"Thus it is apparent that you will choke and starve your tree for water if you plant "pretty little flowers" around its neck. " Hardly. I'd say they got that pretty much backwards. First, it is difficult to make an accurate analogy between a natural wooded habitat and a cultivated garden. Second, the reason many trees in naturally wooded settings are devoid of much undergrowth is simply due to insufficient light conditions combined with the much more aggressive and far-reaching nature of tree roots compared to that of smaller growing shrubs or herbaceous perennials. The trees hog the lion's share of available soil nutrients and moisture, effectively choking out the smaller growth, not the other way around. In a garden setting where attention can be paid to irrigation and supplementing nutrients through mulching or fertilization, that is far less likely to happen. Even then, many gardeners experience difficulty in developing plantings under the canopies of well-established trees - often much too rooty and too dry. But as to smaller plants choking out larger growing trees - no flippin way!

12 year old post, and still no good answers. Wow. OK, so reviving this for those who follow. I live in an area known for Blue Spruce trees (Colorado). Not offering expert advice here, but I will provide some observations from 50 years of living with these trees: 1) We plant Blue Spruce trees very close to houses in this area. By "very", I mean a few feet from the house. In 50 years of living here, I've never heard of anybody having foundation problems due to a spruce tree being too close (other trees, yes). Not saying it's not possible, but 10 feet away is not going to be a problem. 2) Healthy Blue Spruce trees don't come crashing down, nor do they shed big limbs. Even very heavy spring snow tends to damage other trees, while the spruce trees weather it just fine. Unhealthy / dying trees should be taken down. 3) In mountain communities, people build houses surrounded by spruce and pine trees -- again often just feet from their houses. And again, people are not chopping down these trees due to fear of foundation problems. Some smart folks do start felling them for fire mitigation, but that is a different subject. 4) We personally have 2 Blue Spruce trees right next to our house, both of which were planted many years before we moved in. They are at least 25 years old, towering above our house. No foundation or basement damage has occurred from these mature trees. Keeping the gutters clean is a pain, and we have to be sure limbs are kept off the roof to prevent damage to shingles. 5) Blue Spruce trees do get big -- so if you don't want a big tree in your yard they are not for you. 6) Grass under the tree will typically die out or be very thin, unless it is a kind that tolerates shade and soil conditions created by the trees. However, some ground covers (like vinca minor) will thrive and are a nice compliment.

spedigrees: Limestone varies in magnesium content. If you go to your local agricultural store--I am not sure what you have up there--and ask for “high mag limestone“--crushed or pulverized--they should be able to direct you. The analysis is always posted on the bag. Dolomitic limestone is generally “high-mag,” but perhaps other types of limestone have a high magnesium content. Our soils here in the northern Shenandoah Valley are very high in magnesium, and high mag limestone underlies a good portion of our soils, and high mag limestone is readily available. And, almost all the NS in this area look very nice, in spite of our hot, dry climate. As for soil acidity--that should not be a problem for Norway spruce, unless the soil is extremely acidic, maybe in the low 4’s. At my timberland, where the soils are a bit below 5, Norway spruce does very well. I am not sure what an optimum pH would be, and it would probably vary with soil type. Maybe somewhere in the 5.5 range is "safe." As for magnesium for Norway spruce--this has been fairly well documented. I titled my original post “a hypothesis,” but there is substantial evidence. A site factors study done at SUNY Syracuse some years ago now, noted that “at least 75 kg per hectare” is needed for good NS growth. Studies in Europe, where there has been extensive decline in NS forests, has shown that the acid rain causes a reduction in the availability of magnesium, and supplementing magnesium often solves the problem. And, I have made some personal observations--not scientific, and without all the facts--that magnesium supplementation can make a dramatic difference. But, the main effect of magnesium may not be in height growth, but in the fullness, density, and lushness of the foliage. I have seen many poor looking, thin foliaged NS trees growing reasonably fast in height. Also, the thin foliage on some Norway spruce trees has causes other than a lack of an optimum supply of magnesium. And, I know, some of that is genetic, and not correctable. As for your experiment: Yes, 5 years should be long enough to show some results, but no sooner. The limestone has to dissolve into the soil, get down to the roots, and, because NS hold their needles for several years, the "thickening" of the foliage may not be vis1ble for several years. BUT, and this is a big "but," the effect may not really show up on very young trees. It may help the growth rate, but as for foliage density, that is never really noticeable until trees are somewhat older and larger--maybe not until they are 20 feet tall or more will any difference be really clear. As for the growth rate: white pine usually starts growing faster than NS. How old are your trees? How tall? NS trees don't begin to grow fast until they are about 4.5 feet high, and that could be only after 6 to 8 years. At that point, they should "take off." On the best soils, and in the right climate, an average of 28 inches is possible, with some years the new shoots elongating up to 4 feet or more. But growth averaging 20 to 24 inches is good for many sites. Norway spruce and white pine, assuming equally good strains, should grow equally well over the first 50 years. The white pine up to about 18 years should outgrow the NS, but after that NS should catch up a bit. After 50 years NS should outgrow the white pine for some years. SUNY Syracuse did a growth curves study for NS, and found that for the first 60 years--after the trees reach 4.5 feet in height, there is no "curve" as such, but a straight line. White pine growth curves bend sharply over to the right after the first 18 years or so, and at 50 years the growth averages about 1 foot, while at the same age, NS trees can still be growing 28 inches per year. But this rate does begin to decline not too long after the 60-year mark. On the best sites both should eventually make 150 feet or more in forest stands. Open grown NS should make 120 feet or more on better sites. As for the blue spruce and magnesium, I really don't know. Tom may be right about this. --spruce

allina, let me come at this a little differently. By your description I think the bobcat's issues may have been a weight lifting issue. Smaller bobcats only have a lifting capacity of around 500-1000 pounds. If they were trying to get deep under the tree and he put his forks down in the soil very far, it would make sense that he could not lift it. Between the resistance from the roots and the compacted soil, I could see it exceeding the bobcats's lifting ability pretty quickly. But I've also dug out 12' spruces before by hand so it is doable. Spruce tree root structures aren't all the extensive when they're young. The picture may be misleading me but it appears the tree is only about 5-6' tall. You also said the tree has been in the ground for some time so let's say it's a dwarf that is pretty well settled in. You should still be able to dig out a root ball around the base of that tree say 1 to 1 1/2' out from the trunk in all directions and then down about 2', and you'll have all the roots you'd need for that tree to survive. Adding to that depth another foot just to compenate for the deep planting originally, that means you'd be digging a ball 2-3' round and 3' deep. That's should be manageable for a couple of strong people. Lifting the weight of the rootball once you have it ready to go will be the difficult task. Then you can either move it to a new location or simply fill in about a foot or so of dirt under the root ball you lifted and then place it back in the hole. Once done now scrape off the top foot or so of dirt surrounding the trunk with your shovel. There shouldn't be any roots in the dirt to speak of since all the dirt was above the original root ball. When you start hitting a lot of tiny fibrous roots then stop scraping and that will be your new ground level base. Be sure the base is a little above your yard's normal ground level for good drainage. Now recover with mulch up to about 2-3" away from the trunk. mark