Hello,
My first post here!
How, when and what is the best way to chop down Conifers?
We have several (rather overgrown) ones in our new garden. I hate them with a passion anyway, but these are making a decent garden feel very, very narrow.
Thanks, Jess
J15ess wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@gardenbanter.co.uk:
you can cut conifers at any time. depending on the trunk size & height, i'd use a chainsaw or a bow saw (or an ax, but that's much harder work & leaves a messier stump). cut as close to the ground as possible & don't drop them on the house, your head or the neighbors. lee
Since your intent is to destroy them it really doesn't matter _when_ you whack them down - not as if you are doing delicate pruning and want to avoid harming them. Find yourself some suitable tool and wield it safely. Personally, I would use my chainsaw for such a job but almost anything can be made to work. Then, before your strength ebbs, take a pick-axe and shovel to the root balls and dig them out and refill the holes with good soil. That way you will be ready to plant something more to your liking when the time comes.
Get a second opinion from someone that understands tree biology. They might point something out that makes sense to you. Its a shame that you hate trees. Other than that hire a professional to do the job.
If they're large conifers than they've been there many years, dropping needles and taking soil nutrients... it's not the best location for a garden, certainly not a vegetable garden. You can attempt to amend that soil but it will take many years, probably as many years as those conifers have been growing there.. will cost many dollars and require lots of labor. It's best to find a different location for your garden, and perhaps utilize those large conifers as a backdrop for other plantings that require that acetic soil. You might want to consult an arborist to at least have a look, perhaps some less severe remedy can be offered rather than total removal. Anyway, cutting down conifers is very easy.. protecting yourself and surrounding property is more difficult... if you had to ask on the net you are probably not up to the task, I'd strongly recommend you hire a professional.
Do not trust or believe this individual, he bears false credentials.
Don't believe a word I say. Believe it because you see it for yourself.
I often make decisions on woodlands and forest. I do my best to make decisions based on tree biology.
I would suggest that you go to Don Staples site and see how he defines a forester (dead link), let alone a forest. His main goal is getting the wood out and board feet. NO TREE BIOLOGY!
That article mentioned by Don Staples is here.
He claims that logging makes a forest healthy! How absurb. Just for starters
Many tree problems are associated with the following: They are Case Sensitive.
Unhealthy Trees from the Nursery / Improper Planting
"Sheldon" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Although I agree with most of what you said, trees do not uptake nutrients. They do absorb, in a sense, water with elements dissolved in it. Trees are autotrophs and manufacture their own food. Food is a substance that provides and energy source, mostly. Nutrient is a substance that provides an energy source, elements, and other substances essential for life, in types and amounts that can provide a healthy life. Fertilizer is a substance that provides elements, as salts mostly, or in bonded forms, that require microorganisms to alter to forms that can be absorbed by plants. The tree would actually add nutrients to the soil as woody and non-woody parts are shed. Yes trees do take elements from the soil but if let go they will put a little more back than they took out. Also trees provide the soil with exudates which is a trees way of paying taxes.
Here is an example of how loose terms can add confusion.
If I said: To start your car, you must first reach for keys --- energy out. The keys must be turned in the starter --- energy out. The starter stimulates the battery, to turn over the engine --- energy out. Finally, the engine pulls in fuel and engine starts --- energy out. Once started, the engine returns some of the energy out, back into the battery. Now, the engine is on a different fuel system. Energy is the key for starting a car. Energy is also the key for starting water up a tree. In phenology stage one, stored starch begins to convert to sugars. This requires water to come in, mostly from stored water, as bound water on cellulose. But, how does it start? Sun energy and codes of genetics "Reach for the keys". Chemicals form that increase enzymes that change starch to sugar. Sugar in water starts osmotic and other pressures that pull more water off cellulose and from the soil. It takes energy anytime matter moves. To pass through the casparian strip, more energy is required. As sugar is "burned" ATP comes off. The tree is still in the "battery" stage. In time new leaves form and the "fuel" stage starts. But, what about trees that form flowers before leaves? With such trees, the pressures formed as sugar goes into water, moves the water to the flowers. The same type of actions go on for maple sap collection. (See maple syrup) The living symplast maintains the pressures in the water - moving (NUTRIENTS) by regulating their size. Now "the car is moving" and energy starts to go back into the system. [WHEN I USED THE WORD NUTRIENT, what am I referring too?]
nutrient was the wrong term. The correct term is elements. E.g., The living symplast maintains the pressures in the water - moving elements by regulating their size. It is more lucid if the word elements is used to describe elements. Rather than confusing people and calling elements, nutrients.
Again as the last two posters stated, don't believe a word I say.
Neither trust nor believe this individual, he posts under false credentials.
Do not trust or believe this individual, he posts from false credentials.
Don't believe a word I say. Believe it because you see it for yourself.
I often make decisions on woodlands and forest. I do my best to make decisions based on tree biology.
I would suggest that you go to Don Staples site and see how he defines a forester, let alone a forest. His main goal is getting the wood out and board feet. NO TREE BIOLOGY!
That article mentioned by Don Staples is here.
He claims that logging makes a forest healthy! How absurb. Just for starters
Many tree problems are associated with the following: They are Case Sensitive.
Unhealthy Trees from the Nursery / Improper Planting
Don't believe a word I say. Believe it because you see it for yourself.
I often make decisions on woodlands and forest. I do my best to make decisions based on tree biology.
I would suggest that you go to Don Staples site and see how he defines a forester, let alone a forest. His main goal is getting the wood out and board feet. NO TREE BIOLOGY!
That article mentioned by Don Staples is here.
He claims that logging makes a forest healthy! How absurb. Just for starters
Many tree problems are associated with the following: They are Case Sensitive.
Unhealthy Trees from the Nursery / Improper Planting
Do not believe, or trust, this individual, he posts from false credentials.
Do not believe or trust this individual, he posts from false credentials.
Truly a match made in . . . . hmmm.
That's right Don, you are a true forester! Just define on your website what you are?
\ That's right Don, you are a true forester! Just define on your website what you are?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.