Whoo boy! Wouldn't you just know it-long time readers here that I, wisconsitom, would happen upon this latest offering about fertilizer spikes!

Nick, we're going to take this apart first, then see if there's anything left to put back together: So I'll start right out by saying fertilizer spikes are a ridiculous product. I am almost beyond comprehension that these bogus items are still being made and sold, So let's think about a plant's root system once: First, roots go wherever they are able to colonize new soil with relative ease. That is, they tend to take the path of least resistance. Then too, they rummage all over the place, far beyond the point where most folks think they would stop. So once that arb gets going and growing, it will have roots extending far beyond the initial planting space. Therefore, we can begin to see that placing a small amount of highly-concentrated fertilizer in one tiny little spot has no relationship to how the plant forms its roots. Bad, bad idea.

Second, research has shown over and over that the main job of a new transplant is to regenerate its root system, most of which will have been left behind in the nursery when the plant was dug. And other research has shown us that roots develop fastest in a low-nitrogen (fertilizer) environment. Since it is root regeneration we need to see in order for our landscape plants to perform well, it follows that no fertilizer should be used at time of planting, this unless a soil test has actually shown an acute shortage of this or that nutrient. And all I have to do is look at the green grass and other plants in your photo to tell that there is no acute nutrient shortage here. Maybe a eency-weency bit of this or that, but nothing limiting to growth.

So does fertilization have any place here? Perhaps, after a year or two or four have gone by, the plant is established, and you wish to boost growth as you say at the outset. It may make some sense to do a very light application, via broadcasting at the surface, of a fertilizer at that time. But not now, and never with those !@@#$%^& spikes! Maybe you can tell, I'e been down this road here before, so please don't take it that I'm yelling at you. But if I could, I surely would lay into the knuckleheads that still sell this outright garbage.

BTW, you can take those spikes, crush them up, and use as a proper top-dressing style of fertilizer later on if you wish. The feeder roots, those roots which do the actual absorption of nutrients in the soil solution, are upward-facing and very shallow, like right under the surface.

Finally, one more point: Studies have shown that you can double the speed of plant establishment by mulching your plantings. You've done that and this is a good thing. But I wouldn't use fertilizer on a brand new transplant.

+oM

NEVER FERT a conifer... tree or shrub ...

unless a soil test indicates something is missing ... and then its called a soil amendment...

AND NEVER USE SPIKES.... marketing hocus pocus ... useless...

and NEVER FERT A RECENT TRANSPLANT... and read that as two years after planting ...

you are treating them like children.. they are not ... they will never need to be fed.. changed.. educated.. etc ... coming from the other end.. dont kill them with too much love ...

water properly ... and if there is enough sun there.. they will thrive

in a year or two.. if you start ferting that lawn ... they will have roots out there.. getting what they need ...

ken

Couple of things.....

First, the intent behind fertilizing is not to make a tree grow faster. The purpose behind fertilizing is to supply or replace soil nutrients that are missing or used up. If the trees are healthy, of good color and are growing normally, they are likely getting everything they need from the soil and fertilizing is unnecessary. Excessive N can certainly push rapid and lush foliar growth but growth stimulated in this fashion tends to be prone to insect problems and is vulnerable to both heat and cold extremes.

Second, when you do fertilize, it is best done in conjunction with the start of the growing season, not the end of it.

Finally, fertilizer spikes are a highly inefficient delivery method for required nutrients. Plants absorb nutrients through their root systems, which spread out in a roughly circular fashion from the base of the plant. With trees, these can be hugely wide circles, extending dozens of feet. Pounding in a tiny spike in one area is hardly going to distribute nutrients in a manner that the majority of the roots are able to access. A granulated all purpose fertilizer sprinkled lightly around the dripline (or in the case of arbs, maybe 12-18" away from the base of the plant) is a much better approach. If you already have the spikes, then convert them into a granulated form by pounding them up into small crumbs and apply as suggested above.

How long have these been planted? If recently, no fertilizing is required or suggested. What you can do is apply a good layer of a high quality organic mulch and let them be. The mulch will help to add nutrients to the soil and you may never need to fertilize - trees established in the landscape seldom require any fertilizing.

The need to fertilize is often greatly overstated, usually by the manufacturers of the fertilizer products :-) The way to be assured of any need to apply supplemental fertilizer is to have a soil test done to see what nutrients may be lacking, if any. And to watch your plants for signs that they may need something they are not getting. That will often show up with yellowed or off colored foliage and stunted or slower than normal growth. But you never want to fertilize as a matter of routine practice. Fertilizing when unneeded or unnecessary can create as many problems for plants as not fertilizing when needed.

Come to think of it, maybe I could have sat this one out, lol!

+om

Like minds think alike :-)