Pam, if it were me, I absolutely WOULD mix your coniferous trees with the broadleaf trees that like the same habitat - that's the way Mother Nature plants them, she certainly doesn't separate the coniferous from the broadleaf trees, be they evergreen or deciduous, at least not in my area. The trees that you mention - bald cypress, Atlantic white cedar, swamp tupelo, swamp basket oak, red maple and sweetgum all like wet soil, so I'd plant them together in mixed blocks. You could add some spicebushes to the wet soil group if you want to - I think most of your understory shrubs/trees like it well drained. The other trees you mentioned could be planted in varying mixtures, whatever strikes you, on the better drained parts of your property.
No critter has ever browsed on my Atlantic white cypresses - maybe they eat it in areas where AWC is the predominant tree and about all they have to eat, but in your case, you'll be providing those deer and rabbits with oaks and others, so I doubt they'll touch any of your trees with needles.
Sherry

Pam:

I am thunderstruck by what you have ordered to plant this year. Wow!

As for nurse trees, I think you have a good understanding of this. As for the black locust dominating if you plant too many--you can control this by cutting them back, as we discussed before. Also, be prepared for the black locust, after just about 4 years or so, sending up new trees from the roots, sometimes 20 feet of more from the parent tree. Again, these can be cut back and controlled.

I understand that sassafras are very difficult to transplant--I never tried it, but a while ago there was a discussion here about that. Maybe a site search will turn that up.

Planting the oaks together? I think that would be OK, but maybe the southern red oak will grow a bit too fast for one or two of the others, at least to start. But I am not sure. If you have nurse trees, the oaks can be planted more widely spaced--I don't have any rule for this, but in a mature stand oaks will need at least 25 foot spacing, and will not be too widely spaced if 35 feet or more. But then "maturity" will be several decades off. If you space them widely with black locust between, you could after 4 or 5 years plant some red maples under the black locust nurse trees and they can come up as upper understory or "co-dominant" trees in the stand. I like maples mixed in any "natural" forest.

I love sweetgum color, so one way or another get them in. They are "intolerant" trees, so need full light from the start.

The other issues you raise, I am not qualified to give you specific advice about. but your overall plan seems like it will lead to something stunningly beautiful!

--Spruce

Sherry:

I think the "blocks" are one way to achieve the ultimate mixture you and I think is the most beautiful. The point of the blocks planted with one kind of tree is to avoid having fast growing trees like the loblollies completely crowd out the slower growing varieties. As the trees grow larger and are thinned out each "block," which will be limited in size, will be contributing just one or a few trees to the mixture. Creating a natural kind of mixture of trees starting from scratch can be tricky. Some trees grow so much faster than others, that if they are planted close together in a mixture one may be disappointed to find that the mixture ends up having just one or two kinds of trees--just the fastest growing ones that dominate.

--Spruce

That's a good point, Spruce!
Sherry

Following up on what has already been stated.....and keeping in mind, I'm no expert at all on most of these species, it seems the most "natural" look would be achieved when there are groupings of individual species, which then intergrade into each other. At least, that's how I see nature doing it most commonly. And yes, growth rates definitely need to be considered. I'm not sure if this holds true in Virginny, but I have read that foresters in the Lake States advocate closer planting of hardwoods-closer than what, I'm not sure-if timber quality is a goal. This to ensure adequate dieback of lower limbs as the trees grow. Your nurse trees may well accomplish this.

That's all I've got right now, Pam. Sounds like a pretty amazing thing taking shape!

+oM

I don't think I saw it mentioned, but where did you get all the trees from? One particular nursery or all different ones?

Pam- Congrats on the tree orders. Now the fun really begins!! If you are like me, the first couple hundred seedling I planted were fun, then it became a drag and you just want it done. After it is all done, you will be glad you did it. It will look like crap the first 2-3 years - then it will start to look like something you can be proud of.

We have discussed plantings on this forum several times before, so I'll try not to go into too much detail on my lessons learned from my 10,000 and counting (soon to be 12,000) seedlings planted over the past 4 years. Here are my general thoughts:

-Tree planting is part art, part science. Concerning the art - everyone likes different things. Do what you think would look nice and fits your priorities. Look at other plantings and natural forests and pick what you like best. I have seen plantings where someone planted all of one kind of tree and it looks bad/unnatural to me, but others may like it. I have seen some beautifully mixed (conifer and hardwood) natural forests - overall that's what I like the most. From my readings, it is also the best for wildlife.

-I suggest using approx 10x10 spacing for all as a general rule of thumb. Natural forests have a large variety of spacing. You will see large oaks 5 feet apart, but sometimes 50 feet apart. You can decide down the road what you want to keep and what you don't. Id bet a chunk of change you will eventually want to keep some of your "nurse" trees as permanent. If you are like me, you will change your mind multiple times. Some seedlings will certainly die, so you may want to plant closer (maybe 10x7) to account for that if you have the budget. I would do the closer spacing if using a tree planting machine. If planting by hand, I would plant 10x10 as 10x7 spacing would take a lot longer to plant for the same acres planted.

-Mixing the oaks you mentioned is fine. I have recently put an emphasis on tree colors (all seasons) and tried to mix the trees so there is a nice mix of colors in all seasons - for me that means a decent mix of conifers with my hardwoods. I would add red maple and sweetgum for their great fall color.

-I planted several hundred bald cypress in my ponds (most of them are now partially submerged). If the pond is on your property, it may be cool to plant some at the edge of the pond.

-For my screenings I used eastern red cedar, white pine, shingle oak, and norway spuce. They all hold their leaves/needles throughout the year and provide a good mix of color.

-I had more changes in heart from not mixing enough than mixing too much. I started with a rigid pattern, then decided I wanted a more natural look. Planting in curved rows was the best decision I made - it allows for mowing and is pleasing to the eye. Nobody that I show the place to now can tell where the rows are - which is a good thing. If you are using a tree planter, this is easy to do. Planting by hand means flagging most/all trees. If you use a machine, you can just mark your 1st row and run parallel rows by sight. Trying to plant in curved rows by hand is much harder than it sounds because you are staggering something on a curve that you canÂt see  a little hard to explain. Am curious about your tree planting method(s). I have done it all - about 5000 by hand (tree bar mainly) and 5000 with a tree planting machine. I suggest using the machine as much as possible- it's an amazing, yet simple, tool. You can easily plant 500 seedlings per hour with the machine. The disturbance between trees it nearly unnoticeable after a year or two.

Also, are you planting a new cover crop or are you planting through existing sod?

Good luck and let us know how the planting goes.

John

How healthy is your back, Pam?
Sherry

Wonderful project! But I dont see southern magnolias, eastern cedars or redbuds.

I'm planting redbuds and dogwoods one for one.

Lou from Texas made a posting on Nanjing Beauty taxodiums a while back, so I bought six of them, for $10 a piece from the Botany shop. They might add some variety to your wetlands... if they handle winters there.

You might add a few American elms, white oaks and perhaps a few Burr Oaks, if for no other reason than the novelty of their acorns.

And dare I say....Live oaks?

The shade of loblollies tends to be too dense to make them good nurse trees for oaks, particularly those in the white oak group, in my experience.

I apologize for not getting back sooner. Yesterday was beautiful so I spent most of it out in the field, thinking about how I can amend the plan to incorporate curves without a planting machine - and spraying Roundup. I also took a few photos - I'll get them up later today. I think they will help. At a minimum, they are good "before" pics.

Tom - last year, you recommended a backpack sprayer so I got one. It makes a huge difference - it's easier to carry the weight on your back (although I felt like a turtle for a while) and it seems as though you can spray a wider area.

Spruce, I found MANY thistles so was able to start the thistle eradication program earlier this year.

Sherry, I had spinal fusion surgery in 2003 (L4 & L5) so my back is in good shape. AND I'll have help. One of the folks at the office suggested that we close the office and have a "throw down" day to plant the seedlings. So I'll have 3 people to help.

I am in the middle of a big project at the office today. I also want to post the photos. I'll be back later this afternoon or evening. Thank you!

Take care,
Pam

Quercus M:

Yes, good point. But in this case Pam and I have only been talking about "nurse" trees to limit light from the sides. I think all of the kinds of trees in her project, with the exception of the understory trees, should have clear overhead sun. Many kinds of trees can make progress under nurse trees like black locust, but they will grow slowly--too slow for this project, with the exception of some understory varieties.

I think with the oaks, to go into a little more detail--Pam, I am sorry I have not discussed this before--should always have at least a 45 degree angle to full sun. This won't work if the oaks and the loblollies, or other nurse trees, are planted at the same time, since oaks are relatively slow starters. With the oaks, they should probably be allowed to get something like 4 or 5 feet tall before any fast growing nurse trees are planted between, and then if any other trees threaten the clear dominance of the oaks, they should be cut back or removed. The point of the nurse trees is to prevent the oaks from growing large branches in their crowns too early. Forest-grown trees have long straight trunks clear of branches for some distance.

--Spruce

I've been outside picking up limbs - we're having strong winds that are bringing down mostly dead branches, but a few live ones. The temperature is 79F degrees, about 26C degrees for you, Resin. :) It's supposed to rain again and turn cooler, briefly, then warm up again, the typical roller coaster of winter. I took this picture of one of the spruce pines I recently bought and potted up, with a long-leaf pine branch to the left of it and a loblolly branch to the right - shows the big difference in needle length!
{{gwi:331524}}
Sherry

misssherry, you got the spruce pine, good for you! To me in the upper plains, both the long-leaf and loblolly needles look unnaturally and exotically long :(

Not to rock the boat, but it was my understanding that atlantic white cedar usually is found in even-aged, single-species stands. It might get shaded out by faster growing trees otherwise.

LLP does have some LONG needles, doesn't it, fledgeling? Loblolly pine needles look pretty short to me - spruce pine needles may be VERY short, but as the trees grow, the needles get real dense and dark green, giving it a very attractive look.
I don't know about the AWC being in even-aged, single-species stands - the only place I've seen it growing naturally around here is along some bayous in Jackson County, MS, where it was mixed in with other types of trees, mostly bald cypress, sweetgum, red maples, and sweetbay magnolias, as I recall. I've got one that I planted in pretty deep shade quite a few years ago, because I'd read it would do fine in shade, and it hasn't grown very much. I planted another one last year in a mostly sunny spot, and it's grown MUCH faster - I don't know how much of that is due to the added sunshine or the chicken manure. :)
Sherry

Sherry: Thanks for the advice and the photos. I put some photos at the end of this post. I think you are saying, "Pay attention to what you see and trust your gut." That's great advice. I asked our forester about slash pines. He didn't recommend them for this area. I don't remember why. Maybe they are prone to disease here? I'll check. I may plant some anyway. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Spruce & QM: I'm confused. If I plant blocks of oaks and a nurse tree at the same time, what will happen? Will they not grow, growly more slowly, or die? I see oaks in the forest growing very close to loblollies, red maples, hollies, sweetgum, tupelo, magnolia, etc. Is this unusual? Is this a function of the shade tolerance or intolerance of a particular species?

A friend sent two live oaks that were grown from seed last year. One was grown in the shade, one in sun. The live oak grown in the shade was about 3 feet tall, twice as tall as the one grown in the sun. The seedling grown in the sun had many side branches. I thought this was evidence that some shade can be a good thing if you want a tree to grow tall, and without side branches.

What would happen if I didn't use a nurse tree but planted the oak seedlings closer - say, 10 x 10 or 8 x 8? Would they thrive? Would side branches be a problem? The field I'm planting faces south and is in full sun 100% of the time. I'll add a couple of photos at the end of this post.

jq: I ordered most of the trees from state nurseries, some from Mussers, one from a seller on Ebay. Here is what I learned.

* Indian Mound Nursery (TX) - They had a good selection of oaks and other hardwoods, very good prices. I ordered swamp chestnut oak, Nuttall oak, and bald cypress (and 2 dibble bars).

* VA Seedling Program - my state, high prices, good rep. Ordered Loblolly pine, Southern red oak, Cherrybark oak 2-0, Black cherry, Black locust, Red osier dogwood.

* NC Seedling Program - excellent prices but shop early!! They were out of most good stuff long before Christmas (they begin taking orders in July). Ordered Atlantic white cedar, bald cypress (2 Year), swamp tupelo.

* Mussers (PA)- Prices competitive with VA Seedling program, I had some concerns about provenance. Tupelo /black gum, Washington hawthorn, thornless honeylocust, sourwood (5 small ones for pots), white dogwood.

Terry: I'll plant magnolias, live oaks. I couldn't find a source for young trees. I'm also looking for Carpinus caroliniana (in case you have a source). I'll probably order redbuds. The trees I listed are just the beginning, not the end by any means. If you have other suggestions or know a good source, please let me know.

John - It's good to hear from you. My head is spinning again. My goal is essentially the same as yours. I want to create a natural looking forest that will become a forest in my lifetime (and I plan to live another 60 years or so. :-)) Easier said than done? You say you want a good mix of colors in all seasons. To do this, you are mixing conifers with hardwoods. Is this working for you? This is how trees grow here.

Planting Method: I'm planting by hand but have 3 people to help. I'm planting less than 1,000 seedlings this year so we should get through this fairly quickly. Planting isn't an issue. The aftercare is likely to be a lot of work for the next few years.

I don't want to plant in rows. I thought I had a solution by planting trees with similar needs in blocks and planting seedlings within the blocks naturally (not rigid spacing). But I didn't consider the mowing issue! Rats!

I understand that creating curves when you plant by hand is a bear. The area I'm planting is much smaller than yours. This year, my goal is to plant 2/3 - 3/4 of the field behind the house - the field is 350 feet long and 200-300+ feet wide (it gets wider closer to the water) - about 75% of 2 acres. Here is a photo of the field taken from the top floor of the house.

{{gwi:331525}}

How would you create curves on a flat field this size? (I have lots of flags) In pine plantations, you see trees planted on the diagonal - would this work? I prefer curves with enough space to mow between them. Flags? Use the riding mower to create curves, then use flags to mark location of seedlings? A huge amount of work?

The house is set back about 800 feet from the road. So I also want to screen the house from the road.

{{gwi:331526}}

On the east is a shallow freshwater pond / wetlands area and the backs of cottages and sheds:

{{gwi:331527}}

{{gwi:331528}}

I want to increase the diversity of plants, encourage more wildlife, and create a screen between our house and the backs of my neighbors houses and sheds.

I'll have a surplus of bald cypress seedlings so will plant some in the pond, in addition to groves near the pond. Last year, I started a small bald cypress grove near a cove so I'll plant more there:

{{gwi:331529}}

Many thanks folks. The road is a little bumpy right now, but I'll get there. You all are great!

Pam

Sherry: They can be mixed species, but this species grows characteristically in pure stands, and has its own forest type . Pam, I would recommend planting Atlantic White-Cedar together, as that is how they are usually found naturally.

Pam! Thanks for the follow-up. "When I grow up".. I definitely want to do what you did. I just have to find some land. But boy the Raleigh area is getting so expensive right now! I'm gonna have to bookmark this thread from when i get trees!

Pam, your list is pretty much my list. In addition to the native suggestions given above, I can only think of big leaf magnolias.

Can you get some free trees on Arbor day? That's where I found a dozen live oak seedlings. I nursed mine in pots for a year and am now giving them to friends. I have plenty of live oaks on my land.

For oak genetic diversity you might consider a few hybrids from Oikos Tree Crops. Next year I plan on ordering a dozen different seedlings from them. Good prices.

I don't like planting in rows either, but keep in mind tractor paths. Will you be bush-hogging? Be very careful if you plan on using fire as a managment tool. Our local sandhill crane refuge rarely gets it right with an army of laborers. No quicker way to kill young oaks. In fact that is the idea at the crane refuge. But they still manage to burn up their pines and sometimes the fire jumps the four lane hwy.

And I'm always interested in suggestions for strong wooded non-invasive exotics for zone 8/9.

Love the pics! I miss the beach house I rented for five years,... but not so much during hurricane season.

What interesting pictures, Pam!
You mentioned carpinus caroliniana - the books said this is a slow growing tree, but mine have grown from about 18" to 5' in one year, which I think is pretty fast. You can order them from Mail Order Natives, unless they've sold out.
Sherry

When you try to look at page 3 on the tree section of MON, it switches over to a picture and won't show the regular page. Carpinus carolina costs $7 each - you could e-mail Amy to see if they still have any.
Sherry

The hardest part is trying to come up with planting pattern to make it look 'natural'. What I did was place a bamboo or a stake from one end to another end in a straight line. I would walk straight toward the other bamboo 5-7 paces (15-21 feet) then either move 1-3 feet either left or right and stake it. Back to the line and repeat till you get to the other end. It looks more like random planting that way.

Pam:

Ah, we have been talking about your project from two different kinds of backgrounds. Of course I knew all along my background with trees is quite different from yours, but I was making some basic assumptions based on my understanding of the forest and not thinking that you were coming from a very different "place."

We need to back up quite a bit here and get to some very basic things about forest growth. The way the natural mixed species forests we see and find so beautiful become established is something we need to understand. These were all established through a very long process beginning with what is called the "plant succession" and the "forest succession." A search of the web will turn up some good explanations of this, but I will try to summarize the topic with my own little essay here. You can observe some basic "plant succession" in some relatively short periods of time, unlike the forest succession. If you have a bare field that was used for a long time for growing crops and most weeds and other plants were eliminated, it can be entertaining and instructive to see how the land becomes covered with plants. At first what you see is a variety of weeds that seed themselves and grow readily on bare ground. But over time these are replaced by other species that the "pioneer" species created a good environment for. These "second stage" plants would not grow well on the bare ground where the pioneer species colonized. Then after these "second stage" plants establish another new environment, other later stage plants take over the site. The initial stage and second stage plants now die out and cannot grow in the new environment created by the later stage plants. Things like some kinds of grasses and goldenrod are just a couple of these later stage plants. Eventually others replace these, and at this stage many of these are trees. But some of the earlier stage plants can also be trees. Here these might be black locust, ash, sycamore. Pin cherry, etc. Eventually the site will be dominated by what are called tolerant species of trees like beech , sugar maple, hemlock. This would be called the "climax forest," although in your area the climax forest species will be different from what we have where I am.

OK, so if you want to have a forest of mixed species, including pine, oak, hickory, maple, ideally you should have about 200 years or more for the forest succession to develop. What you are trying to do is completely unnatural--I dont mean that is a bad sense--but what you are trying to do is to grow a forest that is like a mid or late stage in the forest succession, without going through all the stages that lead up to it.

OK, that is some basic background. Now to answer your question about oaks and loblollies. Loblollies are an early forest succession stage species. The Oaks are a mid stage tree, and hickories maybe just a little later, and maples, especially sugar maples, a later stage yet. On some kinds of soils in some parts of the country, oaks may represent a late stage species. But you want to grow these all as part of a first stage of the process. This is unnatural, but not on that account a bad thing to try to do. But maybe not an easy thing to do.

So specifically, what about the oaks and loblollies in a mixture--you see them growing together in a "natural forest." Of course we dont really have many places where there is any natural forest left--almost all the forests you see except some virgin forests, have had the forest succession changed by cutting, etc. But if you see oaks and loblollies growing compatibly together, how did this happen? I can tell you that they did not become established and grow up together.

If you plant a pine forest, what you will see is that after the pines grow up for 20, 30 40 or more years--it "depends"--you will see some oak seedlings start to grow under the pines, assuming there is a seed source. These oaks will grow slowly for a number of years. When they are about 4 or 5 feet high, they qualify as "advance reproduction," meaning that if the pines are cut, at this point the oaks can overcome the weed competition and grow up into good trees. If they are smaller, they probably wont survive. In a forest of loblolly pine these oaks can continue to grow under the pines for many years, slowly growing up to 20 or maybe thirty feet tall. Now, if a pine overhead dies or blows down, the oak tree will grow faster and will take its place in the stand as a dominant tree. In the meantime some other pines may die and be replaced by other pines instead of by oaks. Then later some maples and hickories can take their place in the stand. Hickories become established much like the oaks, but usually are slower. Red maples and hickories and most other mid/late-stage trees must have "advance reproduction" to survive. (Deer radically alter the forest succession by destroying advance reproduction of most kinds of trees. In my forestland, all oak and maple advance reproduction is destroyed by deer.)

So when you see a stand of mixed species such as pine, oak, hickory, maple, beech, you will have trees of all different ages that became established in the stand at different times.

Now there is one more topic I must cover in my little introductory essay on the plant/forest succession--fire. Many of the forests in the southeast, and especially the west, are periodically subjected to fire. In many regions this is completely natural--the result of lightning strikes, in others for thousands of years native Americans regularly set fire to the woods to improve hunting grounds and occasionally for other purposes. In these areas the forests we see, even if untouched by man in historic times, are partly the result of these fires, and not the result of the forest succession as we understand it in other areas. Fires favor some species over others. Pines are favored, to some extent oaks--the oak advance reproduction that is destroyed re-sprouts readily, but maples are very hard hit and tend to be much reduced or eliminated in areas regularly burned.

In areas of the west, where man has excluded fire for many, many years, the forests that are growing up are in a way completely unnatural, becoming more dense, with a much changed species composition, and with accumulating dead wood on the ground, etc. In these areas foresters are trying to re-introduce fire by using prescribed controlled burns.

So when I give some suggestions about how to establish a mixed stand of pine, oak, and maple, etc. I am trying to give you some ideas about how to do this without going through the forest succession, which is how this was done naturally, but which would take 200 years or more. You are trying to establish a natural mixture artificially, quicker.

If what I have been trying to explain has been unclear, it is because I have been trying to answer specific questions in specific situations, forgetting that giving a basic general background is essential.

--Spruce

The succession has to do with soil biology mainly. It takes long time to shift one type to another type where plants thrive. You're going from bacterial dominated soil where grass and pioneer plants and early succession plants thrives. Over time, the organic matter produced from these plants provide food for fungi to start growing. It then shift to next phase and so on. I've read where conifers needs enormous amount of fungi biomass in the soil to thrive. Oaks, maple, and most deciduous trees are in between and are probably easier to grow than conifers when trying to grow in grassy area.

Lou:

I agree with you that changes in the soil such as accumulating organic matter and the introduction of various fungi are important in the plant/forest succession, but as for relative place of the pines and oaks, I have to disagree, at least in areas I am familiar with. I do not know what happens in Texas.

Here in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, reforestation has for many, many years, beginning on a large scale with the WPA projects during the depression, has been done by planting pines and spruces in old fields, mostly dominated by grasses. These trees have grown magnificently, with some plantations boasting trees now over 150 feet tall.

In New England, most of the magnificent white pine stands one sees today, were established by natural seeding of white pine in old fields when many farms were abandoned when the more profitable agriculture shifted westward, hence the common local name for white pine as "old field pine." My family once owned such a stand and the tallest trees were maybe 170 feet. I have not seen any oaks of any size in my family's pine stands nor in any others I have seen.

In areas I have been familiar with, oaks do not establish themselves well in old fields, if at all. Here in Winchester where my field is adjacent to a stand of trees with many oaks, I never find an oak seedling growing up in and successfully competing with grasses and goldenrod. At my forest land in Western, MD where there are even more oaks, I have never seen one growing up successfully in any of the many old fields I have there--not one, except for perhaps two or three near the forest edge growing up amidst some brush or stunted Scots pine. But these are very small and took a long time to become established. But then Texas may be completely different.

But this is not to say one can't plant oaks in a grassy field. I have done that, but I give these trees a head start, and if the weeds and grasses grow up over them, I clear them away.

--Spruce

Pam- My seedlings are doing good. There are some oaks that grow fast. I planted maybe 80% hardwoods/understory 20% conifers in some areas, 80% conifers 20% hardwoods/understory in some areas, and 50%- 50% in some areas, with a couple small groves each of bald cypress, white pine, and norway spruce. I understand they will all grow at different rates. Some of my red oaks are taller than my pines planted at the same time. As time goes on, I will thin as needed.

Concerning planting in rows while still trying to keep a natural look:: Not trying to brag, but I think this is one thing I think I have mastered - with a lot of practice and trial and error. If you don't use a planting machine, you can mow the curves as you mentioned with a mower. I created my curved rows 9 feet apart (2 passes of my mower with a slight overlap). The full curve repeats every (top to top) every 60' or so. The distance from top to bottom of each curve is about 25' or so. Overlap the "top" of one curve with the "bottom" of the curve (offset) in the next row.

I also made very gentle curves within the curves. I basically set flags periodically in a very gentle curve first - just as a guideline for the very first row. I then created my first tree row curving in and out (as I described above) along that curve (planting a seedling every 10'+/- along this line). I then created parallel lines from that first row. Once you develop your first row, you can use a mower to create the rest you will get so you can eyeball the spacing. Spray roundup at least a month before planting every 10'+/- along the rows. The longer the turf roots have to die, the easier the planting (3 months or so is best). Maybe plant some seedlings at 8', 10', and 12' along the rows to mix it up a little? Flags are optional - you could just go out and spray along each row with a sprayer - spray every 3-4 paces. The dead grass will tell you where to plant.

The "rows" only look like "rows" until you decide to mow between the seedlings along each row. For the first couple years I left a thin strip (about a foot or so between the seedlings) along each row to help me locate the rows. Rows were obvious then. However, once I mowed between the trees (last year for the first time for me), you cannot tell any pattern and it suddenly looks natural. I recommend keeping at least one row unmowed between seedlings so you can follow the pattern when mowing the remaining rows.

This method allows for simple mowing and a very natural look. I have used both a brushhog and a zero turn - either work fine. The curves will keep you awake when mowing. As I mentioned before, Guy Sternberg made this suggestion to me - a dandy suggestion. Most plantings I see have straight rows and look unnatural- it is fairly simply to cruve the rows at least a little to make them look more natural while keeping maintenance/mowing simple. Planting totally random just doesnt seem feasible. If one cant mow around seedlings when they are young, a large majority will get overtaken by surrounding vegetation and die.

One other lesson learned - when planting several hundred by hand, you can't "baby" each seedling when planting - not even a little. We did this at first. Then half way through the 1st day we realized we were going to be there for a week if we kept up that pace. I try to spend a little less than one minute per seedling and have decent survival. It obviously boils down to how much time/help you have - then you can sort of back-calculate how much time to spend on each seedling. In my mind, its better to have 700 seedlings in the ground planted quickly, than half that many planted with great care.

I'm anxious for pics. Good luck.

John

Spruce: Thanks for taking the time to write in such detail. You are a good teacher. This discussion about oaks, pines, and nurse trees piqued my interest so I spent a good part of the morning in the forest adjacent to my house, observing. What I saw surprised me so I got the camera and took some photos.

I need to get back to the office now but will post photos later. I don't know if they will shed light on my problem - how to grow these trees without going through the natural succession of a forest for few hundred years.

One other thing that may or may not be relevant - in deciding which oaks to order, I selected oaks that are reported to be fast growers.

Sherry: I think your warm weather moved here. It's 74 degrees (about 23 for you, Resin), and sunny. Tomorrow is supposed to be the same, then the temps plunge to low 50s.

BTW: the Virginia Dept of Forestry planted 15 acres of longleaf pines a few miles from my house 2 years ago. Some of the LLPs popped out of the grass stage, have trunks, and are branching out. They look like a cross between a Saguaro cactus and a Joshua tree. Very cute! (I took a couple of pics)

Pam

I'd like to thank all of you who made suggestions. I've learned a great deal and hope I can help others.

jq: When you "grow up," please feel free to ask for advice. ;-) John Staci is going down the same road, but he's about 4 years ahead of me. He's been very generous with his advice, and I've learned many things by tagging along, asking questions.

Sherry, I ordered from Amy a couple of months ago. Her plants are fantastic - much larger and less expensive than expected, very healthy. Her low prices offsets shipping. I'll contact her, see if she has Carpinus caroliniana. I could break the bank at her store!

Lou, thanks for the suggestion about planting seedlings so they look natural. This is turning out to be a challenge but I'll get there. John had some specific recommendations. I'll work on this, see if I can come up with a strategy.

Terry: I've never ordered any trees from Arbor Day. Some people here say the quality is not that good. I checked their website - it's hard to know how you can go wrong with 10 free trees. If they aren't any good, well, you aren't out much.

This year, I'm working on the middle area. I will plant the land nearer the house with more special trees spaced much further apart - specimen trees. I'm still thinking about what I want to do with the top third that I've been clearing - slowly. Probably forest and wildlife areas.

Spruce: You say you "never find an oak seedling growing up in and successfully competing with grasses and goldenrod ... At my forest land ... I have never seen one growing up successfully in any of the many old fields I have there..." I was stunned to read this.

Yesterday, I looked out and noticed several oaks growing behind loblollies by the driveway. All these trees are fairly young - they grew after the land was clearcut about 10 years ago. Until this discussion, I didn't pay attention nor think this was unusual.

Today, I spent several hours in the woods and took many photos - too many to upload here. I will put a few into this post. As background, this land was never an agricultural field. No one ever lived here or farmed here. The area was a forest that was cut and burned in late 1996. The loggers left some of the largest trees. Some went down during Hurricane Isabel but many remained. It looks like a field because we had to get rid of more than a hundred trees that fell during Isabel - loggers came, followed by a succession of other people who cleared it, burned it, ground stumps, etc.

Today, I saw many species growing so close together, it was impossible to move through or around. I saw tall oaks growing in near total shade, surrounded with invasives and strangled by smilax.

{{gwi:331530}}

{{gwi:331531}}

Several oaks were growing under pines:

{{gwi:331532}}

As an example, the land at the top of the driveway is in at least 3/4 shade, depending on the time of year. Loblollies form a tall wall and don't allow much sun to penetrate. The area is a mess - tall weeds, invasives, vines and smilax everywhere. Despite an almost complete absence of sun and a great deal of competition from aggressive plants, several oaks are growing a few feet from the tallest pines, with smaller pines next to them (not to mention the pests)

{{gwi:331533}}

On the other side of the driveway, a 25 ft oak is growing 12-15 inches from a huge loblolly. Behind them is a massive American holly and several huge wax myrtles, surrounded by smaller pines. All these trees with the exception of the big loblolly and holly grew since the area was clearcut. More oaks are growing behind this group.

{{gwi:331534}}

So, how do we explain these differences? In my area, many trees, including oaks, grow in shade. They grow in profuse, competing vegetation. They grow fast.

This fall, I was trying to improve my tree ID skills, as you advised, so I walked through much of this area, collecting leaves and (when possible) acorns. I expected to find very few oak species because this area is not known for diversity. Not! I don't remember how many species I identified, but many more than I expected.

QM lives in Illinois. You live further north. Does this explain these differences? I don't know. I'm just looking for ways to make this project work. I have to disagree that a loblolly or a black locust will be bad for oak seedlings because this is completely at odds with what I see.

I do think growing trees is different here and in Sherry's Mississippi than it is in many other parts of the country.

I'll go forward, plant the seedlings (100 LLPs arrived this afternoon!) in blocks and/or curves and groves, learn from my mistakes, and report what happens. Maybe others can learn from my experiences, good and bad, as I have learned from the people in this forum.

Thanks for your patience, advice and counsel.

Take care,
Pam

Pam, I've never ordered from the Arbor day people, just received some trees as handouts at local Arbor Day events. The quality was fine here. Longleaf pines, live oaks, dogwoods and redbuds were given out.

Oaks grow well along with pines everywhere down here. So do Sweetgums, Hickories, Magnolias, and Red Maples. IMO pines don't produce very dense shade, just more of a dappled shade. That's the reason it is so difficult to keep invasives out of pine plantations.

Yes, pines trees don't make the deep shade that oaks do, and they all grow very close together down here, all mixed up. Sometimes oak seedlings grow faster than conifers, sometimes conifers out pace others, they all still manage, most growing quickly.
Sherry

Pam:

Nothing unusual about the oaks you are finding--you say the area was never an agricultural field, but was clear cut about 10 years ago. That fits exactly with what I was trying to explain in my little essay about the forest succession. The young oaks you see are almost certainly the result of the advance reproduction of oaks under the pines that were clear cut. And many of these advance reproduction oaks were probably destroyed during the logging, but their roots survived and the trees re-sprouted. The larger oaks you see are oaks that grew up under the pines and were not knocked down during the logging. If you have a forest that is clear cut, you are not going back to an initial stage of the plant/forest succession--many plants , including trees survive and re-sprout and/or begin to grow rapidly once the overhead shade is removed. In addition, an oak tree can grow fairly fast under a pine tree if it has good light from the sides. An oak will not grow so fast in the midst of a dense pine stand. And I dont know of any kind of oak that will grow anywhere near as fast as a loblolly pine where the growing conditions are favorable for both. On some sites not favorable for fast pine growth of loblolly pine, oaks can compete successfully. Of course there are some slower growing pines than loblollies. But over time the forest succession will have the pines completely replaced by oaks, and other species, especially in the absence of fine or other disturbance.

I had thought I made it clear that pines grow underneath pine trees in dense stands. I quote the entire paragraph for those who missed it:

"If you plant a pine forest, what you will see is that after the pines grow up for 20, 30 40 or more years--it "depends"--you will see some oak seedlings start to grow under the pines, assuming there is a seed source. These oaks will grow slowly for a number of years. When they are about 4 or 5 feet high, they qualify as "advance reproduction," meaning that if the pines are cut, at this point the oaks can overcome the weed competition and grow up into good trees. If they are smaller, they probably wont survive. In a forest of loblolly pine these oaks can continue to grow under the pines for many years, slowly growing up to 20 or maybe thirty feet tall. Now, if a pine overhead dies or blows down, the oak tree will grow faster and will take its place in the stand as a dominant tree. In the meantime some other pines may die and be replaced by other pines instead of by oaks. Then later some maples and hickories can take their place in the stand. Hickories become established much like the oaks, but usually are slower. Red maples and hickories and most other mid/late-stage trees must have "advance reproduction" to survive. (Deer radically alter the forest succession by destroying advance reproduction of most kinds of trees. In my forestland, all oak and maple advance reproduction is destroyed by deer.)"

--Spruce

In the above described situation, where the land is clearcut and then left to grow back up, you will often find that some of these resprouting oaks will eventually be shaded out by the pines. They'll do very well for a few years because of the energy stored up in their root system, but after being subjected to deeper and deeper shade as the pines outgrow them, many will eventually give up.

Brandon:

Yes, this often happens, but the oaks more often give up when under denser shade than the pines--more often maples, hemlocks, etc. Actually, most pine stands as they grow older, if they are fully stocked stands, produce less and less dense shade--this is certainly true of my red pine stands, and to a lesser extent, the white pines. Also, what very commonly happens is that young seedling oaks (stump sprouts from mature oaks may behave differently) growing under moderate shade will grow for a number of years and then die back to the ground, only to re-sprout again and grow up to 3 or 4 feet or so, and then die back again only to re-sprout. Studies by research foresters show that this can happen to oak advance reproduction several times, but then upon release the young--or by this time actually not so young--oak trees grow just fine.

Under a typical loblolly pine stand I believe that oaks, at least of some species, will continue to grow until they either force their way up between the pines or the pines die. In some cases, as with shorter lived oaks such as black oak, the oaks may grow for a long time to some moderate size, never assume a dominant crown position, and then die, still under the pine trees.

But oaks that grow for a long time under pine trees will not achieve the best growth form--they will often not be straight, and not have clear trunks free of defects. All oaks, without exception, in the NE quadrant of this country, are classed as shade intolerant beyond the sapling stage, and need full overhead light for best development.

--Spruce

Spruce,

From my understanding of forrest succession after clearcutting, the reason that "SOME of these resprouting oaks (can) eventually be shaded out by the pines," is at least partially due to the fact that much of their energy reserve is used up in the rapid production of new growth which makes them more suseptible to the shade and other factors that they might otherwise overcome. As you point out, there are many factors (the particular species involved, etc.) that will determine what percentage will be elliminated. Whether trees such as maples would be likely to come into play depends on the makeup of the forrest before being clearcut. Pines will normally outgrow maples and shade them out unless the maples were established in the area before the clearcut and resprout from the roots of established trees.

Well, Pam, I ordered two nyssa biflora/swamp blackgum, one fagus grandifolia/American beech, and one ostrya virginiana/American hophornbeam from Forest Farm. I've ordered a Jefferson elm also, so that's five more trees to add to my collection!
Two more big, dead, Katrina pines have fallen - this rainy, windy weather we've been having has brought down several other still standing dead trees that we've already taken care of - I can't wait until all the ugly reminders of the hurricane have gone! Hophornbeam is a tree I've been wanting to try - it's related to carpinus caroliniana/blue beech, but it needs well drained soil, can't tolerate wet soil like blue beech, or so I've read. It's supposed to be another good wildlife plant, so if it thrives, I'll probably order some more - the pictures of the leaves and fruits look very attractive.
At least we didn't have a tornado like so many other parts of the South - weren't they terrible?
Sherry

Yes, Brandon, I think I follow what you are saying better now. If you have a clear cut and all the oaks are taken down to ground level, both the larger trees and the advance reporduction, and then plant a fully stocked stand of red pines, for example, then it happens as you say. If the pines get a head start on the oak sprouts, they will shade them out. A young red pine stand, up to the age of 15 years or a little more, casts very dense shade--dense enough to cause the oak sprouts to die.

But sometimes oaks, especially larger oaks, produce very vigorous sprouts. I have seen red oaks on my timberland grow stump sprouts that grow 6' or more the first year. These, if allowed to grow and not eaten back by deer, will outgrow the pines. Often the mortality of oak sprouts, including those from advance reproduction, if there is any, is increased or hastened by deer. The oaks may resprout, but then they are eaten back again, and in the presence of dense shade from young pines, they can't last long.

But then if the pines continue to grow and the pine stand gets to 30 or 40 years old or more, and 65 feet tall or so, the oaks and maples, etc. will again invade the stand. Eventually, if there are not many deer present, they will grow very thick under the stand, so thick one has difficulty walking through. I have seen this in the Potomac State forest in Garrett county, MD, one of the few places in the county where the deer population is kept in check.

There is one section on my timberland where I have an 85 foot tall white pine stand that is down wind from woods that contain a lot of maple, especially sugar maple. There are plenty of deer and they nibble the maples, but they are so thick they can't eat them all. The forest floor is like a carpet of nibbled maples, all about one or two feet tall. A few here and there are beginning to grow up taller and may eventually get above the browse line. There are also beech, and since they are not so loved by deer, these more easily grow up to become understory trees. If the deer were fenced out of this white pine stand, in 5 years or so the maple growth would be so dense I would have to hack my way through.

After about 40 years of studying and practicing silviculture, I sometimes think I can easily explain how things work. But here are really a number of different kinds of situations, and sometimes I focus just on one and forget there are others involving different kinds of sequences and which have different factors that come into play.

--Spruce

Pam,

Were you satisfied with the quality of seedlings from Indian Mound? How large were the Swamp Chestnut Oaks?

Thanks for your help, suggestions and encouragement. I'm sorry I wasn't able to respond promptly. We put out a new product this week - this involves a great deal of extra time and work for everyone. Getting back to the subject -

Spruce: I'm sure you think I'm a nut case or an idiot but some of these concepts are difficult to grasp and internalize until you observe them firsthand. I've read about forest succession and how it unfolds over hundreds of years but I've never observed it nor have I tried to create a forest. I'm trying to find ways to bypass some stages - as you say "trying to grow a forest that is like a mid or late stage in the forest succession, without going through all the stages that lead up to it."

At times, I've been confused by conflicting advice - for example, whether to use loblollies as a nurse tree. In any group, people will disagree. It's my responsibility to find more information to resolve the question or clarify the issue. I asked our forester this question. He advised me to use loblollies as nurse trees until oak seedlings are 3-4 feet tall - once they reach that height, the pines may cast too much shade. If this happens, they need to be removed.

In another thread, you also recommended using black locusts as nurse trees, chopping them back as needed, so I did order black locusts. Given the type of shade they cast, it may not be necessary to remove them - I'll wait and see.

Alabama & Sherry: Thanks for the posts about hardwoods growing under and around pines. I was beginning to think I'd lost my mind. I've decided that trees grow differently around the country and under different conditions - and that there are no one-size-fits-all answers to questions.

Sherry: Why do I think you just got your 2008 FF catalog? So did I but I'm afraid to open it - too much going on right now. The seedlings I ordered from the NC nursery arrived 3 days ago - 2 weeks early - and they sent an additional 200 Atlantic white cedars that I didn't order. I've called but haven't heard back from them so I'm trying to keep the cedars cool.

You said you ordered two nyssa biflora/swamp blackgum from FF. How would you describe these trees? I ordered 20 nysssa biflora seedlings, in addition to 50 Nyssa sylvatica seedlings. I have a wet area and thought N. biflora would be happy there, along with bald cypresses, Atlantic white cedars, maybe some red maples.

I'm not familiar with the the Jefferson Elm.

I'm working on an order from Mail Order Natives (I am a nut case!). In addition to Carpinus caroliniana, I'm looking at A. saccharum var. floridana, Acer saccharum var. leucoderme (Chalk maple), and Pistachia chinensis (Chinese pistache). She has Magnolia asheii - that's been on my list for years, and Magnolia macrophylla (Big Leaf Magnolia) but I think they both need more shade and protection than I can offer right now.

I really need some big fast growing Magnolia grands to screen my neighbor's sheds across the pond.

QM: I haven't received the seedlings from Indian Mound yet. They should arrive around Feb 15. But NC sent seedlings two weeks early so you never know. I'll let you know when they arrive.

Take care,
Pam

I have lots of nyssa sylvatica growing naturally on my property, Pam, and I ordered two n. bifloras to plant in some heavy clay soil near the bottom of the hollow - it's wet most of the time. I may or may not have ever seen n. biflora. There's a tree growing in my mother's front yard (in heavy clay) in Hattiesburg that the builder's left when she bought the house. I've never been able to ID it positively, but I think it's n. biflora. It's almost identical to n. sylvatica, except the leaves are narrower and shinier than n. sylvatica, and the bark is more deeply grooved. If these trees turn out to look just like my mother's tree, then I'll know that's what it is - my mother's tree is very attractive, so I hope that's it. Your n. bifloras should grow well in the wet situation.
All the bigleaf magnolias, whether they be m. macrophylla, m. asheii, or others, need well drained soil and protection from wind. I've got four m. macrophyllas, all growing successfully in sheltered situations, one on the south side of our detached garage, the other three growing on the slope that goes down to the hollow, but they're in well drained sites. I lost the one I planted next to my porch when rain and wind funneling across the porch whipped it to death. Mag grands grow fast here while young, so they're good for screening - they're all over my property.
FF is one of the big culprits in my plantoholism - I shouldn't open my catalog either!
Sherry

Thanks, Sherry. It will be interesting to see how your tree and my seedlings grow. I remember you saying that the tree at your mother's house intrigued you.

I still haven't opened the FF catalog. It's sitting here on the coach, about 2 feet away, seems to be moving closer. I need more will power.