Ask Steve dot Com

Attack of the Giant Bees!! Save the Playscape!!

Tracy Becker writes:

"Is there some non-toxic (kids & dogs) way to keep the nasty carpenter bees off a wood play scape? Hubby just finished a gigantic play scape for the boy, and within one day (!!!) there was a carpenter bee making a home in it. Grrrrr...."

Don't you just hate it when you finish a big job, and all you want to do is sit back in a comfortable chair, drink a cold beer, and admire your handiwork, and then a big, black Carpenter Bee comes along and eats it.  I'll bet it really bugs you.............  Get it?..........."bugs" you.  Never mind.

Fortunately for me, we don't seem to have many problems with Carpenter Bees here in West Texas.  We've got lots of other nasty critters, like scorpions and vinagaroons.  But that's another story.  Carpenter Bees are large (larger than a bumble bee) bees with hairy a hairy head and thorax, and a shiny black abdomen.  They bore holes into soft wood where they lay eggs and raise young Carpenter Bees.  I've looked at several sites for information on controlling these beasts and a very helpful site can be found at UC Davis' website.  It describes several methods for controlling these bees, with emphasis on non-chemical solutions.

One method to prevent Carpenter Bees in the first place (a little too late for Tracy and her hubby) is to avoid soft woods like pine, spruce, or fir.  If you can afford the cost, use oak or maple instead.  If you have to use soft woods, fill all depressions or cracks with wood fillers or caulk.  These openings are invitations for Carpenter Bees to start digging.  If you already have a problem, try filling the holes with steel wool and then capping it with caulk.  There appears to be some disagreement as to whether to do this during the day while the bee is still in the hole, or to wait till early evening when the bee should be out.  The  UC Davis site suggests the latter.  Another non-chemical approach is to dust the holes with a desiccant powder containing boric acid or diatomaceous earth.  These powders are natural and work by abrading the hard surface of the bee's body, causing it to leak water and drying the bee to death.  Pretty cool.  Read all the information on the UC Davis site.  I think you'll find it helpful.

Geyser Plumbing

Christa asks:

"I've always wondered how geyers work and how old faithful can be old faithful.
Thanks."

You know, I was wondering about that too.  Last year My wife and I went to Yellowstone National Park, the land of geysers.  Having never been before, I found the steaming vents, bubbling mud, and spewing geysers absolutely fascinating.  We went in September, after all of the big crowds had left and were really blessed to be able to wander through the geyser field near Old Faithful early in the morning surrounded by billowing steam and frost covered trees.  It was really beautiful.  The photo below is one I took of Grand Geyser, one of largest in Yellowstone. 

Christa, you wanted to know how geysers work.  The best explaination I found was in Geology.com.  The information below is taken directly from their site. 

"A geyser is a vent in Earth’s surface that periodically ejects a column of hot water and steam. Even a small geyser is an amazing phenomenon; however some geysers have eruptions that blast thousands of gallons of boiling hot water up to a few hundred feet in the air. 

"To understand how a geyser works, you must first understand the relationship between water and steam. Steam is a gaseous form of water. Steam is produced when water is heated to its boiling point. When water converts into steam at surface conditions it undergoes an enormous expansion because steam occupies 1600 times as much space as the original volume of original water. The eruption of a geyser is powered by a "steam explosion" when boiling hot water suddenly expands into the much more voluminous steam. 

If you have a fissure or hole in the earth that contains water from top to bottom, all you have to do is add heat, lots of heat, to the water at the bottom of the column of water.  When the deep water reaches the boiling point and suddenly converts to steam, the sudden expansion forces the cooler water above it up to the surface with amazing speed and force.  It's kind of like shooting off a cannon, except geysers use water suddenly converted to steam as the gunpowder, the cooler water above the steam as the "bullet", and the fissure in the earth as the barrel.

As to why Old Faithful is so faithful, it all depends on the physical geology of Old Faithful's vent and underground plumbing and the available supply of water.  The Yellowstone.net website reports that the time of the next eruption is dependent on the length of the last eruption.  Follow the link and look at "Predicting Old Faithful" to see the method park rangers use to post the time of the next eruption.

If you haven't been to Yellowstone, I highly recommend going.  It's a great place to visit.
 

 

Q&A: How Big is That Moon on the Horizon?

Julia Jayes asks:

Why does the sun appear larger when it's near the horizon? ;)

My wife has frequently bothered me (I mean asked me) with this question too.  Recently the moon was at it's closest point to earth for the next few years and some discussion about how large the moon appears when close to the horizon popped up.  MSNBC.com ran an article on the larger than normal full moon.  Robert Roy Britt wrote: "At moonrise, the moon will appear even larger than it will later in the night when it's higher in the sky. This is an illusion that scientists can't fully explain. Some think it has to do with our perception of things on the horizon vs. stuff overhead.  Try this trick, though: Using a pencil eraser or similar object held at arm's length, gauge the size of the moon when it's near the horizon and again later when it's higher up and seems smaller. You'll see that when compared to a fixed object, the moon will be the same size in both cases."

I have my own theories about this phenomenon.  I haven't found any research yet that backs me up, but what the heck, that's never slowed me down before.  I believe that humans (and other animals like raptors, or birds of prey) do not have true telescopic vision, that is we are not able to manipulate the images that hit the back of our eyeballs and make them larger than they would normally appear.  If we could, that would consititue true telescopic vision.  But when we need to take a closer look at something far away our brain concentrates its efforts on the input from the light sensing neurons (called rods and cones) that are "seeing" light coming into the eye from that far away object.  That light would be concentrated in the center of the retina.  Perhaps the brain can even draw input from rods and cones that are only used or "switched on" when extra detail is needed.  When this happens, the perceived image has more resolution. 

If all of the above is true, then one of the byproducts is the perception that the object we are concentrating on appears larger.  Think about it.  When you try to observe the details of color or pattern on a bird that's flying nearby, do you actually "see" the nearby elements of your surroundings, like the low shrub that's growing just in front of you, or the person standing just to your right?  These are objects that are easily within the normal scope of your vision.  That is, when standing in the same place and looking in the same direction, but not concentrating on the bird, you would easily notice the shrub and the person.  I believe that the brain can, at its discretion, "ignore" the periphery of the field of view and concentrate on a smaller field when more resolution is called for.

Thus, when we look at the moon, especially when it's near the horizon, our brains concentrate on the center of our normal field of vision and consequently the moon appears larger.  Part of this perception is bolstered by the appearance of other features in view near the horizon.  For example, trees or mountains on the horizon tend to reinforce the perception that the moon looks larger than normal.  Although the effect is not as noticable when an object is viewed overhead, I believe it still is at work.  There's just nothing in the field of view to compare it to.

This is my theory.  If someone does the research and it turns out I'm right, I want the effect named "Steve's Theory of Perceived Telescopic Vision".  Yep.  That ought to do it.  

 

 

Q&A: "Like Moths to a Flame"

Julia Jayes asks:

"What attracts moths to lights?"

I found this interesting discussion of the phenomenon on NPR's "All Things Considered; Science Out of the Box".  This is an audio clip offering possible explanations from Dr. May Berenbaum of the University of Illinois at Champagne Urbana and Dr. Henry Schau at the University of North Carolina.  After listening to both of these theories, I'm not sure I buy either of them.  But I have to admit, at least these guys have studied the critters and I haven't.

Q&A: A Thorny Subject

Ernie Vineyard asks:

    "Exactly how many species of cacti are there in the Trans-pecos region? Can you name them?"

Methinks perhaps you are trying to test me, Ernie.  Nevertheless, A Michael Powell and James F. Weedin report in their recent publication Cacti of the Trans-Pecos and Adjacent Regions that there are "109 taxa, 76 species, and 33 varieties of cacti" in the Trans-Pecos.  I was surprised that the number wasn't higher.  I guess when I total up the number of times I've been brutally attacked by cactus during my lifetime I just got the impression there were more of them than Powell and Weedin report.

Incidentally, the book referenced above is one of the finest books published on cacti from any part of the world, much less the Trans-Pecos.  I heartily recommend it to avid naturalists and serious cactophiles alike. 

The answer to your second question is "No".  I can read them to you.  Does that count?

Q&A: The Proverbial Woodchuck

Terry Reeves asks: 

"How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

Let's start with the animal first.  A woodchuck is basically a groundhog.  Same as Punxsutawney Phil.  The saying suggests that woodchucks can't chuck wood.  What's chucking?  According to Dictionary.com, to chuck is to throw something, as to "chuck a rock in the pond".  There are other definitions, but this is the only one that applies to wood/trees/logging.  I have searched high and low and can find no reasonable reason why a groundhog would toss wood about.  Julia, my very learned daughter, said that she had watched one of the realtity programs about logging and that they call trimming all of the limbs off of a fallen tree "chucking".  But groundhogs can't operate chainsaws, so that's probably out.

According to Wikipedia, possible answers are:

1. "As much wood as a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood."
2. "A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood."
3. "A woodchuck would chuck all the wood, if a woodchuck only could."

 

Q&A: Plans for Owl Boxes in 2009

Pete Z. asks: 

"Steve, friend, kahuna, paisano. Exactly where will you be hanging your owl nesting boxes this coming year?

As you probably know, In past years I experienced terrible problems with predation on my Western Screech Owl boxes.  In 2007 all six of the nests started were predated by ringtail cats.  Since I couldn't come up with an easy way to "ringtail cat proof" these nesting boxes, in 2008 I decided to move the boxes somewhat farther away from ringtail habitat (farther upslope and away from watercourses) but still in the Emory Oak woodlands they seem to favor.  I experienced slow acceptance of these nest boxes in 2003 when I first placed them.  One box out of 12 was used.  However in 2008, none of the 17 boxes placed were used.  I'm going to give it one more year to see if the birds accept this new arrangement.  If not, who knows?  Moving thes boxes is a huge undertaking.  Last year it took almost a week to relocate the 17 boxes.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Q&A: Going "Stag"

Barbara Brescian writes:

a) What kind of animal is a stagg?
b) What do you call a female elk?

Both questions pertain to elk, scientific name Cervus elaphus, a species that occurs over many parts of the world including North America where it is commonly to as Elk or Wapiti.  A subspecies of this animal, the Red Deer, occurs in Europe, Central Asia, and Asia Minor.  It has also been successfully introduced into many areas including New Zealand. 

The male of the Red Deer is referred to as a Stag, with one "g".  To answer your second question, the North American Elk female is referred to as a cow.  Whatever the name, these are truly magnificent animals.

Here's one of my photos of some animals that hang out near my home.