Come play with conifers...

You got that right.

Oh - I consumed all the bars that came to me after a slight warming to melt the caramel/chocolate conflagration.

No guilt whatsoever...

Just curious, what brought Olmstead to Loovull? I'm guessing the prosperous horse industry money, back then, had something to do with it?

Chocolate accented by salt is one of the best 'inventions' of recent years

You guys are hilarious...and such a joy!!! Ya'all bring me sunshine. ☼

So are youse guys interested in seeing what's in my yard? It's nothing exciting, this would be a review of the simple ones for you. Resin could do 'em with two eyes tied behind his back (an interesting visual), and and the rest of you can easily do them with one eye tied behind your backs (still an interesting visual). And I will need all of my eyes, a reference book, and will still have to cross my fingers for luck before I "identify" them for you...even then I cringe...

The Salmagundi Club invited him down - not so much horse money (that was over in the central KY Bluegrass region, primarily) as bourbon, tobacco, railroad, and other manufacturing industries that might find a home on the Ohio River.

That was an organization composed of influential community leaders who recognized that quality of life was important for a growing town to attract new people and businesses. They traveled regularly to northeastern cities, and saw that attractive parks were an important component of many of these places. The Olmsted firm was responsible for designing a lot of the parks and park systems in those days, and that led to his visit to Louisville.

The rest - as they say - is history.

Olmsted was busy with a couple big and important commissions at the time Louisville came a-courting. Anyone remember the The White City - the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago? How about a little country house outside Asheville, NC? Biltmore ring a bell?

The travel arrangements from Boston to Chicago to Asheville kind of took him right through this part of the world anyway, so I'm sure that made it easy for him and his posse to entertain these River City ruffians.

We like to say: Olmsted practiced through trial and error on all those other places, and came to Louisville when he'd gotten it right.

I vote for momlady to start her own thread - and let the games of "tied eyes" begin...

It's always amazing to me that the issues never change. The fight between grabbing money and having beauty, for example. Ken Burns' documentary about the national parks is fascinating. It feels like our natural treasures have been protected forever, but the fight to protect them versus to exploit them was huge - and recent.

hm interesting stuff--that maybe I can try to make an article out of....

Yes, momlady, make a thread and let me collect my eyes, books, videos, and large amount of luck.

Hi Sallyg, I got that thread started, it's called "my yard and your tied eyes." Hop on over and join in!

Here are some more images of Conifer #1.

Abies concolor

Resin

Does anyone know were I can purchase Pinus 'Shear Murder', I've searched all over the internet for days....with no luck. ;)

You could have gotten many of those illustrated at 9 feet for $90.00 - if you'd ordered when I did.

Maybe next year...

I have been looking at those Abies concolor pics. I am a novice at these identifications. Here's what I see so far:

It seems that the needles are rounded at the end, not pointed or notched.

They are plain on the top, without those stomatal bands.

The needles curve up and don't stay on a flat plane.

From the pictures, those needles look about 2 cm. long. (But, after consulting my reference that states they are 2 or even 3 times that long, so it's clear that I can't estimate lengths from pictures very well.)

The tops look "plain green," not blue green, and the bottoms are a little bluer.

What are the other things I should be looking for to distinguish the different firs?

Mipii- Pinus 'Shear Murder' is an a 'natural hybrid' of Pinus anyofthemia x P. anyotherofthemia. It pops up everywhere, in yards and public places. It is so common you don't even need to buy one. You can have as many as you want, just hire a discount landscaper service, and suddenly they will appear. The cultural conditions that are required for the 'hybridization' will also cause rapid appearance of 'hybrids' like Acer palmatum 'Flyingsauceris' and Abies x ohnotheytoppeditus. ;)

I can assure everyone here that the institution I work for and the staff employed there do not generate plant characteristics such as are parodied above.

While I appreciate the humor and intent behind mlmlakestevens's comments above, I believe there is a distinction to be made between ill-advised landscape management of established plants with excessive use of shearing and the current condition of the conifers illustrated above that have just been planted after nursery production.

I wonder if many gardeners know that there is a difference, and a legitimate horticultural reason. I suspect Resin does, even though he may not agree or support the practice.

Looking forward to this lesson VV (even though I appreciate the humor too). I'd assume the nursery would shear the conifer for a variety of reasons, please feel free to correct me if I'm off base...lol!

They grow specimens close together for space saving purposes and strength in numbers. I would also assume the closer you grow one specimen to another, the straighter they will grow without the need for staking. Water usage is also more conserved when watering the actual root zone, instead of space between them. Shearing would encourage more stem growth, hence a fuller habit that's generally more pleasing to the average consumer. One more thing I can think of would be that shearing might also preserve limbs when growing conifers in close proximity.

A side note:
Thanks to all of you, and a special thanks to VV and Resin, I've decided to (and have for the past week) volunteer(ed) at a small nursery and greenhouse close to home. Now I can hone my skills and put into practice all the wonderful things I have learned on DG. Just so you know that imparting your wisdom has not fallen on deaf ears...it has invigorated and motivated me to practice more and pass on all the good stuff gained. Here's to passion and Mentors!

This message was edited Jun 1, 2014 4:58 PM

I could not think of any other reasons besides those on Mipii's list. Nursery shearing does not seem to do any long-term damage-just look at all the live Christmas trees that became nice landscape trees.

It will be interesting to hear Mipii relate what she learns as she pursues her latest passion.

As to nursery production techniques: I will list the comments stated above, but most were not reasons why conifers in particular - and many other plants in general - are grown the way you find them when purchased. All my comments below refer to field grown plants - unless otherwise stated - since that is how the conifers in question were grown.

**Specimens are grown close together for space saving purposes and strength in numbers.

Nursery plants are spaced in rows at the distance apart that makes them convenient to harvest when they have reached a specified saleable size. A common standard size for conifers is 6 feet tall. There will be an industry standard width (branch spread around the base) that goes with that height - say, 4 feet wide - so conifers will be lined out accordingly in their rows. If a nursery intends to keep any of these trees to larger sizes, they will try to sell every other one in a row so that the remaining trees can grow wider without shading out their sides. No "strength in numbers" considerations, and not really even a space-saving purpose. More space is "wasted" between rows of plants to allow for cultivation/tillage, spraying, other production processes like pruning, spraying, fertilizing - and that width is based on standard industry equipment which must fit down these rows for the entire life of that plant in the nursery. Imagine that as the wheelbase width of a typical tractor.

**The closer you grow one specimen to another, the straighter they will grow without the need for staking.

While this is actually what happens out there in nature, it isn't what nursery growers do. No one would purchase (as a specimen B&B plant) the ramrod straight but lightly branched and foliaged plants that would result from this production technique. Bare root seedlings are often produced this way, but not much if anything else. The same principle applies in this instance as in the previous one: spacing is dependent on the final saleable target size. Staking will occur if a trunk doesn't grow straight on its own.

**Water usage is also more conserved when watering the actual root zone, instead of space between them.

While that statement makes sense, it doesn't apply. I'm not certain that there is a standard watering regimen from nursery to nursery for field-grown plants. Some still use overhead broadcast sprinklers; some will bring a tank of water to apply as needed in drought situations; some don't irrigate AT ALL. Most are moving toward a drip type system that only applies moisture at each plant, and minimizes the use of water and subsequent runoff - which is massively regulated.

**Shearing would encourage more stem growth, hence a fuller habit that's generally more pleasing to the average consumer.

Shearing - reducing the length that a branch wants to grow, and forcing more side branching to increase density of branches and foliage - does encourage a thicker trunk and more branches and foliage per trunk height than normally would have been the case if no intervention were made. It is generally more pleasing to the average consumer - mostly because advertising tells you to like that versus a "Charlie Brown Christmas tree" appearance.

**Shearing might also preserve limbs when growing conifers in close proximity.

Again, the conifers are planted at the spacing for final harvesting. If there were some reason that the plants weren't sold, the shearing would have been done anyway and wouldn't save limbs due to proximity.

The primary reason that plants in general - and conifers in particular in this instance - are sheared (or pruned heavily ) in a field-growing nursery situation...is to produce much more foliage on the plant. This heavier than normal foliage is necessary for survival of the nursery plant ONCE IT IS SOLD AND TRANSPLANTED.

It is very poorly understood by the general gardening consumer that B&B plants typically have less than 20% of their root systems coming with them in their root ball of soil. With this being the case, having lots of foliage to help generate energy in the plant to grow new roots is really important. Watering the root ball to keep the relatively few roots alive is equally important, as well as having those truncated roots able to take up moisture to support the foliage in its work.

OK - anyone still with me? Questions are welcome, and input from growers is encouraged to present experiences here.

"It is very poorly understood by the general gardening consumer that B&B plants typically have less than 20% of their root systems coming with them in their root ball of soil."

Which is the reason I really, really dislike planting B & B's. I readily admit I don't understand the B & B process, which no doubt affects my planting success. Still, I will always take a well grown container plant, even conifers, over B & B when I know the nursery is diligent in managing their container stock. Gerten's in the St Paul area is especially good at this. I'm sure there are limitations to how large they can grow conifers in a container, but up to roughy 5', I'll take Gerten's container plants to a B & B.

My .02.

VV those last two paragraphs are pretty mindblowing.

Pseudo, imagine how many consumers are fooled by a chopped up plant stuffed into a pot for the Box Store lot. I know I was- a Santa Rosa plum came out of its pot, clods fell off and I found the trunk with several whacked off roots and that was about all, and the trunk buried halfway down the pot, well above its root flare. And still the thing became a monster.

Okay, cool...thanks for the info. That does make sense to leave in place for the optimum sale size balance if field grown w/ room for maintenance. I was obviously thinking more on the lines of container grown, but your logic would still apply there (except the purpose for shearing).

Just to be clear, B&B (balled and burlap) are field grown then uprooted; cutting about 80% off the roots and burlap wrapped, correct? Is this the preferred type of purchase by perhaps you VV and Resin? I ask because I'm with Pseudo for the container grown specimens myself. Although, container grown stock can be a disadvantage when the plant wasn't bumped up in a timely manner. Root bound specimens can be inhibited from taking up nutrients and water. The healthier the specimen, the easier the transplant.

I've never run across the scenario described by Sally...I'm almost certain that plant would be in shock.

I often hear the recommendation to do a hard pruning prior to transplanting a tree so the limited roots can support the foliage's hydration & nutritional needs adequately. Is that a bogus concept? Sounds from above arguments: the more foliage, the better survival.

That would be an entirely new school of thought regarding transplant survival Wee, at least new to me. The principle behind that would likely be energy transference from leaf production to root, like you said.

However, If the tree/plant is fully hydrated the day before transplant and a root stimulating fertilizer is applied after a good soaking post transplant...that sounds better/efficient to me.

To answer Wee's question: I believe it is a bogus concept to prune off branching "to balance the plant" on a B&B transplant.

It is better to have all the branches/foliage go with the newly installed transplant, and LET THE PLANT SHOW YOU WHAT IT WILL SUPPORT.

Suppose you were to do the pruning, and then the plant doesn't support what you left? You can always prune off (more) - you can't put it back. I would not prune off anything except already dead or broken branches when transplanting B&B plants.

Once the plant begins new growth, assessment of what is happening can be made and some judgements about subsequent pruning made also. If a double leader is present, and new growth is occurring on both stems, then that's the time to take corrective action. Same with crossing branches, or maybe some other directional pruning.

I wouldn't undertake normal branch thinning or structural pruning on a B&B transplant until it has regained the rate of growth it had prior to being transplanted. This usually equates to a year per caliper inch on a deciduous tree.

Thank you this is really interesting!
p.s. I like the Charlie Brown Christmas au natural trees better than the sheared ones because there is room for more ornaments to dangle.

Charlie Brown Christmas trees have character too.

Your two opinions do not a sustainable commercial enterprise make...

The point is: people buy plants with lots of foliage. Plants with lots of foliage transplant better. Nursery growers produce plants with lots of foliage for successful transplantation.

You can always prune the he!! out of a densely sheared tree after you've successfully grown it for a few years, and make it as thin as you could ever want. Conversely, you are likely to blame the grower when your thinly foliaged tree "always just dies" when transplanted, and demand your money back.

Beyond everything else you might be thinking about...there is typically always breakage in shipping and transportation. Imagine the Charlie Brown tree - already full of character but short on branches - when it arrives with its few branches disheveled, crushed, and/or snapped. Not the desired result. Alternatively, a sheared tree has a full complement of branches - in fact cushioning each other when bound up for transport - and while no breakage is the object, it can in fact withstand a broken twig/branch here or there and still survive and most times still look good.

There needs to be a way to arrange regional DG trips to growing operations. I think scales would fall from eyes, and a new appreciation for the efforts of nursery growers may just be found.

The schools of thought for the various types of conditions for buying trees? It varies with the circumstances that you are planting into. For the parks department, we have to buy trees that can withstand the vagaries of YOU, the public. Amazingly, there are park users that have apparently nothing better to do with their time than to vandalize (or steal outright) things found in parks - including trees. So, the larger sized conifers you see are planted specifically for that reason. We hope these are big enough not to "walk" or be cut for holiday decorations. No nursery I know of will be growing this size conifer in containers, so we are confined to B&B in this instance.

For deciduous trees, we aim for 2" caliper trees of the species we want to plant, and will vary from that size in order to get the species we want (larger or smaller). There are many species grown in this size range (diversity; we like that). Since this size range is popular, nurseries grow many trees at this size (choice among a single species; we like that a lot). That also ties into availability - which we like the most, since we don't get to travel the world to buy trees. It is becoming more common to find well-grown trees in this size in adequately sized containers, but not common enough. We would buy only Rootmaker/Roottrapper style container grown trees if given the choice, but there aren't all the species, quantities, and sizes we need in this condition - so we still buy a lot of B&B plants.

The container media is lighter - so more work can be done with less effort. In a container, no roots are lost - so less transplant shock and greater survivability in the park landscape. In a container, you can go plant that tree ANY TIME YOU WANT.

The difference in container media from native soils can create an issue if you aren't prepared to care for that plant until it roots well into the surrounding soils. Some overcome this issue by total removal of the container media when planting, which can be risky at some times of year - and a real bad idea if your soils are not very granular to settle in around the now-bare roots.

Great questions and comments all around. I'm glad to present new information, blow up some misconceptions, and appreciate the diversity of viewpoints - all while sipping a nice Tempranillo...

That's funny, I'm perusing the information while sipping a fine distillation of Laphroaig.

A Scots whisky gentleman...you need some chocolate truffles to run with that.

Hmm ... not a bad suggestion. But sadly, none available at the present...

Perhaps a mere image will suffice...

Left to right includes Bourbon, Grand Marnier, Kahlua, Simple Chocolate, Bailey's, and a couple Bourbon with Sea Salt way in the back corner.

Darn, I'm way behind you guys this evening on all of these goodies. I'd better get cracking!

What a good brain to pick...great info. Somehow, I always need great info. Keep sippin' gentlemen, Hopefully it makes you a little more chatty. BTW, I'll take the Simple Chocolate, I love misnomers.

Decaf Irish Tea for me tonight. Hold on while I go get some chocolate...
OK, back to business. Thanks for the info on professional growing. Very interesting. I never would have thought of the cushioning issue. I get my Charlie Brown trees by cutting down a volunteer in the yard. I am aware of the vandal/theft issue. My local Rail-to-Trail planted a very expensive, very long line of 6 foot tall shrubs to disguise an industrial park, and over the next month every one was stolen. Most folks would like to go to Las Vegas or Disneyland for vacation, I would like to visit gardens and take tours of nurseries, escorted by the people who work there (or you guys).