Converting typhoon damaged hillside forest to blueberry plantation
theniceguy
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Featured Answer
Sort by:Oldest
Comments (38)
fruitnut Z7 4500ft SW TX
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agoglib
7 years agoRelated Discussions
How Do You Rate Your Garden?
Comments (23)Less than 50%, truthfully. Some things are coming along nicely, FINALLY. Up front, my 3 gal. Blush Noisette, 2 years in place, is getting a lot prettier and less skeletal, and her flush this year is lasting 2+ weeks so far. Louise Odier, 1 gal, also 2 years in place, is also starting to look 'real', and on purpose, rather than skeletal. The much repeated "sleep, creep, leap" has helped me have patience for this slow progress! Other things up front are either too new, or too new in 'this place' to have done much growing, so aren't amazing to look at. The irises are getting thicker and doing well, but they're over so fast! Out back, where I hesitated planting anything because I thought we'd replace the septic tank (which I'm not entirely sure of its location....) I have given up waiting for DH to make a move, and I stuck most everything into the ground over this past winter. My 2 citrus trees, while still dinky, are showing signs of loving the dirt life, and they are blooming a lot more than they ever did in their pots (big pots, but still only pots). Cornelia who has been puny and floppy and unlovely, is also enjoying being in the ground, and is sending out more robust canes and laterals (still thin, but a big improvement). I have hopes for her. My hydrangea is looking good this year (also 2 years on site, one of my first plantings), and we'll see if my 'bluing' amendments do anything whatsoever. Madame Alfred Carrier is finally big enough to need some support, so I need to work on that. She bloomed nicely this year, but briefly. I'm still permanently behind on the weeds, and I know that I always will be to some extent, as I am surrounded by weeds and it gets breezy, so weeds blow in. Such is life. The back is starting to pull together and look decent. I'm happy with it all. I look forward to 5 years down the road when it will be that much prettier than it is now! Melinda...See MoreNorway Spruce Needle Browning and Loss
Comments (10)bluebars: This is so sad. I am sorry. Perhaps it is possible to give a level of application of this weed control product that most trees can tolerate while still killing weeds in a lawn. I would never take the risk. Also, I do believe that Norway spruce are more susceptible to poisoning from this product than some other kinds of trees. Norway spruce is one of my absolute favorite trees, and one of its virtues is its very high disease and insect resistance in most parts of the country. These trees are very tough, and also have wonderful drought resistance. But this susceptibility to weed control chemicals is a weak point. I often see some poor looking trees that are weakened if not completely killed by these chemicals. Needless to say, I hate them. The chemicals are designed to kill most everything except grass. Trees, in this regard, are "weeds." Most trees can survive light applications of these chemicals because they are so big and strong, but their basic susceptibility to the chemicals is the same as the weeds. I won't use them around any trees because it has negative effects no matter how light the application. Before we moved here to the Winchester area we lived in Arlington, VA. At the back of our property there we had the most wonderful line of NS trees--especially wonderful in the variation in appearance (growth form, foliage, etc) from tree to tree. Two years ago we went back to see how the old house was doing. The owner invited us in to see the renovations, etc. Out the back I saw all our NS trees dead or dying. All the weeds in that part of the lawn were gone, but also the trees, that were not only beautiful in themselves, but also a wonderful screen blocking the view from the houses behind. Awful! I must admit that I have a different attitude about lawns than most people. Weeds in a lawn dont really bother me, unless there is some kind that completely takes over and then doesnÂt provide a good ground cover. I really love dandelions, etc. and others that produce nice flowers at different times of the year. My attitude is one that was held for many years in this country. If you ever go to Monticello (Jefferson"s home) in VA and take the garden tour, you will probably be told about how people felt about lawns in those days and how the variety of plants that mixed in with the grasses were thought to be a plus. One of the "weeds" that grew in lawns at that time gave a wonderful fragrance when stepped on. I wish my view of lawns were more common. I have tried to talk to my friends about allowing more variety in their lawns and to stop using these chemicals, but I am sorry to say I donÂt think in all the years I have been doing this that I have made a single convert. There are some people I have met who agree with me, but I have never changed any minds. What to do? Two possible solutions. First, one can place mulch around the trees. Because the roots can extend so far, this may not be practical in most situations. Perhaps mulch closer to the tree, and then some kind of ground-cover plant extending further out or a flower garden, maybe. For the lawn--if the weeds get too bad, kill the old lawn with all the weeds, etc--perhaps with Roundup or something that is active on the foliage and not in the ground, and then replant with a kind of seed guaranteed to be weed seed free. Weeds will eventually come back, however. Perhaps for a long time they can be controlled in areas near trees by hand weeding them out. If it is a choice between the trees and the grass--I choose the trees every time. --Spruce...See MoreBamboo shooting in Oklahoma
Comments (43)Matt, When I'm referring to cedar trees I am referring to Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana) which is horribly invasive...if you let it spread, it will reseed vigorously and won't stop until it has covered every inch of bare ground. It is a huge water guzzler and here in our part of the state, the pastures that are full of cedar trees never produce hay or forage nearly as well as pastures where the cedar is kept out by the vigilant work of the landowner. There are many reasons to hate cedars. We had them all over our open land (most of our land is heavily wooded) when we purchased it, and we have spent that last 12 years removing it and trying to keep it from coming back on the 2 acres nearest the house. Diane already listed her reasons, and ours are pretty much the same. I don't even attempt to grow apples here because cedar apple rust is going to get them. It is inevitable when the acreage near you has anywhere from dozens to hundreds of cedars per acre. I don't think Diane mentioned ticks either. There are these little tiny ticks that sit on/in the cedar trees and jump onto you or drop down onto you everytime you're near a tree. You cannot get rid of the ticks until you get rid of the cedars. Since we got rid of the cedars, we almost never have a single tick anywhere around the house. Fire. For us, fire is a huge issue and cedar trees are immensely dangerous in fire situations. They burn like mad, and they literally explode sending their burning sap or resin or whatever you call it through the air. That burning sap or resin sticks to other trees, the ground, the walls and roofs of houses and barns, etc., and sets them on fire. If you're in an area prone to wildfires, cedars are a disaster waiting to happen. I've seen wind-driven cedar-fueled fires roll right over the top of a firefighting brushtruck with firefighters, including my DH, inside the truck. These fires can be almost unstoppable as long as there's more cedar and tall prairie grasses to fuel them. Generally, if there is any sort of wind over about 35-40 miles per hour, we cannot stop wind-driven cedar-fed fires except by starting carefully managed and strategically-placed backfires (not always possible in a high-wind situation) or by getting far enough ahead of the fire that you can plow/bulldoze a really wide firebreak. Let's not even mention the pollen. Our cars, porch railings, patio furniture, etc. have been coated in pollen for weeks, although the cedar here are through pollinating now. I'm allergic to cedar pollen so moving here probably was a mistake in terms of allergies. There's a famous ranch in Texas where the millionaire owner bought very dry, yucky, nonproductive land that everyone thought wasn't worth much. He then spent enormous amounts of time and money removing the cedar and other invasive non-natives. Guess what happened? Springs began oozing water, streams began running, ponds and lakes began to fill up with water. Without the junipers sucking up all the moisture, it became an entirely different place. People come from all over the country, and the world, to study what he did and how he did it. On the back part of our property, we have an area of cedar trees that are in excess of 50' or 60' in height. It probably starts about 600 or 700' west of our house and runs to the fence line. (A fenceline we've never actually seen since the cedar just covers it up.) Between their tendency to guzzle water (easily 30 gallons per tree per day, and larger trees guzzle more) and the heavy shade they provide, nothing much grows underneath them except maybe some poison ivy and greenbrier. By contrast, in areas where we don't have cedar trees, there is a beautiful healthy ecosystem growing in the shade of the broadleaf deciduous trees and that ecosystem consists of dozens of types of plants and supports all sorts of wildlife. That area occupied by the very large cedar trees mainly supports copperheads and ticks. There is a deer/coyote/wild pig trail that runs through there. If a tornado ever hits our property, I hope it hits the backwoods cedar area. The next time you drive up/down I-35 through the Davis/Turner Falls area, look at the hillsides. Many are covered in cedar. A few are not. Those few areas that are more cedar-free were burned in massive wildfires several years ago. The first was earlier in the 2000s....maybe 2003 or 04, and there were smaller ones in 2005, and maybe in 2006, 07 and 09 as well. Those fires burned for days and days despite the valiant efforts of firefighters from all over the state and country who fought them as hard as they possibly could. Cedar trees are taking over many parts of Oklahoma precisely because we don't let the lightning-fueled wildfires clear them out every few years. (We can't let that happen because too many people live in the midst of great numbers of cedar trees, and the trees often surround entire towns.) I found and linked an article from the Oklahoma that discusses the threat cedar poses to our state. By the way, some friends of ours have leased a ranch for several years that is covered in cedar. With leased land, it isn't cost-effective to remove the cedar because the land isn't yours. A few months ago I noticed they were clearing out some of their cedar trees (yea!) and I instantly knew they'd purchased the place. Now that it belongs to them, I expect they'll spend the next few years removing cedar. It is hard to remove cedar because, under normal conditions, when clearing land, you pile up the trees, let them dry and burn them. With the cedars, burning them as a means of disposal is inherently risky, and a landowner can be held legally liable for damage done to other folks' property if a brushpile rages out of control and turns into a wildfire. People still do it here, but they work a lot harder from the start to keep their pile of burning cedar contained, including plowing a large firebreak around each pile, having a water truck standing by, having a bulldozer or tractor standing by, burning only in low wind conditions, etc. So, you see, even removing it is very dangerous. Dawn Here is a link that might be useful: Cedar Trees In Oklahoma...See MoreFastest conifer to reach 200' (61m)?
Comments (52)"One study showed about 6% of the water in the leaves were from fog in some trees. " Right, so the notion that they "need" this source of moisture is romanticized pseudoscience. Just because something happens, doesn't mean that this is the cause of everything else that happens. If they could merely subsist on the fog, then why haven't they reached 600', 700', or 800'? In fact since their range goes up to 2500', the right magical fog clearly exists at that altitude, too, and trees at ground level should be able to reach 2800' at least! LOL. Any moisture loving plant can grow better, or faster in a moist climate. Duh on that. But to specifically say that these trees can only reach that height because the fog is the _only _reason they can reach that height, is the height of absurdity! If you plotted standard deviations of soil moisture and drought with tree heights around the world - guess what you'd find? The places with plentiful, consistent soil moisture and rainfall are going to have the taller trees...and the places without tropical storms the really tallest trees. The sugi of Japan top out a bit above 200' - as would the redwoods of California if they had monsoon thunderstorms and typhoons to deal with. And guess what happens in climates with very consistant moisture that don't have the tropical waves and ridging/troughing - well they are maritime climates and by definition will have fog. The fog is associative, not causative, for the tall redwood trees. The only competition is Eucalyptus regnans, which, guess what, comes from moderately elevated areas with consistent rainfall and atmospheric moisture. (my brief google research suggests Tasmania is not known for thick summer fogs, but it is certainly wet, and w/o California's summer dry season. In fact, its native range _doesn't_ include the NW coast which is probably the foggiest part of Tasmania.) And guess what their upper limit is in spite of being morphologically completely different from conifers? About 400 ft! The fact is you won't find many other places in the world that have soil moisture as consistent as redwood coast, and the right temperature parameters, and the right absence of storms, lightning and high winds. But if you did, they could also reach 400' there. This post was edited by davidrt28 on Fri, Jan 2, 15 at 23:59...See Moreericwi
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agofruitnut Z7 4500ft SW TX
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agofruitnut Z7 4500ft SW TX
7 years agoglib
7 years agosteve333_gw
7 years agoKevin Reilly
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agoglib
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agoRick Langhorne
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agofruitnut Z7 4500ft SW TX
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agofruitnut Z7 4500ft SW TX
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agojolj
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agodrew51 SE MI Z5b/6a
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agojolj
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agodrew51 SE MI Z5b/6a
7 years agojolj
7 years agodrew51 SE MI Z5b/6a
7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years agotheniceguy
7 years agolast modified: 7 years ago
Related Stories

GARDENING GUIDESGarden Myths to Debunk as You Dig This Fall and Rest Over Winter
Termites hate wood mulch, don’t amend soil for trees, avoid gravel in planters — and more nuggets of garden wisdom
Full Story
GARDENING AND LANDSCAPINGWorld of Design: 10 Home Gardeners Show Us Their Sweet Summer Harvests
From New York to Tokyo, these gardeners have turned their yards, terraces and rooftops into places of bounty
Full Story
Rick Langhorne