I see this consistently - oaks, usually. Why not plant trees that are short lived and grow quickly (mulberry, tulip poplar, etc.) instead? And almost always the trees they plant never make it to adulthood as some other landscaper will come in, remove them, and plant newer, slow growing trees.
Asked
Active
Viewed 534 times
8
-
1I'm with you on your point, but let's avoid planting mulberry trees in parking lots, okay? My deck is in full-swing "purple polka-dot poop" glory at the moment because of those gals. (Don't get me wrong, I love how much wildlife they attract - but purple poop... purple poop everywhere.) – Paul Nardini Jun 27 '16 at 04:38
-
Conversely in the Netherlands in the growth period after WW2 fast-growing poplar trees were planted everywhere in new suburbs and along new highways, and now they're dying and their wood has a bad reputation and people say we should've planted more slow-growing trees. – RemcoGerlich Jun 27 '16 at 07:19
-
3A mix of species is actually the best bet, but it requires long term thinking that's all too uncommon - slow, fast, medium, fast, slow... with a plan in mind to cut the fast trees as the others get bigger, and then later cut the medium when the slow ones get to the point that it's encroaching on their space. – Ecnerwal Jun 27 '16 at 13:12
-
@PaulNardini There are sterile, non-berry bearing mullberries. :-) – figtrap Jun 27 '16 at 14:13
2 Answers
8
I think this depends on the city and builders guidelines where you live. Where I live the standard tree in front of each new house was the Ash (Fraxinus) or the Linden. Cheap because they propagated easily and a fast grower. Oak trees and hard maples were usually an upgrade.
Sadly the Emerald Ash borer has decimated the Ash species which comprises up to one third of the tree stock in my city.
Your question implies that Oaks are slow growing which is not always the case. In my area a weedy tree can put on more than six inches a year of top growth but many oak species can do the same.
This site in missouri quotes growth rates of up to two feet a year for a number of species including oaks which I find astonishing but growth rates for trees vary widely depending on location, species and after care.
Most urban arborists understand that the best kind of trees to plant are a variety of species so one problem like the Emerald Ash Borer does not cause such a significant problem.
-
Maybe your cold winters keep them under control, but ash would be a terrible choice in the UK. Plant one, and get at hundreds of seedlings a year springing up everywhere the wind can blow the seeds. – alephzero Jun 27 '16 at 03:44
-
Yes, late to leave out, early to drop leaves, lots of seeds but cheap to buy and fast to grow. That's all developers and some cities are interested in. – kevinskio Jun 27 '16 at 09:52
2
What FUN!! You are incredibly observant!! One of the reasons I hated commercial work was that you sat at a table deciding what to plant, where to plant without being able to even go to the site. Deciding on types of trees and shrubs; number one priority was...what was on sale? Gross. Second, what would last for a long time before having to be replaced...(oaks, maples). I felt responsible for the HOMES given to the plants I chose from the nursery.
And THEN they stake these these these STICKS! Staking is so very wrong. Only to be used temporarily when using bare root plants or wind blown mature trees.
When I walk through a parking lot or development I CUT the straps of the stakes and around the tree and pull the dang mulch (non decomposed bark chips usually) away from the bottom of the trunk. Just doing those two things doubles, quadruples the life expectancy of any tree.
I stayed with residential. Cities were mind boggling retarded. Sorry, but true. Anyone can be a 'landscaper'. So sad. Landscraper...all one has to have is a mower, a weed wacker and a blower. Then people think these guys know what the hell they are talking about. So wow. So wrong. So much money is thrown at these idiots. When things don't go right, it is the client's fault, or the soil's fault, or better yet, the neighbor's fault.
stormy
- 40,098
- 3
- 31
- 75
-
I thought the stakes were there to limit damage by vandals. I often see trees snapped in half by hooligans. It's harder when you have three stakes surrounding the trees. – Graham Chiu Jun 27 '16 at 05:42
-
What? That is interesting...vandals? If someone wants to vandalize newly planted trees, staking won't help one bit. Those stakes damage the trees just fine by themselves! Imagining that those stakes will be montitored and not allowed to girdle those trees the primary no no is staking trees reduce the movement of the tree in response to wind. That movement causes deep, stronger roots...especially the roots meant for support versus taking up chemicals and water. The difference between staked trees and non-staked trees is incredible. Thicker (easily twice to three times the caliper)... – stormy Jun 28 '16 at 21:27
-
...and virtually no chance of being blown over. We get these little 'sticks' to plant as baby trees and then stake them down so they barely move. Baby trees have little to no resistance to the wind and staking is just dumb. Trees will grow straight without OUR HELP. That movement by the wind causes that tree to grow its own support system BIG TIME. As well as THICKER trunks. This is a fact. A normal situation is some company comes in, by specifications does staking then no one thinks of those trees again...to take the staking and girdling stuff off. A big wind and duh, tree in half. – stormy Jun 28 '16 at 21:30
-
You don't have the wind we have! No amount of staking is going to stop our trees from moving. – Graham Chiu Jun 28 '16 at 21:32
-
How the heck do you think I don't know about wind sweetie? No amount of wind could blow a stick with a healthy, grown in clay (normal), root ball! The artificial 'movement' because of stakes is relative to being a normal tree free to move. The only trees that need staking are bare root and mature trees downed already. Check out the difference between staked trees and non staked trees. This is sort of like giving our babies bottles and formula. We humans THINK we know more than the natural world! If the new tree has a big head and small root ball, thin to allow air to flow through. – stormy Jun 28 '16 at 21:38
-
Sorry sweetie, but you don't know what sort of ties we use. Staking is recommended for the first year of transplantation. – Graham Chiu Jun 28 '16 at 21:47
-
Sorry sweetie but I've seen any kind of tie that could possibly be used...to include panty hose. I don't care. You go get more information about the needs of trees...check out Michael Dirr. 'Staking is recommended for the first year' BY WHOM??? arghhhhhhhh...COME ON. I have had DECADES to observe the differences...you have not. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. How the heck are forests made without staking, huh? And all straight...??? – stormy Jun 28 '16 at 21:57
-
And trees fall down in forests all the time. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. – Graham Chiu Jun 28 '16 at 22:13
-
heh heh heh. Don't go there Graham. Bad argument. We sad humans are trying so hard to do our best with things we just have little credibility to be doing. 'When a tree falls in the forest and no one is around...gee is there a sound'? Go ahead and stake away, follow those city specifications. Don't listen to someone who has more education and experience in this stuff than you. I paid hundreds of thousands of bucks for the education, the experience and broken down body from decades of hands on learning was priceless. Just trying to help others THINK and pass on this knowledge. – stormy Jun 28 '16 at 22:22