Across the American West, what looks like a leafy success story of fast-growing shade and windbreaks is doubling as a vast, accidental fuel depot. In trying to green bare hillsides and feed a hungry timber market, generations of Americans covered millions of acres with Australian eucalyptus, trees that evolved to burn hot and often. I see that legacy now colliding with a hotter, drier climate, turning imported forests into a structural fire hazard that few people ever intended to plant.
The story is not simply about one species that went wrong. It is about how well-meaning decisions, from Capt. Robert Waterman’s Victorian landscaping to twentieth century commercial forestry schemes, created a landscape where explosive bark, volatile oils and invasive roots are now part of everyday life. The result is a combustible experiment in ecological engineering that is still unfolding along roadsides, in city parks and on private land.
How a Victorian fad became a statewide forest
The American romance with eucalyptus began as a status symbol, not a safety calculation. In an Abstract on the species’ early history, federal researchers note that Eucalyptus were introduced into California in 1853 as an ornamental by Capt. Robert Waterman, a sea captain who wanted a touch of exotic Australia on his estate. That private enthusiasm quickly spread as nurseries marketed the trees as hardy, fast-growing and picturesque, ideal for lining boulevards and framing new suburbs in California’s Mediterranean light. However, the aesthetic choice masked a deeper ecological mismatch between Australian fire forests and American towns.
By the early 1900s, the fad had morphed into an economic strategy. Eucalyptus was heavily planted in California in the early twentieth century to bolster commercial forestry in California, a push that later observers on Reddit have described as people trying to do the right thing and it backfiring. Investors imagined straight, dense trunks feeding railroad ties and construction lumber, only to discover that the wood twisted as it dried and resisted standard milling. What remained after the boom faded were sprawling groves of nonnative trees, rooted in public lands and private ranches, that no longer had a clear economic purpose but were too established to remove cheaply.
The anatomy of an “explosive” tree
What makes these Australian imports so dangerous in a warming American landscape is not just that they burn, but how they burn. Many experts say that eucalyptus trees worsen the fire threat for a few reasons, including the way the bark they shed dries out quickly and creates ladder fuels that carry flames from the ground into the canopy, a pattern detailed in reporting on Many fire seasons. The bark on the gums, which include Eucalyptus globulus, is deciduous, and Constant shedding of bark is part of what makes these trees so hazardous, as strips of dry material hang like fuses and then drop to the forest floor in thick mats.
Fire managers have watched that structure turn routine blazes into fast-moving crown fires. In a Eucalyptus fire education newsletter, the National Park Service describes how the bark strips can ignite, carry flames up into the canopy, and then cast embers outward, seeding spot fires well ahead of the main front. Botanists at a California arboretum add that Eucalyptus species have adapted to survive and even benefit from wildfires, with flammable bark that is shed at the base and in the canopy so that fire clears competitors and stimulates new growth, a cycle explained in their account of Eucalyptus bark-shedding rituals.
Fire-loving evolution meets American suburbs
In their native range, these trees are not accidents of history but products of evolutionary strategy. One analysis from Cornell argues that the eucalyptus have evolved to create a flammable environment on the forest floor so as to burn away the offspring of competing trees, while their own seeds are protected in a shell that needs to be burned off, a dynamic explored through game theory in a discussion of the eucalyptus strategy. In other words, the trees are not just tolerant of fire, they are active participants in shaping when and how it moves through a landscape, using heat as a competitive weapon.
That logic makes sense in Australian bushland, but it becomes far more troubling when the same traits are planted next to American homes and highways. Fire ecologists studying Western forests have described how some species are fire responders or fire adapted species that not only were able to tolerate fire but were in fact stimulated by it, a pattern highlighted in a podcast about a burned redwood forest. Eucalyptus fits that category, but unlike native redwoods, it brings volatile oils, bark ribbons and dense thickets into places that were never designed to accommodate such aggressive fire behavior.
From California hillsides to LA infernos
Nowhere is the collision between imported fire ecology and human settlement more visible than in California. Local reporting has chronicled how eucalyptus became California’s most hated tree as residents watched groves explode during wind-driven wildfires, with Many experts warning that the bark they shed dries out quickly and creates tinder that can carry flames into neighborhoods, a pattern documented in a widely cited KQED feature. Those same groves often sit at the wildland urban interface, where suburban cul-de-sacs back directly onto steep, tree-covered slopes.
The danger is not theoretical. Earlier this year, Highly combustible Tasmanian gum trees were caught up in an LA blaze that drew national attention, with footage shared by ABC News showing how quickly the Tasmanian gums ignited and how intensely they burned, a moment that underscored the risk of planting such species in dense cities and was later referenced in an ABC clip. When hot embers from those trees ride Santa Ana winds, they can leap highways and rivers, turning what might have been a contained brush fire into a multi-front urban emergency.
Invasive roots, toxic shade and the next forestry experiment
Fire is only part of the eucalyptus story. Environmental groups are concerned about the negative effects of Eucalyptus trees on the environment, warning that these difficulties include hydrological changes, biodiversity loss and allopathic impacts of Eucalyptus spp. on surrounding plants, concerns laid out in a peer-reviewed Environmental assessment. The trees’ dense shade and chemical leaf litter can suppress understory growth, reducing habitat for native insects and birds and simplifying ecosystems that once had layered, resilient plant communities.
Those traits have led some communities to treat eucalyptus as an invasive species, akin to the emerald ash borer or spotted lanternfly that schoolchildren now learn about in invasive-species lessons. In one classroom project, a student described how an invasive species in their area, the emerald ash borer, digs in trees and lays eggs, causing the trees to get sick and die, a simple but accurate summary of how nonnative organisms can unravel local ecology that appeared in a public media segment on invasive species. Eucalyptus does its damage more subtly, through water use and chemical warfare rather than burrowing insects, but the end result can be similar: weakened native forests and higher management costs for cities and landowners.
More from Morning Overview