garden, and perhaps why we (I) blog. 
I’ve written about, or hinted at, some of my reasons here, here, and here in this blog. I could list an arm’s length of descriptive attributes about myself in my profile which have little (but not nothing) to do with my gardening. 
Gardening is a source of healing for me. Does it inform the reader, or distract, to know something about the journey of recovery which comprises most of my adult life, or the lifetime of emotional darkness which preceded it? 
Gardening is a deeply spiritual act for me. Does the reader understand this, or me, better to know that I’m also an atheist? 
 For now, I’m choosing to continue to keep this blog pruned in a naturalistic style, not sheared to crispy geometry. My gardening does connect me to larger considerations, such as invasive species, biodiversity, global warming … so I will continue to write about those things here, alongside the photos of the bugs and flowers under my care. 
I believe we must all become – we already are – gardeners of the world. I will act, and write, “as if” my work and words matter. It is my hope that the seeds I plant, the weeds I take, the feelings and thoughts I express, help to heal the world.

Circus of the Spineless #10

COTS #10 is up on Science & Sensibility. No, it’s not the Carnival of the Sycophants. “Spineless” as in:

… Of the two and a half million animals so far described considerably less than 60,000 fall into the sub-phylum Vertebrata [the spined] – that is, less than three percent of described animals build their bodies in the same way we do. Even that number is a great under-estimation; there are probably at least 10 million arthropods and very few vertebrates not yet known to man. …

So, fellow gardeners, when you’re feeling outnumbered by the beasties in your garden, you are.

Your host got picked up for this issue:

More beetle news from Xris of Flatbush Gardener who reports that the state of New York has decided to change the state insect to one that actually lives in the state of New York.

Even cooler, several of my favorite bloggers are also in this issue, including:

And there’s several blogs in COTS #10 new to me which are going on my rolls.

Invasive Plant Profile: Artemisia vulgaris, Common wormwood, Mugwort

Artemisia vulgaris, Mugwort, in the sunny border at Garden #4 in Flatbush, Brooklyn, New York. The first photo shows the habit of growth. For scale, the stepping stones are 11″ square. The plants in this photo are about two to two-and-a-half feet tall.
The second photo shows an entire plant removed from this area. You can see the horizontal root below and to the right. The plant regenerates if any part of this root remains in the soil.
After taking these photos I removed all the plants.
Photos taken: June 4, 2006.

This photo shows what you get less than 20 days later if you don’t get all the roots out!
Photo taken: June 23, 2006

Artemisia Vulgaris, Common wormwood or Mugwort, is a perennial herbaceous (at least in Zone 7a) plant in the Asteraceae (Compositae), the Aster, Daisy or Sunflower family.

The emerging foliage, as seen in the third photo above, looks like Chrysanthemum. The maturing plants, as in the first two photos, remind me of ragweed. The pleasant (to me), pungent scent of the leaves alone identifies it as an Artemisia, a sage. The semi-woody stems and distinctive scent distinguish it from Chrysanthemum or ragweed.

The flowers individually are insigificant. When in bloom, collectively the flowers don’t offer much either, forming just a greyness around the tops of the plants, as if they had lint stuck between their leaves. I’ve seen some listings of more ornamental selections with more prominent flowers, and even one with variegated leaves.

“Wort” is an old suffix for plants traditionally used for medicinal and healing purposes, for example: Lungwort. I don’t know what “Mug” identifies that would need healing. It also has culinary uses as a seasoning. It’s widely available commercially, sold as an herb. You’re welcome to have mine for free, if there’s any left after I’m done ripping it out. Artemisias also have toxic properties. Among other applications, A. vulgaris has been used as a natural abortifacient in early pregnancy. Another well-known member of the genus is A. absinthium, Absinthe.

It has escaped cultivation and is reproducing in the wild. Several sources categorize it as invasive. Once established, it can be difficult to eliminate through mechanical means. It’s common along roadsides in New York City. The photos from my garden above show the long, rambling root system, and how easily it regrows from any small part of the root left behind. I expect to be pulling this up for years from my garden, until I’ve exhausted it.

References:

Technorati tags: ,

Coleomegilla usurps Coccinella as New York State Insect

[Update, 2006.08.15: Corrected the date to 2006 from 2005!]


News, June 15, 2006, Albany, NY: The New York State Assembly bill A06247 passed and delivered to the Senate:

PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL : Alters terminology of the state insect.

JUSTIFICATION : To change the official state insect from the Nine-spotted lady beetle (Coccinella novemnotata) species of the lady bug, which is no longer found in New York State, to another species of Lady Bug, the Spotted lady bug (Coleomegilla maculata).

PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY : New Bill.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS : None.

EFFECTIVE DATE : Immediately.

Here’s how the New York Times reported it today, June 23:

The state’s official insect, a nine-spotted ladybug, would no longer fly in that role: it is extinct in New York State. So legislators took a break from bickering over health care spending and property taxes in the waning days of the session and found common ground on the issue of designating a new state insect, making it the pink spotted ladybug instead.
A Few Things Lawmakers Can Agree On [requires subscription for viewing]

I think the correct term would be “extirpated” in New York State. Regardless, the article goes on to quote Nancy Calhoun, Republican, sponsor of the bill:

… “I know it’s not earth-shattering,” said the assemblywoman, Nancy Calhoun, who represents parts of Orange and Rockland Counties.

Ms. Calhoun says she was just trying to right a wrong. Lawmakers first adopted the state’s official bug in 1989, but the nine-spotted ladybug had already become extinct in the state. Ms. Calhoun was alerted to the error by a reporter a couple of years ago and she submitted a bill to rectify the matter.

“Why do we want to get something like this wrong?” Ms. Calhoun said. “It would be like having a dinosaur as our state reptile.” …

It’s an interesting question. In fact, New York State has a state fossil, the Sea Scorpion, which is an extinct relative of the Horseshoe Crab, which is not. So intentionally selecting an extinct state symbol is not out of the question. The comparison is not accurate, however. Dinosaurs were extinct before we got onto the scene; C. novemnotata was once common. A better question is: How did New York State get to have a once-native-but-no-longer-resident state insect?

The back-story can be found in the Fall 2003 issue of Wings, the magazine of the Xerces Society:

In 1980, fifth grader Kristina Savoca sent a letter – along with a petition bearing 152 signatures – to New York State Assemblyman Robert C. Wertz, urging him to introduce legislation designating the lady beetle as the official state insect. The proposal languished for a number of years, passing in the Assembly but not being considered in the Senate. Approval finally came in 1989, after Cornell University entomologists suggested that Wertz propose the nine-spotted lady beetle (Coccinella novemnotata, usually abbreviated to C-9) as the state insect because it was one of the most important native lady beetles and was believed to be common. The red-and-black insect is also widely recognizable to the public as a ““ladybug.””

Among the several dozen species of lady beetles in New York state, C-9 was the clear choice in 1989 because it had been -— and was assumed still to be -— the most common lady beetle in New York and the northeastern United States. It ranged across the United States and through southern Canada. However, several recent [as of 2003] surveys in New York and the Northeast in general have not recovered any individuals of C-9 … It is now clear that C-9 occupies only a tiny fraction of its former range in North America.

Many entomologists suspect that introduced lady beetles, such as the seven-spot (Coccinella septempunctata) and Asian multi-colored (Harmonia axyridis) lady beetles, played a role in C-9’’s disappearance. … Qualitatively, several native lady beetle species have declined as first the seven-spot and then the Asian multi-colored lady beetles established and rose to prominence. Introduced species may also replace each other, as the Asian multi-colored lady beetle’s arrival seems to have led to the seven-spot lady beetle becoming increasingly rare.

The cause for concern is that introduced species may fill the same ecological niche native species once occupied. [Emphasis added] This is problematic because many of these species are from Asia and are not adapted to the harsh Northeastern winters or climatic irregularities like droughts. Unlike native lady beetles, which overwinter in hedgerows and in the duff of trees, the introduced coccinellids take to people’s garages and homes, often by the thousands, creating a considerable nuisance. More important, introduced species may out-compete native species for food and replace them

We can hope that the decline of C-9 and several other conspicuous coccinellids will lead to a greater focus on this valuable family. To call attention to their plight, listing the species as ““endangered” in New York state and ““threatened” at the national levels is warranted. This is a task that the Xerces Society will be undertaking in the coming months. Other native lady beetles have similar habitat requirements and probably suffer from similar limiting factors, so efforts to survey for and conserve C-9 should prove useful for a suite of species. What began as a simple letter from a student to a state assemblyman has resulted in a greater awareness of the threats to apparently ubiquitous creatures often assumed to be safe from the pressures of environmental change.
The Decline of C-9 – New York’s State Insect, By Erin J. Stephens and John E. Losey

Here’s how we can “right the wrong”: instead of introducing a bill to gloss over the extirpation of a species, let’s reintroduce and restore C. novemnotata to New York State. Then our state insect would be a symbol to aspire to, and not simply an “error.”

[goo.gl]

Links

Insect Profile: Apion (Rhopalapion) longirostre, Hollyhock weevil


Apion (Rhopalapion) longirostre, Hollyhock weevil, on, of all things, my hollyhocks in the sunny border at Garden #4 in Flatbush. The upper photo shows a single male, I believe, on a leaf. The lower photo shows a pair in their typical posture, ie: mating. The female has her (even longer) snout buried in the flower bud.
Photos taken: June 4, 2006

The taxonomy of Apion (Rhopalapion) longirostre, common name Hollyhock weevil or (sometimes) Black vine weevil, is confusing. I’ve seen it listed as being in the Family Brentidae, the straight snout weevils, the Apionidae or Apioninae, and the Curculionidae. Whatever! They are in the order Coleoptera, the beetles.

The genus Apion seem to generally have long snouts. Their antenna are jointed and located halfway along the snout. A. longirostre is distinguished from other Apion species by its orange legs.

Their native range of A. longirostre is in Eurasia, originally limited to southern and southeastern Europe and Asia Minor. It has since spread much further afield there. It was first detected in North America in Georgia in 1914. Within fifty years it had spread across the continent.


They deposit their eggs in the ovaries of unopened hollyhock buds. The eggs hatch and the larvae develop within the ovary, eating the seeds. Within the still unopened bud, they pupate and emerge as fully-formed adults, chewing a hole from the inside out. Adults can winter over in the soil. They may also spread via hollyhock seeds.

This is my first encounter with this creature. I didn’t notice them during the first year in this garden, though they were probably already present. The adults are easily spooked. They move constantly. When I approached them with my macro lens, they would hide deep in the buds and under leaves. The photos above were the only two good ones – ie: in focus on the weevils, not the plant – I got out of the series. Oh, and did I mention they mate constantly?

From what I can find out, they seem to be host-specific: they don’t affect any other plants. Many, if not all Apion seem to be host-specific. A. fuscirostre, the Scotch broom seed weevil has even been intentionally introduced as a biological control for Spartium scoparium, Scotch broom. (Other weevil species are serious problems). There also doesn’t seem to be any biological controls for them, whether insect, fungus or what have you. It’s possible that some generalizing insect predator might be effective. All the literature suggests various insecticides, which I refuse to use. I’d rather just not be able to grow hollyhocks, if it comes to that.

Mechanical controls would seem to be the only option. They also tend to drop to the ground when disturbed, so that could be used against them by shaking them out onto some paper or other collector placed under the plant. I had been wondering why some of the hollyhock buds turned brown and papery before they bloomed. Weevils may be why. If so, then removing and destroying the unopened buds may also help control their population. I’ve also seen suggestions to either freeze the seedpods to kill the larvae (which would not affect overwintering adults), or open the seedpods and place them in the sun to drive out the weevils (my weevils were in full sun, so I don’t think that would bother them enough to make a difference).

Note that there is another weevil, Otiorhynchus sulcatus, which also goes by the common name of Black vine weevil. It looks completely different. In particular, it does not have the long snout with antenna; it looks more like a regular beetle. It’s behavior is also different. It does not lay eggs in flower buds; instead, they drop to the ground. Also, it feeds on multiple host plants. It’s much more of a problem than Apion.

http://bit.ly/7ZGBV7

Links

Tags:

Garden Notes: Garden Furniture

Yesterday, I took my laptop out to the backyard for the first time. The wireless reception was excellent. It was a little awkward, but workable, sitting in an Adirondack chair with a laptop. Although the trees provide filtered shade, I still had to brighten the screen to its highest setting, reducing battery life. So I want a table where I can put the laptop, and a regular height chair to sit at and type or write, and an umbrella to provide more complete shade.

I’m researching a dining table, seating for at least four, and an 8′ or 9′ umbrella. I have a 7′ umbrella which is on its last legs: the bottom part of the part has rotted off, and one of the spurs has broken. A 7′ umbrella is just not large enough to provide enough shade for four people sitting around a table. I want wood, rather than metal, for its comfort, warmth, beauty, and the natural element it adds to the garden. The table must have an umbrella hole. Ideally, the table will be foldable, and the chairs foldable or stackable, for storage.

Over the years, I’ve used wooden planters and garden furniture made from cedar, teak, and “tropical hardwood.” In my experience, teak really does last several times longer in the garden than any other wood. For example, I can squeeze about five years out of a cedar planter by first treating the wood and reinforcing it with galvanized brackets; the bottom will rot out before the brackets give way. On the other hand, I have a teak planter nearly ten years old which is nearly new. My cedar furniture gets weathered, pitted, loose and weak after just a few years. My teak furniture turns grey the first winter and then nothing else happens to it. No wood is as resistant to rot, insects, and diseases as teak.

The qualms I have about teak are about whether or not, by specifying and purchasing teak as my wood of choice, I’m contributing to deforestation, habitat destruction, and so on. It’s my intent to minimize the impacts of my gardening activities, and to garden sustainably however I can. Is my teak table the equivalent of a tiger-skin rug, or an elephant foot umbrella stand? Nearly every company will claim that their teak is “ecologically harvested” or some such, whatever that means. Third-party certifications, such as those from the Forest Stewardship Council and the Rainforest Alliance, hold promise for identifying sustainable sources and holding suppliers accountable.

All I can conclude is: I can’t know for sure. The same problems arise when purchasing any wood product: a cedar bench could come from a clearcut forest in northwest North America, for all I know. In the absence of other information, my strategy is to select the highest quality and longest-lasting products I can, and to deal with reputable companies. I hope I can reduce my gardening “footprint” by using products which will last me twenty years or more, not something I will need to replace in five years.

The following suppliers are all companies I’ve dealt with over the years. In alphabetical order:

  • Crate and Barrel. I like the design of their teak Trovata Round Folding Table. However, the hardware is galvanized steel, which will eventually rust and stain the wood. Any metal used outdoors other than brass must be sealed, galvanized, or allowed to oxidize or rust. For outdoor folding furniture, the best hardware is brass.
  • Land’s End. They’ve just recently added an “Outdoor Living” category to their catalogs and Web site.
  • Plow & Hearth. They offer furniture made from eucalyptus, cedar, and “yellow balau.” I have no experience with eucalyptus; I expect it’s comparable to cedar. Their Lakeside series is made from eucalyptus in an attractive, Mission style. I’ve never heard of “yellow balau” and assume it’s in the “tropical hardwood” category.
  • Pottery Barn. They’ve recently added outdoor furniture to their offerings. Their Jayden series is teak. They have the least expensive umbrellas.
  • Smith & Hawken. The original popularizer of teak garden furniture and planters. They’ve made an effort to select reputable sources. At full price, among the most expensive. I wait for sales and discounts.
  • Wood Classics. My favorite company for teak furniture. They’re employee-owned and based in upstate New York. What I especially like, is that all their furniture is offered in kit form at deep discounts over the assembled, and even flat pack, pricing. This makes their teak furniture competitive with other suppliers, and gives me the satisfaction of building the furniture myself.

Links

Forest Stewardship Council
Rainforest Alliance