This discussion seems to have strayed a bit from the original topic. I apologize to the OP for the apparent hijacking......it was not intentional, but sometimes one thing leads to another and is worthy of further discussion :-) Tom, I've made my thoughts on many of Ms. Chalker Scott's opinions pretty clear on this forum (and others) a number of times. I am not a big fan for various reasons. But I would not necessarily consider her 'myth busting' articles junk science. What is contained in these articles is a brief synopsis of her conclusions in response to these topics and yes, not documented by citations or attributions. But that doesn't mean the research hasn't been done or the scientific evidence doesn't exist......it is just not appropriate for that degree of detail to be included in a master gardener newsletter or extension service bulletin :-) But she is rather well-published in various scientific journals and has authored or co-authored a number of peer reviewed papers. For the most part, she's done her work. In some cases, I and others don't always agree with the conclusions reached, but the science is there. As to the allelopathic effects of western red cedar (Thuja plicata), quite a lot of research has been done. Allelopathy is quite the 'hot' topic in various horticultural circles due to the potential of these natural plant chemicals to effect plant growth and thus be useful as natural herbicides. And of course, forestry management organizations are very interested in this phenomenon as regards its implication in affecting or perpetuating healthy forest systems. I'm not going to take the time do the research for you but it's out there. Much of the online material is available only by accessing paid subscription scientific sites like springerlink but there are some accessible publications. And various scientific journals and texts are available at the library at CUH. And the literature does support her contentions - there is virtually NO scientific documentation of WRC being allelopathic. E.L. Rice, who has authored perhaps the most conclusive treatise to date on allelopathy, states a slight effect from WRC litter but no indication of the roots or other tree parts having this property in any significant concentrations. And while there is far less documentation of research conducted on mulches specifically, it stands to reason that if the tree itself does not demonstrate allelopathic properties, the mulch is hardly likely to. I think a lot of the confusion that arises regarding the "toxic" properties of various mulches has to do with how wood mulches act in a garden setting. And the nitrogen unavailability or tie-up they can create. Fine or shredded bark mulches or sawdusts can create a nitrogen imbalance at the soil surface. This is not an issue with established plants with well-developed root systems but can have an effect on the development and growth of seedlings or shallow rooted plants, as in many veggies and seasonal crops or plants. And there is a far greater chance of incorporation of the wood product into the soil with the necessary cultivation of most vegetable gardens, which will cause far greater and more widespread nutrient unavailability. I would not recommend this type of mulch for those situations for that reason. But not because the mulch itself is toxic or poisonous.

Clearly you found your own answer. We have black walnuts in our woodland. Would I ever let one grow in our landscape around the house or garden? Nope. It isn't worth it because of the allelopathic issues that arise with the juglone. While there are lots of plants that are not affected by black walnut, I just don't even want to have to worry about it, especially since we gather leaves that fall from the trees in and near the yard and use them as mulch and as a compost pile ingredient.

Well, there are certainly guys that can pull it off but just as certainly, some should stick with kitchen cabs only. My top-of-the head response, in your case, would be "No". The reason being your kitchen guy mentioned a furniture maker that he uses. By that reference, he is telling you he's waffling on the project and my bias is generally to go with a specialist, no matter what the subject. Having said that though, my guy does both but he sticks to certain styles and he has been doing both for 30 years with a huge portfolio of both kitchens and individual pieces. Before I hired him, I saw examples of his work, both cabs and furniture pieces, and went to his shop to see projects in process. I'd have no issues at all with commissioning him to do individual pieces. I started off my work life as a traditional cabinetmaker (read this as we made furniture) in Boston so I feel I have a good background to evaluate quality pieces. Of all furniture, case pieces, such as you need for your bedroom are the easiest to build (as opposed to chairs for example). So, your kitchen guy has that going for him if you decide to use him. Just as you did your research when investigating whom to use for your kitchen, you'll want to fully research the same provider concerning furniture. They are completely different animals. How many pieces has he made, what style were they, are you happy with the quality of his furniture, etc. Ask for drawings or renderings; ask about construction methods, joinery, finishes, design, veneering, drawer construction, wood specie choice, timeframes - you know, the whole enchilada. Once again, you will need to educate yourself as to what goes into a quality piece of furniture so you can intelligently evaluate a furniture maker's responses. There's more to it than you might think. Good luck!

OK, here's the answer. I asked a professional botanist who specializes in grasses. Oaks are NOT allelopathic. In fact, outside of juglone and Black Walnut, *nothing* else is really allelopathic. Plants do many things to the soil to change soil populations, but only juglone is a lasting chemical poison. Everything else that might be harmful to plants that comes out of plants degrades very quickly. Oak tannin, for example, degrades very quickly on contact with soil. That's why you can successfully use composted oak leaves. The tannin is all gone by the time the composting is finished. So what keeps stuff from growing under oaks? Some people got it right. It's competition with oak roots. Period. Now, in the wild, that competition is not very effective, because oak roots in the wild tend to be deep, headed for the water table. In the woods, native grasses will grow right up to the trunk. But in lawns that are watered, oak roots are abundant near the surface, and they very successfully compete with any grass that try to grow there. P.S. That's why, with my cherry tomato bed almost under an oak, that gets tilled and turned every year, in tomato versus oak, the oak doesn't have a chance.