I used to think that container grown trees were the next best thing since shirt pockets. In recent years I have seen so many root & tree health problems developing as this type of tree has filled the market.
I too, used to be impressed by the fine root mass that was developed... no more!
This mass of roots may be good, for the grower, when the trees are under irrigation at the nursery but it has become to be apparent that the development of major lateral roots that form the stability of trees as they age, has been shut down.
As roots hit the walls of containers, and yes... root fabrics, too... their natural radial growth is essentially stopped...one or more of the tropisms may be a interrupted. The results are often a brillo pad of roots that do not move laterally in the normal fashion, aggressively explore and provide strong anchorage. Let this fine root mass get dry at the planting location and a quick death will result.... there is no water-holding capacity in the woody root mass and the bark/sand "soil mix". This is akin to attempting to wetting of peat moss when it dries out.
Dr. Ed Gillman, researcher with the University of Florida, told me that most of the trees that were lost in recent hurricanes had been container grown trees... lacking sufficient lateral anchorage.
Perhaps the most pervasive problem with container grown trees is that the trees are set too deeply in the containers thereby burying the root flares. This situation eventually leads to massive girdling of the trunk and root flares and we often find that this situation cannot be corrected by root flare exposure and removal of the girdling roots... a very costly remedial process.
Currently, I am in the process of removing a root mass from a Loblolly Pine in a 45 gallon container in order to find the root flares. So far, I have removed a 6 inch profile from a root mass depth of 16 inches and no root flares, yet. I am beginning to have strong reservations about planting this tree, where is may eventually fall on my office... aaarrgghh!
Root flares... are an indicator of the natural grade of the tree.
The majority of my tree diagnostic calls relate to the burial of root flares which leads to stunting of growth, canopy thinning and varying levels of decay of the trunk tissues above the root flares... sometimes, very scary loss of structural strength in large trees caused by trunk decay and death of large lateral roots.
Container trees? I will stick with shirt pockets!
Sandy
G. Sandy Rose, RCA Registered Consulting Arborist Shade Masters, Inc. PO Box 13533 Arlington, TX 76094
In a message dated 2/22/2008 3:45:15 A.M. Central Standard Time,
noreply@googlegroups.com writes:
Larry, Beth, Gary, Bob
I love growing trees too. I usually start with bare root stock, but I have been experimenting with growing Hickory from seed. Hickory is absent from the commercial market because of the taproot, but I am having success with a fiber pot from Rootmaker. I am fortunate for this hobby to be part of my job. Below are the trees currently in my nursery. The Rootmaker pots, www.rootmaker.com ,I use don't allow the roots to circle. You get a nice fibrous root system, even with tap rooted trees. In a five gallon rootmaker pot, you can grow a tree to 1" caliper. There is little to no transplant shock too. I use a Fafard nursery mix that is mostly bark with a little peat. The plants love it. One of the best places to get oddball native plants is Woodlanders in Aiken SC. www.woodlanders.net they are mail order and retail. This does not include the hundreds of trees we have planted out in the gardens. I hope to live a long life so I can see the trees mature. That is the neat part about planting trees, you really don't do it for yourself. People that aren't even born yet will be the ones to appreciate the trees the most.
QTY Nursery Inventory of Our Lady of Angels Convent
I have planted trees for many years and have never liked container
grown plants. I much prefer bare-root because I want to make sure the
roots are spread out from the tree in a natural fashion, not the
kinked, circling mess you can so often have with container stock.
Give me a younger, smaller seedling, let it be planted properly and at
the right time, mulch it properly and give it extra attention the
first couple of years and it will generally catch up to and pass a
larger container plant of the same species within a few years.
As an example, I planted a small grove of longleaf pine seedlings bare-
root in 1/95, babied them the first two growing seasons with regular
watering and a very light compost tea, and in 8/96 they first broke
the "grass stage" that longleaf are known for, with a small amount of
terminal growth. Beginning with the growing season of '97, they all
skyrocketed in growth and the tallest are now closing in on 40', and
several of them had their first seed cones last year.
Direct seeding, therefore never transplanting at all, can be the best
method of all, but you've really got to protect that little plant when
it first pops up.
> I used to think that container grown trees were the next best thing since
> shirt pockets. In recent years I have seen so many root & tree health problems
> developing as this type of tree has filled the market.
> I too, used to be impressed by the fine root mass that was developed... no
> more!
> This mass of roots may be good, for the grower, when the trees are under
> irrigation at the nursery but it has become to be apparent that the development
> of major lateral roots that form the stability of trees as they age, has
> been shut down.
> As roots hit the walls of containers, and yes... root fabrics, too... their
> natural radial growth is essentially stopped...one or more of the tropisms
> may be a interrupted. The results are often a brillo pad of roots that do not
> move laterally in the normal fashion, aggressively explore and provide strong
> anchorage. Let this fine root mass get dry at the planting location and a
> quick death will result.... there is no water-holding capacity in the woody root
> mass and the bark/sand "soil mix". This is akin to attempting to wetting of
> peat moss when it dries out.
> Dr. Ed Gillman, researcher with the University of Florida, told me that most
> of the trees that were lost in recent hurricanes had been container grown
> trees... lacking sufficient lateral anchorage.
> Perhaps the most pervasive problem with container grown trees is that the
> trees are set too deeply in the containers thereby burying the root flares.
> This situation eventually leads to massive girdling of the trunk and root flares
> and we often find that this situation cannot be corrected by root flare
> exposure and removal of the girdling roots... a very costly remedial process.
> Currently, I am in the process of removing a root mass from a Loblolly Pine
> in a 45 gallon container in order to find the root flares. So far, I have
> removed a 6 inch profile from a root mass depth of 16 inches and no root flares,
> yet. I am beginning to have strong reservations about planting this tree,
> where is may eventually fall on my office... aaarrgghh!
> Root flares... are an indicator of the natural grade of the tree.
> The majority of my tree diagnostic calls relate to the burial of root flares
> which leads to stunting of growth, canopy thinning and varying levels of
> decay of the trunk tissues above the root flares... sometimes, very scary loss
> of structural strength in large trees caused by trunk decay and death of large
> lateral roots.
> Container trees? I will stick with shirt pockets!
> Sandy
> G. Sandy Rose, RCA
> Registered Consulting Arborist
> Shade Masters, Inc.
> PO Box 13533
> Arlington, TX 76094
> In a message dated 2/22/2008 3:45:15 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> noreply@googlegroups.com writes:
> Larry, Beth, Gary, Bob
> I love growing trees too. I usually start with bare root stock, but I
> have been experimenting with growing Hickory from seed. Hickory is
> absent from the commercial market because of the taproot, but I am
> having success with a fiber pot from Rootmaker. I am fortunate for
> this hobby to be part of my job. Below are the trees currently in my
> nursery. The Rootmaker pots,www.rootmaker.com ,I use don't allow
> the roots to circle. You get a nice fibrous root system, even with
> tap rooted trees. In a five gallon rootmaker pot, you can grow a tree
> to 1" caliper. There is little to no transplant shock too. I use a
> Fafard nursery mix that is mostly bark with a little peat. The plants
> love it. One of the best places to get oddball native plants is
> Woodlanders in Aiken SC. www.woodlanders.net they are mail order
> and retail. This does not include the hundreds of trees we have
> planted out in the gardens. I hope to live a long life so I can see
> the trees mature. That is the neat part about planting trees, you
> really don't do it for yourself. People that aren't even born yet
> will be the ones to appreciate the trees the most.
> QTY Nursery Inventory of Our Lady of Angels
> Convent
Gary and Sandy, Writing your names I couldn't help wanting to write
Spongebob, Patrick, and Squidward too (all characters from a cartoon
my kids used to watch)
I very much prefer to direct seed, or plant bare root when I can.
Unfortunately, with the amount of deer and lack of labor, I have to
resort to other methods. Black plastic pots are out due to girdling,
and I don't have the resources to field grow. The rootmaker pots are
a happy medium. It is much easier to water, feed, and monitor (IPM)
the young ones while in a group near the water source. I plant a
little high if not at grade, and agree that this is one of the most
common oversights in planting. Some times I have to add soil to the
pots because it settled, or I planted too high to begin with. So many
trees come from the nursery to deep in the ball or J-rooted. Often
these trees appear to have broken balls, but when you pull the dirt
off the top of the ball you find the flare way down inside, up to 8"
sometimes.
The manager before me had planted a 4" Blue Atlas Cedar a few years
before I came along. It was grown in a black plastic pot. When I
looked at the tree a couple of years later, it was about 6" caliper
and I could move it back and forth in the ground! I figured it would
topple at some point, and left it go. (No need to put extra effort
into a non native) After two additional years the tree is now about
8" caliper and is very sturdy?!? I wonder if the potted trees can
overcome their beginnings with time. It seems so in this case.
The biggest help with the fabric pots is the lack of transplant shock
when set out in the landscape. A plant grown in a black plastic pot
will need almost daily watering when set out, whereas the rootmaker
grown plants seem to need very little water. This is a big help to
me, with my small staff. I guess only time will tell in reference to
the anchor root issue.
----- Original Message ----- From: "pabigtrees" <wa...@comcast.net> To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:54 AM Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
" It is much easier to water, feed, and monitor (IPM)"
When you say "feed" are you not really meaning fertilize? I am hoping you are. To feed a tree is something the product pushers have pushed on us. My professor used to say to me that a person who claims to feed a tree should feed it well and put it in a closet. In short, trees are autotrophs. There are exceptions like the ghost flower that does not photosynthesis. They have no chlorophyll. Food is a substance that provides and energy source, mostly. Nutrient is a substance that provides an energy source, elements, and other substances essential for life, in types and amounts that can provide a healthy life. Fertilizer is a substance that provides elements, as salts mostly, or in bonded forms, that require microorganisms to alter to forms that can be absorbed by plants.
ENTS, There is nothing wrong with container grown trees, as long as they are planted properly---one needs to vigorously score or cut, with pruners or even loppers if necessary, any encircling roots--this will encourage new roots to grow beyond the root zone defined by the container. People are simply too gentle when planting.
Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones. Steve
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 10:50 AM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "pabigtrees" <wa...@comcast.net> > To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:54 AM > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> " It is much easier to water, feed, and monitor (IPM)"
> When you say "feed" are you not really meaning fertilize? I am hoping you > are. To feed a tree is something the product pushers have pushed on us. > My > professor used to say to me that a person who claims to feed a tree should > feed it well and put it in a closet. In short, trees are autotrophs. > There > are exceptions like the ghost flower that does not photosynthesis. They > have no chlorophyll. Food is a substance that provides and energy source, > mostly. Nutrient is a substance that provides an energy source, elements, > and other substances essential for life, in types and amounts that can > provide a healthy life. Fertilizer is a substance that provides elements, > as > salts mostly, or in bonded forms, that require microorganisms to alter to > forms that can be absorbed by plants.
[Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones. Steve]
Steve
I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
Sincerely, John A. Keslick, Jr. Consulting Forester & Tree Expert http://home.ccil.org/~treeman and www.treedictionary.com Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
- With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with
bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems
(hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't
know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of
study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when
it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of
trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too
deeply, etc.
- With a container grown tree, it is easier to just leave the tree in
the pot too long since tree is still growing (even if it is growing in
a way that will later produce problems.) This is "great" from the
viewpoint of a store just selling trees in pots - less turnover of
stock, etc. But it can make for a lot of problems down the road, as we
all know.
So, perhaps it isn't the containers themselves, though they are less
than ideal, but what the containers often lead to that is the problem.
On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones.
> Steve]
> Steve
> I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> Sincerely,
> John A. Keslick, Jr.
> Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
My brother bought a house in Illinois several years ago and wanted to plant a tree in the barren front yard. Both being trained arborists, we knew of the dangers of potted trees and structural issues. So when we went to the nursery to purchase a tree we intentionally picked the absolute worst tree we could find. Our thought was that we could "save" the tree from an ignorant homeowner and avoid its potential short life span due to uncorrected structural and cultural issues. The tree we selected, a red bud, was the "poster child" of cultural ignorance; crossing limbs, bad forks, and redundant limbs. I think we may have gotten a discount after pointing out the structural nightmare it was.
He ended up selling the house, but returned a few years later and was able to climb the tree and perform a gratuitous conscientious pruning, including pruning the growth away from the house as it had grown so fast!
It was a very satisfying "project" and we felt we had made a small, but significant impact on the urban landscape. But we wanted more. So we also performed "guerrilla pruning" where we would go into a park at night and perform much needed structural (corrective) pruning on newly planted and smaller, established trees. One night, we "hit" a park and generated a huge amount of debris. The trees were in bad shape and in need of serious pruning. Not wanting to leave the debris on the ground in disarray and attract negative attention, we ended up dragging ALL of the brush to the street and stacking it neatly. The next day the city came by and hauled it away! Another success story!
-----Original Message----- From: entstrees@googlegroups.com [mailto:entstrees@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Matthew Hannum Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM To: ENTSTrees Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
A few things about this come to mind:
- With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too deeply, etc. - With a container grown tree, it is easier to just leave the tree in the pot too long since tree is still growing (even if it is growing in a way that will later produce problems.) This is "great" from the viewpoint of a store just selling trees in pots - less turnover of stock, etc. But it can make for a lot of problems down the road, as we all know.
So, perhaps it isn't the containers themselves, though they are less than ideal, but what the containers often lead to that is the problem.
On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones. > Steve]
> Steve
> I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> Sincerely, > John A. Keslick, Jr. > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Hannum" <duskdr...@earthlink.net> To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
A few things about this come to mind:
- With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too deeply, etc.
AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems" http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
Sincerely, John A. Keslick, Jr. Consulting Forester & Tree Expert http://home.ccil.org/~treeman and www.treedictionary.com Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones. > Steve]
> Steve
> I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> Sincerely, > John A. Keslick, Jr. > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
Steve
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Hannum" < > duskdr...@earthlink.net> > To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> A few things about this come to mind:
> - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with > bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems > (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't > know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of > study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when > it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of > trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too > deeply, etc.
> AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And > then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I > agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same > school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section > titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems<http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html> > " > http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> IF you have something to add I would give you credit. > MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> Sincerely, > John A. Keslick, Jr. > Consulting Forester & Tree Expert > http://home.ccil.org/~treeman <http://home.ccil.org/%7Etreeman> > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding > us that we are not the boss.
> On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem > with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil > on top of the root zones. > > Steve]
> > Steve
> > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that > pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > Sincerely, > > John A. Keslick, Jr. > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > and www.treedictionary.com > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep > reminding us that we are not the boss.
Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly. http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
Sincerely, John A. Keslick, Jr. Consulting Forester & Tree Expert http://home.ccil.org/~treeman and www.treedictionary.com Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
----- Original Message ----- From: Steve Galehouse To: entstrees@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
John-
Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
Steve
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Hannum" <duskdr...@earthlink.net> To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
A few things about this come to mind:
- With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too deeply, etc.
AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems" http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
Sincerely, John A. Keslick, Jr. Consulting Forester & Tree Expert http://home.ccil.org/~treeman and www.treedictionary.com Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones. > Steve]
> Steve
> I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> Sincerely, > John A. Keslick, Jr. > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
I have had good success with trees from St. Lawrence Nursery, so can also recommend this recommendation. Also Musser Forest in PA sells bareroot trees, many natives. -- Carolyn Summers 63 Ferndale Drive Hastings-on-Hudson, NY 10706 914-478-5712
From: symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> Reply-To: <entstrees@googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:38:19 -0500 To: <entstrees@googlegroups.com> Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
Steve
Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly. http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
Sincerely, John A. Keslick, Jr. Consulting Forester & Tree Expert http://home.ccil.org/~treeman and www.treedictionary.com <http://www.treedictionary.com> Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> From: Steve Galehouse <mailto:srgaleho...@gmail.com>
> To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> John-
> Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly > haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a > better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to > consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
> The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field > potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. > Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) > pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of > what is needed for a successful landscape.
> Steve
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> > wrote:
>> To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com >> <mailto:entstrees@googlegroups.com> >
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM
>> Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
>> A few things about this come to mind:
>> - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with >> bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems >> (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't >> know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of >> study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when >> it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of >> trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too >> deeply, etc.
>> AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And >> then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I >> agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same >> school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section >> titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems >> <http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html> "
>> On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net >> <mailto:symplastl...@comcast.net> > wrote: >>> > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem >>> with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil >>> on top of the root zones. >>> > Steve]
>>> > Steve
>>> > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that >>> pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
>>> > Sincerely, >>> > John A. Keslick, Jr. >>> > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman >>> > and www.treedictionary.com <http://www.treedictionary.com> >>> > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. >>> > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding >>> us that we are not the boss.
The key for me in bare-root transplanting is that I want a seedling,
not a sapling.
That kind of transplant doesn't require some elaborate manner of
staking. I generally do stake, but with a very thin, but strong stake
very close to the seedling on the north side. The tree is tied to
allow it a little flex with the wind. The stake is going to be pulled
straight up out of the ground once the little tree is well rooted, the
soil where the stake was tamped down a little, and we have no harm, no
foul. Most stakes can be pulled after the first growing season. All
this may not be according to the book, but it has worked for me.
I've had some bare-root deciduous seedling transplants become
beautiful trees in a relatively short time if they were treated right
from the beginning, correct soil depth when planting, a very slight
basin to hold moisture the first year, roots spread out naturally, no
air pockets, elimination of competition in a 3-4' circle, pine needle
mulching, and so on.
gs
On Feb 29, 4:38 pm, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly.http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
> Sincerely,
> John A. Keslick, Jr.
> Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Steve Galehouse
> To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> John-
> Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
> The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
> Steve
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew Hannum" <duskdr...@earthlink.net>
> To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> A few things about this come to mind:
> - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with
> bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems
> (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't
> know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of
> study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when
> it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of
> trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too
> deeply, etc.
> AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems"
> http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
> MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> Sincerely,
> John A. Keslick, Jr.
> Consulting Forester & Tree Expert
> http://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones.
> > Steve]
> > Steve
> > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > Sincerely,
> > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > andwww.treedictionary.com > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.- Hide quoted text -
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Smith" <gary...@bellsouth.net> To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 8:16 PM Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
The key for me in bare-root transplanting is that I want a seedling, not a sapling.
That kind of transplant doesn't require some elaborate manner of staking. I generally do stake, but with a very thin, but strong stake very close to the seedling on the north side. The tree is tied to allow it a little flex with the wind. The stake is going to be pulled straight up out of the ground once the little tree is well rooted, the soil where the stake was tamped down a little, and we have no harm, no foul. Most stakes can be pulled after the first growing season. All this may not be according to the book, but it has worked for me.
[KEEP an eye on the green plastic stuff people stake with. It girdles too.]
I've had some bare-root deciduous seedling transplants become beautiful trees in a relatively short time if they were treated right from the beginning, correct soil depth when planting, a very slight basin to hold moisture the first year, roots spread out naturally, no air pockets, elimination of competition in a 3-4' circle, pine needle mulching, and so on.
[I would not recommend a well around the tree.]
[If interested we sell six pack samples of CAMB GUARDS and they come with a free TREE BASIC BOOK. You could donate the book to a church or 6th grade class. We do charge $15.55 for the package]
[Is Dale from Cook still on the list?]
Sincerely, John A. Keslick, Jr. Consulting Forester & Tree Expert http://home.ccil.org/~treeman and www.treedictionary.com Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
On Feb 29, 4:38 pm, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > Steve
> Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can > plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the > trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I > push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees > correctly.http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information > on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for > marketing.
> Sincerely, > John A. Keslick, Jr. > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding > us that we are not the boss.
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: Steve Galehouse > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> John-
> Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and > honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they > aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less > marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to > consumers.
> The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, > field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 > years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, > will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become > more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
> Steve
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> > wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matthew Hannum" <duskdr...@earthlink.net> > To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> A few things about this come to mind:
> - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with > bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems > (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't > know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of > study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when > it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of > trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too > deeply, etc.
> AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And > then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I > agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same > school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section > titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems" > http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
> MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> Sincerely, > John A. Keslick, Jr. > Consulting Forester & Tree Expert > http://home.ccil.org/~treeman > and www.treedictionary.com > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding > us that we are not the boss.
> On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem > > with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws > > soil on top of the root zones. > > Steve]
> > Steve
> > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that > > pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > Sincerely, > > John A. Keslick, Jr. > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > andwww.treedictionary.com > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep > > reminding us that we are not the boss.- Hide quoted text -
Containerized longleaf are one year old seedlings same as bare root,
but the survival rate is head and shoulders over bareroot LL. Bare
root works great for other species, but not LL. With Bareroot LL
Machine planting is a necessity and then if you do everything else
exactly right you may get halfway decent survival. Bareroot needs to
be planted the same day or the very shortly after they are lifted from
the nursery bed. The Forest service when they replanted with bareroot
would lift the seedlings in the AM and put them in the groud that PM.
They also have large/long roots that have to be properly placed in the
planting trench or you have a dead or worthless seedling. It is worth
the extra cost for containerized LL seedlings.
Containerized LL pines are actually plugs of seed medium about six-
seven inches long and about one inch in diameter. They still have to
be planted to an exacting depth, but you have time on your side. And
you can do it with a modified dibble that opens and exact size hole
that the containerized seedling fits into at the proper depth.
Containerized seedings also tend to come out of the grass stage sooner
that bareroot an important consideration with the competition out
there and also brownspot disease.
> The key for me in bare-root transplanting is that I want a seedling,
> not a sapling.
> That kind of transplant doesn't require some elaborate manner of
> staking. I generally do stake, but with a very thin, but strong stake
> very close to the seedling on the north side. The tree is tied to
> allow it a little flex with the wind. The stake is going to be pulled
> straight up out of the ground once the little tree is well rooted, the
> soil where the stake was tamped down a little, and we have no harm, no
> foul. Most stakes can be pulled after the first growing season. All
> this may not be according to the book, but it has worked for me.
> I've had some bare-root deciduous seedling transplants become
> beautiful trees in a relatively short time if they were treated right
> from the beginning, correct soil depth when planting, a very slight
> basin to hold moisture the first year, roots spread out naturally, no
> air pockets, elimination of competition in a 3-4' circle, pine needle
> mulching, and so on.
> gs
> On Feb 29, 4:38 pm, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Steve
> > Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly.http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
> > Sincerely,
> > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > and www.treedictionary.com > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Steve Galehouse
> > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM
> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> > John-
> > Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
> > The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
> > Steve
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matthew Hannum" <duskdr...@earthlink.net>
> > To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM
> > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> > A few things about this come to mind:
> > - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with
> > bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems
> > (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't
> > know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of
> > study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when
> > it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of
> > trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too
> > deeply, etc.
> > AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems"
> > http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> > IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
> > MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> > Sincerely,
> > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > Consulting Forester & Tree Expert
> > http://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > and www.treedictionary.com > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones.
> > > Steve]
> > > Steve
> > > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > > Sincerely,
> > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > andwww.treedictionary.com > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.- Hide quoted text -
I've talked to the Longleaf Alliance recently, and they promptly sent
me a very nice packet of information concerning longleafs.
Also, even though I'm a "bare-root guy" for trees I've planted in my
yard, I have done some research and agree with your thoughts on
containerized longleafs for larger plantings. (I did have very good
luck with a very small group of longleafs I planted bare-root in 1995,
but they received some real TLC from me in the first two years)
I'm sure you know of International Forestry out of GA. I have placed
an order for containerized longleafs with them, which will be planted
in late 2008, Nov or Dec. The seed source for my longleafs is
Mississippi, which is where I'm at.
Thanks for your advice.
Gary
On Mar 3, 9:23 am, Will Fell <satill...@nctv.com> wrote:
> Containerized longleaf are one year old seedlings same as bare root,
> but the survival rate is head and shoulders over bareroot LL. Bare
> root works great for other species, but not LL. With Bareroot LL
> Machine planting is a necessity and then if you do everything else
> exactly right you may get halfway decent survival. Bareroot needs to
> be planted the same day or the very shortly after they are lifted from
> the nursery bed. The Forest service when they replanted with bareroot
> would lift the seedlings in the AM and put them in the groud that PM.
> They also have large/long roots that have to be properly placed in the
> planting trench or you have a dead or worthless seedling. It is worth
> the extra cost for containerized LL seedlings.
> Containerized LL pines are actually plugs of seed medium about six-
> seven inches long and about one inch in diameter. They still have to
> be planted to an exacting depth, but you have time on your side. And
> you can do it with a modified dibble that opens and exact size hole
> that the containerized seedling fits into at the proper depth.
> Containerized seedings also tend to come out of the grass stage sooner
> that bareroot an important consideration with the competition out
> there and also brownspot disease.
> On Feb 29, 8:16 pm, Gary Smith <gary...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > The key for me in bare-root transplanting is that I want a seedling,
> > not a sapling.
> > That kind of transplant doesn't require some elaborate manner of
> > staking. I generally do stake, but with a very thin, but strong stake
> > very close to the seedling on the north side. The tree is tied to
> > allow it a little flex with the wind. The stake is going to be pulled
> > straight up out of the ground once the little tree is well rooted, the
> > soil where the stake was tamped down a little, and we have no harm, no
> > foul. Most stakes can be pulled after the first growing season. All
> > this may not be according to the book, but it has worked for me.
> > I've had some bare-root deciduous seedling transplants become
> > beautiful trees in a relatively short time if they were treated right
> > from the beginning, correct soil depth when planting, a very slight
> > basin to hold moisture the first year, roots spread out naturally, no
> > air pockets, elimination of competition in a 3-4' circle, pine needle
> > mulching, and so on.
> > gs
> > On Feb 29, 4:38 pm, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > Steve
> > > Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly.http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
> > > Sincerely,
> > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > and www.treedictionary.com > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Steve Galehouse
> > > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM
> > > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> > > John-
> > > Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
> > > The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
> > > Steve
> > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Matthew Hannum" <duskdr...@earthlink.net>
> > > To: "ENTSTrees" <entstrees@googlegroups.com>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:39 PM
> > > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> > > A few things about this come to mind:
> > > - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with
> > > bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems
> > > (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't
> > > know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of
> > > study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when
> > > it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of
> > > trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too
> > > deeply, etc.
> > > AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems"
> > > http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> > > IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
> > > MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> > > Sincerely,
> > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > Consulting Forester & Tree Expert
> > > http://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > and www.treedictionary.com > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > > On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones.
> > > > Steve]
> > > > Steve
> > > > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > andwww.treedictionary.com > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.- Hide quoted text -
Have you ever thought about using rpm stock as an alternative to seedlings and, I believe, outside of the stereotypes of container-grown stock? I use their plants, always from native stock, religiously, on all reforestation and creation projects. Check them out at http://www.rpmecosystems.com/. I can provide more contact info if interested.
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Gary Smith <gary...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Will,
> I've talked to the Longleaf Alliance recently, and they promptly sent > me a very nice packet of information concerning longleafs.
> Also, even though I'm a "bare-root guy" for trees I've planted in my > yard, I have done some research and agree with your thoughts on > containerized longleafs for larger plantings. (I did have very good > luck with a very small group of longleafs I planted bare-root in 1995, > but they received some real TLC from me in the first two years)
> I'm sure you know of International Forestry out of GA. I have placed > an order for containerized longleafs with them, which will be planted > in late 2008, Nov or Dec. The seed source for my longleafs is > Mississippi, which is where I'm at.
> Thanks for your advice.
> Gary
> On Mar 3, 9:23 am, Will Fell <satill...@nctv.com> wrote: > > Gary
> > Containerized longleaf are one year old seedlings same as bare root, > > but the survival rate is head and shoulders over bareroot LL. Bare > > root works great for other species, but not LL. With Bareroot LL > > Machine planting is a necessity and then if you do everything else > > exactly right you may get halfway decent survival. Bareroot needs to > > be planted the same day or the very shortly after they are lifted from > > the nursery bed. The Forest service when they replanted with bareroot > > would lift the seedlings in the AM and put them in the groud that PM. > > They also have large/long roots that have to be properly placed in the > > planting trench or you have a dead or worthless seedling. It is worth > > the extra cost for containerized LL seedlings.
> > Containerized LL pines are actually plugs of seed medium about six- > > seven inches long and about one inch in diameter. They still have to > > be planted to an exacting depth, but you have time on your side. And > > you can do it with a modified dibble that opens and exact size hole > > that the containerized seedling fits into at the proper depth. > > Containerized seedings also tend to come out of the grass stage sooner > > that bareroot an important consideration with the competition out > > there and also brownspot disease.
> > On Feb 29, 8:16 pm, Gary Smith <gary...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > The key for me in bare-root transplanting is that I want a seedling, > > > not a sapling.
> > > That kind of transplant doesn't require some elaborate manner of > > > staking. I generally do stake, but with a very thin, but strong stake > > > very close to the seedling on the north side. The tree is tied to > > > allow it a little flex with the wind. The stake is going to be pulled > > > straight up out of the ground once the little tree is well rooted, the > > > soil where the stake was tamped down a little, and we have no harm, no > > > foul. Most stakes can be pulled after the first growing season. All > > > this may not be according to the book, but it has worked for me.
> > > I've had some bare-root deciduous seedling transplants become > > > beautiful trees in a relatively short time if they were treated right > > > from the beginning, correct soil depth when planting, a very slight > > > basin to hold moisture the first year, roots spread out naturally, no > > > air pockets, elimination of competition in a 3-4' circle, pine needle > > > mulching, and so on.
> > > gs
> > > On Feb 29, 4:38 pm, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > Steve
> > > > Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly.http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
> > > > Sincerely, > > > > John A. Keslick, Jr. > > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > and www.treedictionary.com > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Steve Galehouse > > > > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM > > > > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> > > > John-
> > > > Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
> > > > The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
> > > > Steve
> > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with > > > > bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems > > > > (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't > > > > know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of > > > > study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when > > > > it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of > > > > trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too > > > > deeply, etc.
> > > > AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems" > > > > http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> > > > IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
> > > > MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> > > > Sincerely, > > > > John A. Keslick, Jr. > > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Expert > > > > http://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > and www.treedictionary.com > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > > > On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones. > > > > > Steve]
> > > > > Steve
> > > > > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > John A. Keslick, Jr. > > > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > > andwww.treedictionary.com > > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology. > > > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.- Hide quoted text -
The RPM trees look to congested in the root balls to me, which would
allow for girling and other issues down the road. I would actually
prefer the whimpy looking seedling in their comparison photo.
In my reforestation efforts I came to the conclusion that buying stock
to plant out was a waste of time. The labor involved was too great.
At one point I was able to get a tractor trailer load of 2" caliper
trees from the local wholesale nursery at the end of the season for
$10 a piece, as they were spring dug, and had been written off. Talk
about instant impact!
What I do now is let the field go for a couple of seasons without any
mowing. I spray the invasive trees to cull them. I leave invasive
shrubs, as the Eleagnus and multiflora rose provide habitat and food
for the critters, and will be mostly shaded out in the long run.
Usually in year two, there will be native tree seedlings popping up in
the field. White ash, Tulip poplar, maple, Black Walnut and some oak
and hickory. Before September, when the deer start to rub on trees, I
protect the new saplings. I use the recycleable light blue tubes from
Forestry suppliers and UV coated fiberglass rods from Premier one
sheep supplies and protect the new seedlings from the deer. I like
these products, beacause I can use them repeatedly. I have found that
cutting a small section out of the bottom of the tube allows baby
bluebirds to escape when they fall in (they seem drawn to the tubes),
and it deters mice from building their condos inside the tubes (allows
snakes access I guess) Each year I go into the field and remove
vines, tube new trees and remove tubes from dead trees.
In a nutshell, I am just protecting what nature is providing, which
speeds up succession. This works in Pennsylvania because of the small
patches of older trees that are around that provide a seed source.
I have been using RPM trees for only a couple years now, but root pruning method doesn't seem to exhibit any stability issues yet. If I had not seen it with my own eyes, I would not believe it. I purchased two red oaks, planted them last year and at 210-days, they each were over 5' tall! A friend of mine visited the nurseryman, Mr. Lovelace, who patented the rpm process. He showed me pictures of 5-yr old, 20' tall oaks in mast! Travis
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:02 AM, pabigtrees <wa...@comcast.net> wrote:
> William, ENTS
> The RPM trees look to congested in the root balls to me, which would > allow for girling and other issues down the road. I would actually > prefer the whimpy looking seedling in their comparison photo.
> In my reforestation efforts I came to the conclusion that buying stock > to plant out was a waste of time. The labor involved was too great. > At one point I was able to get a tractor trailer load of 2" caliper > trees from the local wholesale nursery at the end of the season for > $10 a piece, as they were spring dug, and had been written off. Talk > about instant impact!
> What I do now is let the field go for a couple of seasons without any > mowing. I spray the invasive trees to cull them. I leave invasive > shrubs, as the Eleagnus and multiflora rose provide habitat and food > for the critters, and will be mostly shaded out in the long run. > Usually in year two, there will be native tree seedlings popping up in > the field. White ash, Tulip poplar, maple, Black Walnut and some oak > and hickory. Before September, when the deer start to rub on trees, I > protect the new saplings. I use the recycleable light blue tubes from > Forestry suppliers and UV coated fiberglass rods from Premier one > sheep supplies and protect the new seedlings from the deer. I like > these products, beacause I can use them repeatedly. I have found that > cutting a small section out of the bottom of the tube allows baby > bluebirds to escape when they fall in (they seem drawn to the tubes), > and it deters mice from building their condos inside the tubes (allows > snakes access I guess) Each year I go into the field and remove > vines, tube new trees and remove tubes from dead trees.
> In a nutshell, I am just protecting what nature is providing, which > speeds up succession. This works in Pennsylvania because of the small > patches of older trees that are around that provide a seed source.
That is great you are getting local provenence seed source. That is
important in Longleaf. Another thing I've found very valuable in
Longleaf is the need for ripping if you have any clay or hardpans.
What I remember about the western gulf region is a lot of heavy soils
that may have been farmed in the past. You might want to check with
the county agent or local NRCS agent to see if plow pans or argillic
horizons (claypans) are a problem on your soils. If so rip the land to
about about 18 inches or more this spring so it can settle out over
the summer. If it has been recently farmed it will definitely help
survival and also result in better growth and less windthrow later on
down the road. Even on light sandy land, heavy logging equipment can
create traffic-pans that will turn a LL tap root. We used a 1/4" piece
of rebar sharpened on one end and pushed it in the ground to determine
the presence of a pan. It will go down easy and then get hard if there
is a pan. Most traffic or plow pans are within 18 inches of the
surface. The NRCS folks have a specialized probe they can use if you
can get them out there.
On Mar 3, 11:09 am, Gary Smith <gary...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I've talked to the Longleaf Alliance recently, and they promptly sent
> me a very nice packet of information concerning longleafs.
> Also, even though I'm a "bare-root guy" for trees I've planted in my
> yard, I have done some research and agree with your thoughts on
> containerized longleafs for larger plantings. (I did have very good
> luck with a very small group of longleafs I planted bare-root in 1995,
> but they received some real TLC from me in the first two years)
> I'm sure you know of International Forestry out of GA. I have placed
> an order for containerized longleafs with them, which will be planted
> in late 2008, Nov or Dec. The seed source for my longleafs is
> Mississippi, which is where I'm at.
> Thanks for your advice.
> Gary
> On Mar 3, 9:23 am, Will Fell <satill...@nctv.com> wrote:
> > Gary
> > Containerized longleaf are one year old seedlings same as bare root,
> > but the survival rate is head and shoulders over bareroot LL. Bare
> > root works great for other species, but not LL. With Bareroot LL
> > Machine planting is a necessity and then if you do everything else
> > exactly right you may get halfway decent survival. Bareroot needs to
> > be planted the same day or the very shortly after they are lifted from
> > the nursery bed. The Forest service when they replanted with bareroot
> > would lift the seedlings in the AM and put them in the groud that PM.
> > They also have large/long roots that have to be properly placed in the
> > planting trench or you have a dead or worthless seedling. It is worth
> > the extra cost for containerized LL seedlings.
> > Containerized LL pines are actually plugs of seed medium about six-
> > seven inches long and about one inch in diameter. They still have to
> > be planted to an exacting depth, but you have time on your side. And
> > you can do it with a modified dibble that opens and exact size hole
> > that the containerized seedling fits into at the proper depth.
> > Containerized seedings also tend to come out of the grass stage sooner
> > that bareroot an important consideration with the competition out
> > there and also brownspot disease.
> > On Feb 29, 8:16 pm, Gary Smith <gary...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > The key for me in bare-root transplanting is that I want a seedling,
> > > not a sapling.
> > > That kind of transplant doesn't require some elaborate manner of
> > > staking. I generally do stake, but with a very thin, but strong stake
> > > very close to the seedling on the north side. The tree is tied to
> > > allow it a little flex with the wind. The stake is going to be pulled
> > > straight up out of the ground once the little tree is well rooted, the
> > > soil where the stake was tamped down a little, and we have no harm, no
> > > foul. Most stakes can be pulled after the first growing season. All
> > > this may not be according to the book, but it has worked for me.
> > > I've had some bare-root deciduous seedling transplants become
> > > beautiful trees in a relatively short time if they were treated right
> > > from the beginning, correct soil depth when planting, a very slight
> > > basin to hold moisture the first year, roots spread out naturally, no
> > > air pockets, elimination of competition in a 3-4' circle, pine needle
> > > mulching, and so on.
> > > gs
> > > On Feb 29, 4:38 pm, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > Steve
> > > > Here is a source for some native bare-root trees. I do not see how you can plant a bare root tree at the correct depth (where the roots come off the trunk) without staking it. Wire in a hose is torture. I have one product I push - CAMB GUARDS for staking trees correctly.http://home.ccil.org/~treeman/camb/ Please pass this information on. Please tell me what you think of the product. Also any suggestions for marketing.
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > and www.treedictionary.com > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Steve Galehouse
> > > > To: entstrees@googlegroups.com
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:29 PM
> > > > Subject: [ENTS] Re: container grown trees
> > > > John-
> > > > Unfortunately, bare-root trees no longer have much of a market, and honestly haven't had for the past 50 years or more. I'm not saying they aren't a better way to produce a tree, but they definitely are less marketable to consumers. And direct-seeded trees are completely unknown to consumers.
> > > > The plants currently produced by the nursery industry; container grown, field potted, or B&B, are consistently of much better quality than 20 years ago. Mulch volcanoes, like the similarly contrived mounded beds, will(I hope) pass, as consumers realize they are just a fashion and become more aware of what is needed for a successful landscape.
> > > > Steve
> > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, symplastless <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > - With container grown tree, it is easier to hide problems then with
> > > > bare-root or direct seeding. Now, we Ents may see the problems
> > > > (hopefully, before we buy the tree!), but the average person won't
> > > > know any better since tree biology, growth, etc. is not their field of
> > > > study. They buy a tree in a container and expect it to grow, and when
> > > > it doesn't, they are very disappointed. General lack of knowledge of
> > > > trees also leads to things like: mulch volcanoes, planting trees too
> > > > deeply, etc.
> > > > AND then they blame the decline of the tree on secondary organisms. And then use nasty chemicals and inject trees to get rid of the secondary's. I agree with your predisposition theory. It sounds like you went to the same school I did. In the beginning of my tree dictionary I have a section titled "Alert!! Most Common Tree Problems"
> > > > http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/most_common.html
> > > > IF you have something to add I would give you credit.
> > > > MY thought is container grown can be good while container put is bad.
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Expert
> > > > http://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > and www.treedictionary.com > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.
> > > > On Feb 26, 8:14 am, "symplastless" <symplastl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > > [Burying the root flare(actually the trunk flare) is more of a problem with field grown trees, since spading the rows for weed control throws soil on top of the root zones.
> > > > > Steve]
> > > > > Steve
> > > > > I agree with you that trees do not have a root flare. I was taught that pot grown is OK. However pot put is bad.
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > John A. Keslick, Jr.
> > > > > Consulting Forester & Tree Experthttp://home.ccil.org/~treeman > > > > > andwww.treedictionary.com > > > > > Beware of so-called tree experts who do not understand tree biology.
> > > > > Storms, fires, floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions keep reminding us that we are not the boss.- Hide quoted text -
I'd have partially disagree about the lack of quality roots in a
container. The problem lies more with the grower's management of the
pot
than how the tree responds. Most container grown trees are left in
their pots too long and when finally potted up are slipped into the
next size
pot instead of one that is much larger which would allow the roots to
spread. We grow cuttimgs in 38 cell air-rooting trays then pot up into
3 gals rooting pots.
From 3's they go to 10 gal. usually within 4-6 months. from the 10 we
move to a 25 gal. Meshpot of our own design. see this link
http://tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Treefarmers/photos/view/826e?b=4.
The roots never circle, the tips spread out, and constantly add new
growth as the grow out into air, die back and go lateral. The minute
one of our trees get's planted in the ground they respond quicky with
wind roots and taproots if they need them.
Nursery Supply Accelerators, Rootmaker, RPM and our Meshpots all are
superior to conventional pots. That said if careful management of
conventional pots is done then they will be able to grow fairly decent
roots. Rooting pots are significantly better but cost a lot more
except for our Meshpots which are very low cost. Ren
I completely agree. The black plastic pots, even with the spray of
copper ?? in them are far more inferior that the air or fabric pots.
The expense is worth it to me because the tree doesn't die in 7-10
years from girdling itself. If the tree is set properly in the pot
during every transplant, you will have a much more resilient tree in
the long run. Another thing I have noticed...If you compare the
stunted growth of a ball and burlap tree to the regular growth of the
air/fabric pot trees, you will see that these newer pots are better
than B&B too. Convincing the public to spend the extra dough, and
convincing them on the advantages will always be difficult. Most
humans think in terms of minutes, not years or decades.
Scott,
We've found that washing a 1/3rd to 1/2 of the soil off of a B&B
before planting allows checking the top of the ball for girdling
roots fungus, and incorrect root growth plus for checking the planting
depth against the root flare and integrating the roots into the new
soil/mx faster.
We water the soil/mix as we add it back, to fill the pot or hole.
Using rooting pots with drip and compost teas we've doubled our growth
rate as compared
to B&B. The soil biology is the single most important factor in
growing healthy, non-chemical trees. Ren
