No amendments. Amending planting holes often actually slows establishment, by adversely affecting how water moves through the amended zone. You could amend the entire field or bed, but this will last only until the amendments have decomposed completely and leached away. On a lean, sandy soil in a hot climate this can happen as soon as one year later. What then?

No spikes. You pay extra to have fertilizer compacted into an inefficient spike. If you already have spikes, and a need for them is presented, break them up into a powder and scatter this over the root zone.

Sample the soil and have it analyzed to get an idea what fertilization might be called for.

Here is a link that might be useful: Planting Fact Sheet PDF

In back yard plantings you should not amend 'normal' soil. When planting in a wild open field you definitely need to amend for water retention. You want to dig up soil in a wide 6' diameter area to remove competitive roots. Digging down as deep as you can work in chicken and horse manure. Plant tree and seasonally add 6" thick of horse manure mulch over 6' diameter area. Horse manure prevents the soil from drying out chicken maure is a great fertilizer.

I agree 100% with bboy.

Andy: I wouldn't read too much into the fact that the surface is sandy. Any soil that was used for corn and soybeans(both of which root 4-6ft deep) is not pure sand that deep. There is likely loamy or sandy clay soil no more than 12 inches deep. Corn is much more drought susceptible than fruit trees. Apples on M111 (which I'd recommend) will root much deeper than those field crops unless there is a water table. If there is a water table and it is at least 3ft deep(6ft better) your trees will be OK and the water table will supply all the water your trees need.

This soil will have plenty of P and K because a lot is applied to corn and soybeans and it lasts a long time in the soil. You can tell the current nitrogen status by looking at the current vegetation. If it's small, sparse, and light green color, nitrogen is low. If it's tall and growing well there is plenty of everything.

I fertilize my trees by how they are growing. If you get 2-4 ft growth on young trees and 12 inches on mature trees, they don't need more nitrogen.

It won't hurt to apply well rotted compost in the planting hole, just not very much. Surface compost or mulch is a good idea. I've put the black porous weed barrier around mine and like that. What will kill a newly planted tree is placing a high salt index fertilizer, like ammonium sulfate, in the soil placed around the roots.

Weed control is important. Weed barrier, mulch, or roundup can all help.

Deer will kill your trees if not fenced out. Don't skimp there.

Corn and soybean farmers push water and fertilizer because their yield is proportional to the amount of vegetative growth. Smart fruit growers know that highest fruit quality comes with moderate vigor and a bit of water stress. Don't push your trees like a corn farmer.

The Fruitnut

Fruitnut brings up a very important point about the use of surface compost and/or mulch. That is one of the best things you can do for your tree. There are numerous benefits, some of which are:

-improves soil fertility and texture as it breaks down,
-prevents germination of many weed seeds,
-reduces competition for food and water from grass and weeds,
-reduces erosion,
-helps to maintain soil moisture during dry periods,
-often aids drainage by preventing surface crusting and sealing,
-can keep roots cooler during hot summer weather,
-can help to moderate soil temperature fluctuations,
-reduces frost-heaving,
-reduces certain soil-borne diseases by preventing soil and fungi from splashing onto foliage,
-prevents damage from mowers and trimmers,
-and improves the look of the landscape.

He also brought up many more good points. One thing I disagree with is the recommendation to use a weed barrier. I personally avoid the black porous weed barrier like the plague. If there is one good thing about it, it's that people end up paying me a lot to remove it once weeds grow through it from above and make a mess that they can no longer easily handle. I have never found any advantage to it whatsoever when used under a mulch. If you need something to kill the grass initially, just use glyphosate or even newspaper. The fabric/porous plastic barriers will do little to nothing to prevent new weeds from becoming established. It makes weed removal much more challenging.

Oh yeah, here's a link to a planting guide that might be of some use:

Here is a link that might be useful: Planting a Tree or Shrub

I don't put mulch on my weed barrier and won't recommend anything other than gravel. Gravel over weed barrier is common here for low maintenance yards. You still need to spray roundup once in a while. An organic mulch is probably better in VA but it will likely need spraying as well.

My weed barrier has been on all summer and has already saved me a couple of roundup sprays. I also leveled those areas and put a small berm around the outside under the fabric. There has been no runoff even when we had a big rain last week.

The Fruitnut

Mulches can be good for your trees. But a mowed grass cover can provide many of the benefits listed above. And on a site where there is excessive vigor, having the grass compete with the tree for water and nutrients would be an advantage. On a young tree, a mulch is highly likely to be beneficial. But after the tree reaches a good size or starts bearing, it may be too vigorous. Allowing the grass to take over the mulch could be beneficial.

Blanket statements often miss the details.

The Fruitnut

Interesting idea about using grass to assist in controlling excessive vigor. I think I've seen that idea before, but I've never really given it much thought.

To everyone who took the time to reply to my post, I thank you. This forum is a tremendous resource. Thanks to all!

Andy

I don't know if anyone has mentioned rootstock, but more vigorous ones like M111 and seedling will be able to withstand any droughts better.

Applenut

Where do you find seedling rootstocks nowadays? I like 11l for low care also.

Harvestman:

Raintree Nursery still carries a lot of trees on seedling or Dolgo Crab rootstocks. I start my own from seed and bud graft them later that summer. M111 is vigorous, but the roots still have a different nature than the seedling; the seedling are like cables or heavy ropes, while the M111 are more fine like a mop. If brutal conditions and neglect are what you expect, I'd go with seedling.

Thanks, I haven't planted any trees on seedling for about 10 years. Commercial suppliers used to at least graft least vigorous varieties on seedling. Now the rootstock is used primarily in very cold climates, but I think full-sized apple trees are a thing of unmatched beauty. These are the apple trees of our ancestors and I should hate to think that they will ever dissappear from our landscapes.

I still believe that the serious hobbyist can make good use of this rootstock, creating multivariety large trees and more or less having an entire home orchard on one tree. You can train them as low as you want and when managed well the quality of fruit can be just as good as those from smaller trees- in some cases, even better.

They do require more skill to manage for high quality fruit, however.

What a great thread. Since I have an apple orchard on sandy soil, let me tell you what works for me. Most of the advice echoes what was posted above.

1) Rootstock is most important - I use MM-111 for its drought tolerance, and it makes a big difference. Our nutrient deficient sandy soil gives us MM-111 trees that grow 6-8 feet, only in the case of spigold and northern spy do we have trees that reach about 10-12 feet. I have not had good luck with seedlings, they don't have the drought tolerance needed for sandy soil, and are difficult to get going. I have some seedling stock that are more dwarfing than MM-111, one tree is barely 4 feet tall (seedling rootstock according to the nursery where I bought the tree.) If you want full size trees, just root some northern spy trees (they do root on their own).

2) Mulch is really important. I don't have any weed barriers, but the wood chip mulch is enough to keep weeds down, and keep the soil moisture levels up, but it does mean more fertilizer is needed to make up for nitrogen losses from the decomposing wood chips.

3) When you plant, put some manure in the hole, it will help, but it's not necessary, because sandy soil means any surface-applied fertilizer will make it to the roots very fast.

4) The biggest challenge I have with my sandy soil is the poor nutrient levels. It means fertilizing often, especially during the first few years so that the trees become established. I recommend manure, chicken is good, horse is better. No worries about salt accumulations, because the salt will readily leach out from the sandy soil.

Axel, what makes sandy soil difficult from a plant nutrition standpoint is the lack of colloids- the tiny particles in soil that help hold on to plant nutrients until they are needed.

Clay is the mineral source of colloids, humus is the organic source. Compost already contains humus, manure is in the process of becomming humus as is all raw organic material. When someone says all the organic matter disappears in warm sandy soils they are exaggerating slightly but also missing the point.

The best way for making sandy soil more productive is building up its humus content and it requires a very small percentage of humus increase to have a dramatic affect on a soils cation exchange capacity- it's ability to hold many (negatively charged) soil nutrients.

So adding humus to sandy soil in the form of compost not only increases the water holding capacity of sandy soil but also greatly enhances its fertility.

Putting manure directly in a planting hole may or may not be useful if it is adequately rotted- fresh can be lethal to young roots. However the best place for any soil amending is in the top few inches of soil, not where the roots are as much as where they are growing to.

If you want to know what kind of soil in which trees function best go to the forest, preferably a hardwood forest, and put your hands in the soil that the trees have created for themselves.

They keep themselves well mulched with rotting leaves and branches and underneath that are layers that start with one of partially composted leaves and wood. Beneath that is usually a layer of almost pure humus. As long as this humus is moist, most of the important root activity occurs in this layer because it contains most of what trees need.
This is where the majority of nutrient recycling occurs.

Mulching your fruit trees fulfills the first part and creates the first layer of the soil parfait in which trees are evolved to thrive. Eventually that mulch will break down and become humus but by incorporating large quantities of compost in the top few inches of soil you are accelerating the process of creating the kind of soil that trees do best in.

Plant production methods trailblazer Carl E. Whitcomb wrote on page 113 of Establishment and Maintenance of Landscape Plants (1987 (1991), Lacebark Inc., Stillwater):

"In 1970, a study was begun to try to determine the optimum amount of organic matter to add to a planting hole to aid establishment of woody plants. The study was conducted on the sand soils of North Florida using Canadian peat, vermiculite, pine bark, and colloidal phosphate (a clay-like material that holds considerable water), each at rates of 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% by volume of the planting hole....

There was no benefit from any soil amendment at any rate either in the irrigated or non-irrigated area"

Here is a link that might be useful: Lacebark Inc.

I'm actually rather surprised that there are still "professionals" that aren't familiar with the science. Below is one of very very many resources that debunk the myth that backfill amendment is beneficial.

Here is a link that might be useful: The Myth of Soil Amendments

Same title that L. Chalker-Scott used.

This outdated practice is still required in the specifications of architects, landscapers, and other groups
associated with landscape installation. It is still recommended by garden centers and gardening articles.
And there is a multi-million dollar soil amendment industry that has little interest in debunking this myth.
As responsible green industry professionals, we need to recognize and avoid non-sustainable management
practices

Here is a link that might be useful: Amendments.pdf

I dig a hole, throw the tree in, put the dirt back in the hole, put wood chips a couple feet around the hole, thick, water, fertilize a little and leave it. I've never had any problems with tree vigor. I have very sandy soil. I live within a few blocks of the Mississippi River...

I think a lot of solutions would work fine.

The University of Nevada-Reno is growing a whole bunch of fruit trees in the north Las Vegas desert and they thrive. Mulch is the key!

video of that and more can be found here:
http://www.davewilson.com/video/diy_1.html

Harvestman, thanks for your comments, what you say makes sense. I have noticed an amazing improvement as a result of wood chip mulch. I started two years ago, and since, my trees have taken off, water usage is way down.

I usually mulch with manure in late Fall before the onset of the rain season, this helps decompose the remainder of the precious' year's wood chips. Then a day after the last major rain storm in March or early April, I put down a thick, 3-4 inch layer of fresh wood chips.

I'd agree that if your goal is to maximize tree growth, then an organic mulch is a very good idea. Personally I'm more concerned about the fruit. And I can assure you it is possible to grow superb fruit on low organic matter soil without an organic mulch.

If this man's soil will grow decent corn and soybeans, it will grow big apple trees on MM 111 rootstock with or without an organic mulch or anything else organic. They don't grow corn or soybeans commercially on poor soil.

Again, I'd recommend a mulch while the trees are getting established and then evaluate the vigor. A mulch might not be needed on bearing trees and might not even be best. Have we already forgotten about all the gripping over trees with too much water and the resulting bad fruit? Mulches increase water available to the tree, no?

The Fruitnut

I have to admit, I don't know much about soybeans, but I believe corn is often grown on soil that only works because of the high input of synthetic nitrogen. If you add the chemicals and have enough water, of course you can grow anything in pure sand. This is about sticking some fruit trees in the ground and neglecting them and none of us really knows what kind of soil we're talking about as far as water retention.
Maybe you are right, fruitnut, but some extra input certainly can provide some insurance.

A lot of times people don't really know the actual texture of their soil, even accomplished gardeners. You can always have that tested as well.

Growing corn is all about water and nitrogen. Sure there are other factors. But yield is proportional to the amount of water available over the growing season. A huge factor in water availability in the non-irrigated east, is water holding capacity of the soil. Corn isn't grown on soils with low water holding capacity because the yields aren't high enough to be economically viable. Both corn and soybeans are very drought sensitive compared to apples on MM 111.

So unless this guy just has a bad spot, it's a very good bet that his soil isn't just pure sand 4-6 ft deep. It either has better soil at a pretty shallow depth or it has a shallow water table or both. For corn and soybeans a water table at 24-36 inches is very favorable. Apples trees could grow very large, maybe too large with a water table at 36 inches. If there is no water table, apples on MM 111 might root as deep as 10-20 ft compared to 4-6 ft for corn.

True we don't know what kind of soil is on his small plot. Probably he doesn't know either, and doesn't care or he'd be back in this discussion.

My main points are that more water and more fertilizer isn't always better for fruit and if his soil will grow good field crops it will grow big apple trees; maybe too big.

The Fruitnut

Fruit-

I might take your advice and pull the pavers/mulch away from my apple trees. They aren't huge, but i don't want them getting any bigger. I've actually kept them pruned pretty well :)

Fruitnut, well, I've never been called on to install fruit trees in a former corn field to I'll defer to your wisdom here.

I am called on to establish bearing age fruit trees in all kinds of soil and sometimes on sites where there's hardly any. Establishment of these trees is more problematic than planting one year trees by a long shot.

This being my main experience, I tend to error on the side of caution to assure their survival, because replacement is expensive.

Dry fruit farming commercially is not done in neglect and if I was installing even whips on a site where the owner wasn't going to be paying much attention, I might include some compost amending as I describe here just to help assure quick establishment, even in the case of neglect and drought.

Of course growing quality fruit is a balancing act and too much vigor is the worst thing for producing high quality well colored fruit.

When I started my own orchard we were in several years of consecutive or almost consecutive drought summers. I got in the habit of mulching my fruit trees every year because my well was insufficient to spare water for the trees.

This is the first year where I've regretted having done that. With all the rain we've had, my enriched soil may be contributing to bland fruit this time. Even if you get the balance right for an average season, it may not be perfect for an exceptional one.