I am in no way any kind of gardening expert, just a hobbyist that has done
it a few years and learned from reading or doing. However, something I
noticed and seem to think is getting worse over time is conflicting
information on the identical plants. I mean the same common and technical
named plants - ie, exactly the same, not just offshoots or slightly
different species, but identical . I am located in SE Wisconsin. I rely on
tags, nurseries, experience, books, mags, the net, etc for what I want to
plant and where. The information on size if very conflicting though I
notice. So, overall I am very much a gardening newbie.

For example, a few years back when I really knew nothing - I bought some
green velvet boxwoods and I still have the tag that came with that that says
grow 3 ft tall and 3 ft wide.. Both at local nurseries and on the net, I
have found the same plant with descriptions of the following:

1) 2-3 ft tall and wide
2) 3 ft tall and wide
3) 4ft tall and wide
4) 5 ft tall and wide
5) 3-5 ft tall and wide

I've seen many plants like this - another example is a Blue Muffin Vibirnum
that I've seen at:

1) 4-5 ft
2) 5-6 ft
3) 4-6 ft
4) 6-8 ft
5) 8-10 ft
6) 10-12 ft

All of these are from tags at various nurseries in my area over a few years
or even the same nursery at different times. I'm not so concerned when
you're talking 3 ft vs 4 ft or even 3 ft vs 5 ft - but 2 ft vs 5 ft and
4-5ft vs 10-12ft is a significant difference and affects what I plant and
where.

I've asked nursery owners locally and across the net on these and how I can
determine what to expect, but their answers conflict as well. Some example
explanations:

1) The tags from Oregon where the climate lets them get larger
2) The tags is based on no pruning
3) I've never seen one that (large, small - pick one)
4) On the boxwood at different nurseries - "It will stay around 3 ft" or "It
will definately get to 5 ft"
5) On the Blue Muffin - "those are small versions, only 5-6 ft tops" or
"those get 8-10 ft or larger"
6) "They say there so small because they grow slow, but they'll be much
larger over a few years"

I understand that climate, location, etc, etc will have an impact. I also
understand pruning is a way to keep size to desirable. How I look at it
though is that I don't want to unnecessarily create more work so if I have a
location that would fit a 5 ft plant nicely then I don't want to drop in a
plant I should expect to get to 10ft and then require 2x's the maintenance.
If I have a 5ft space to fill, I seek out a plant I like around that size,
not twice as large.

Any tips, advice, or resources where ones gets reliable information on plant
charateristics? Is the only way to figure this out by experience when
something becomes way overgrown for its spot and you have to dig it up? I
suppose its like our Wisconsin forecast though - 1 to 4 inches of snow in
the morning, 3 to 6 inches in the afternoon, and 4 to 8 inches overnight -
adds up to 8 to 18 inches! If only paychecks were the same where I make my
normal rate this week and then 60% more next week!

"Steve" wrote in message
. ..
I am in no way any kind of gardening expert, just a hobbyist that has done
it a few years and learned from reading or doing. However, something I
noticed and seem to think is getting worse over time is conflicting
information on the identical plants. I mean the same common and technical
named plants - ie, exactly the same, not just offshoots or slightly
different species, but identical . I am located in SE Wisconsin. I rely
on
tags, nurseries, experience, books, mags, the net, etc for what I want to
plant and where. The information on size if very conflicting though I
notice. So, overall I am very much a gardening newbie.

For example, a few years back when I really knew nothing - I bought
some
green velvet boxwoods and I still have the tag that came with that that
says
grow 3 ft tall and 3 ft wide.. Both at local nurseries and on the net, I
have found the same plant with descriptions of the following:

1) 2-3 ft tall and wide
2) 3 ft tall and wide
3) 4ft tall and wide
4) 5 ft tall and wide
5) 3-5 ft tall and wide

I've seen many plants like this - another example is a Blue Muffin
Vibirnum
that I've seen at:

1) 4-5 ft
2) 5-6 ft
3) 4-6 ft
4) 6-8 ft
5) 8-10 ft
6) 10-12 ft

All of these are from tags at various nurseries in my area over a few
years
or even the same nursery at different times. I'm not so concerned when
you're talking 3 ft vs 4 ft or even 3 ft vs 5 ft - but 2 ft vs 5 ft and
4-5ft vs 10-12ft is a significant difference and affects what I plant and
where.

I've asked nursery owners locally and across the net on these and how I
can
determine what to expect, but their answers conflict as well. Some example
explanations:

1) The tags from Oregon where the climate lets them get larger
2) The tags is based on no pruning
3) I've never seen one that (large, small - pick one)
4) On the boxwood at different nurseries - "It will stay around 3 ft" or
"It
will definately get to 5 ft"
5) On the Blue Muffin - "those are small versions, only 5-6 ft tops" or
"those get 8-10 ft or larger"
6) "They say there so small because they grow slow, but they'll be much
larger over a few years"

I understand that climate, location, etc, etc will have an impact. I also
understand pruning is a way to keep size to desirable. How I look at it
though is that I don't want to unnecessarily create more work so if I have
a
location that would fit a 5 ft plant nicely then I don't want to drop in a
plant I should expect to get to 10ft and then require 2x's the
maintenance.
If I have a 5ft space to fill, I seek out a plant I like around that size,
not twice as large.

Any tips, advice, or resources where ones gets reliable information on
plant
charateristics? Is the only way to figure this out by experience when
something becomes way overgrown for its spot and you have to dig it up? I
suppose its like our Wisconsin forecast though - 1 to 4 inches of snow in
the morning, 3 to 6 inches in the afternoon, and 4 to 8 inches overnight -
adds up to 8 to 18 inches! If only paychecks were the same where I make my
normal rate this week and then 60% more next week!

Oh, then it isn't just me! I often find myself looking up plant information
because I tend to be an opportunistic buyer who picks up the odd sale plant
or small plant being liquidated by a mail order producer at the end of the
season. For instance I got a Mock Orange (Minnesota Snowflake). I got
estimates of the size from three feet to 10 feet.

As for the Blue Muffin viburnum, I have a little expertise with that. I
picked up three plants, about six inches high, in tiny pots at the
Springhill Nursery clearance sale I put them in a new bed in July of 2003.
This spring they are up to six feet high and about two feet wide. I have
been amazed at their growth, especial since they are in a sheltered area
that gets only afternoon sun. I expect that they will continue to grow, so
a height of eight to ten feet wouldn't be unexpected. There is some
variation in their growth rate from plant to plant. The tallest being over
six feet and the shortest being about four feet. Each plant took a
different amount of time to get established. Now they are suckering from
the base and expanding from elongation of the old growth as well as the
addition of new growth. Mine are just about ready to bloom. I'm in SW
Ohio, zone 6.

Vox Humana wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
. ..
I am in no way any kind of gardening expert, just a hobbyist that
has done it a few years and learned from reading or doing.
However, something I noticed and seem to think is getting worse
over time is conflicting information on the identical plants. I
mean the same common and technical named plants - ie, exactly the
same, not just offshoots or slightly different species, but
identical . I am located in SE Wisconsin. I rely on tags,
nurseries, experience, books, mags, the net, etc for what I want
to plant and where. The information on size if very conflicting
though I notice. So, overall I am very much a gardening newbie.

For example, a few years back when I really knew nothing - I
bought some green velvet boxwoods and I still have the tag that
came with that that says grow 3 ft tall and 3 ft wide.. Both at
local nurseries and on the net, I have found the same plant with
descriptions of the following:

1) 2-3 ft tall and wide
2) 3 ft tall and wide
3) 4ft tall and wide
4) 5 ft tall and wide
5) 3-5 ft tall and wide

I've seen many plants like this - another example is a Blue Muffin
Vibirnum that I've seen at:

1) 4-5 ft
2) 5-6 ft
3) 4-6 ft
4) 6-8 ft
5) 8-10 ft
6) 10-12 ft

All of these are from tags at various nurseries in my area over a
few years or even the same nursery at different times. I'm not so
concerned when you're talking 3 ft vs 4 ft or even 3 ft vs 5 ft -
but 2 ft vs 5 ft and 4-5ft vs 10-12ft is a significant difference
and affects what I plant and where.

I've asked nursery owners locally and across the net on these and
how I can determine what to expect, but their answers conflict as
well. Some example explanations:

1) The tags from Oregon where the climate lets them get larger
2) The tags is based on no pruning
3) I've never seen one that (large, small - pick one)
4) On the boxwood at different nurseries - "It will stay around 3
ft" or "It will definately get to 5 ft"
5) On the Blue Muffin - "those are small versions, only 5-6 ft
tops" or "those get 8-10 ft or larger"
6) "They say there so small because they grow slow, but they'll be
much larger over a few years"

I understand that climate, location, etc, etc will have an impact.
I also understand pruning is a way to keep size to desirable. How
I look at it though is that I don't want to unnecessarily create
more work so if I have a location that would fit a 5 ft plant
nicely then I don't want to drop in a plant I should expect to get
to 10ft and then require 2x's the maintenance. If I have a 5ft
space to fill, I seek out a plant I like around that size, not
twice as large.

Any tips, advice, or resources where ones gets reliable
information on plant charateristics? Is the only way to figure
this out by experience when something becomes way overgrown for
its spot and you have to dig it up? I suppose its like our
Wisconsin forecast though - 1 to 4 inches of snow in the morning,
3 to 6 inches in the afternoon, and 4 to 8 inches overnight - adds
up to 8 to 18 inches! If only paychecks were the same where I make
my normal rate this week and then 60% more next week!

Oh, then it isn't just me! I often find myself looking up plant
information because I tend to be an opportunistic buyer who picks
up the odd sale plant or small plant being liquidated by a mail
order producer at the end of the season. For instance I got a Mock
Orange (Minnesota Snowflake). I got estimates of the size from
three feet to 10 feet.

As for the Blue Muffin viburnum, I have a little expertise with
that. I picked up three plants, about six inches high, in tiny
pots at the Springhill Nursery clearance sale I put them in a new
bed in July of 2003. This spring they are up to six feet high and
about two feet wide. I have been amazed at their growth, especial
since they are in a sheltered area that gets only afternoon sun. I
expect that they will continue to grow, so a height of eight to ten
feet wouldn't be unexpected. There is some variation in their
growth rate from plant to plant. The tallest being over six feet
and the shortest being about four feet. Each plant took a
different amount of time to get established. Now they are
suckering from the base and expanding from elongation of the old
growth as well as the addition of new growth. Mine are just about
ready to bloom. I'm in SW Ohio, zone 6.

Your Blue Miffin Viburnum might be getting tall because it is reaching
for the sun.

--

Travis in Shoreline (just North of Seattle) Washington
USDA Zone 8
Sunset Zone 5

"Travis" wrote in message
news:2O5je.918$6d.320@trnddc07...
Your Blue Miffin Viburnum might be getting tall because it is reaching
for the sun.

Could be, but they look full and healthy and are covered with flowers.

I can't help you with what the tags on plants say, but I have found a
site where users can make comments about plants and upload their own
pictures of them. Davesgarden.com

The only advice I have about bushes and tags is, if you want a bush
that will stay small, make sure it has "dwarf" in the name of the
plant.

Thanks for the link, I will check it out.

I have a Dwarf Burning Bush that says it gets to 8 ft though! And at
least around here a non-dwarf burning bush says 8-10 ft. So even that I
don't get.

I ran into yet another in a nursery, unfortunately it was a plant I never
heard of and thought I could recall the name, but now can't - the tag says
grows 3ft x 3 ft, the picture ON the SAME tag shows the plant pictured
against a house and in the picture it is clearly much larger than 3ft as it
is pictured against a house and as tall as the roof. The nursery written
sign said the plant gets 2 ft x 2 ft. The nursery staff shrugged off the
differnce and said yep, it gets somewhere between being a small to large
shrub. Their stock was already roughly 2 ft x 2 ft insize. So here again, is
it a 2ft plant or 8 ft plant - that's a major difference!

"SedumQueen" wrote in message
oups.com...
I can't help you with what the tags on plants say, but I have found a
site where users can make comments about plants and upload their own
pictures of them. Davesgarden.com

The only advice I have about bushes and tags is, if you want a bush
that will stay small, make sure it has "dwarf" in the name of the
plant.

"SedumQueen" wrote in message
oups.com...
I can't help you with what the tags on plants say, but I have found a
site where users can make comments about plants and upload their own
pictures of them. Davesgarden.com



I bought 6 rhododendrons from one nursery and every one of them turned out
to differ in flower color and size/growth habit from what the label
indicated. I don't buy from that nursery anymore.

"Anonny Moose" wrote in message
...
I bought 6 rhododendrons from one nursery and every one of them turned out
to differ in flower color and size/growth habit from what the label
indicated. I don't buy from that nursery anymore.
I probably frequent 10-15 nurseries and garden centers in my area over the
course of the season. I can't find that any one is more accurate than the
other, they just all have different info. I'm ok with something that says 3
ft but gets to 5 ft, but I don't like something that says 3 ft and really
gets to 8 ft. So, I don't think that I am even looking for too exact info -
I think I am just asking for it to be in the ballpark. If your topsoil costs
$3 vs $8 that's a big deal so I think 3ft vs 8ft is too.

I have the color issues too though - my white potentilla that has yellow
flowers, my yellow rose that is deep red, my daylillies that aren't even
close either. All purchased from different places. Sizing is just more my
issue because I don't want to create work for myself having a larger plant
in a smaller space and since I have a wide range of interest - it should be
easy enough for me to find a plant I like in the right size, if only I could
figure out what size is the real size.

Conflicting information is quite common. Even university botanists
disagree on the classification of plants.

I'm on a committee tasked with advising our county on the proper
care of public landscape along the main road into our community.
We have holly oaks (Quercus ilex) planted in the very wide flanking
medians (greenways) that separate the road from frontage roads.
The greenways are turfed. Some of the trees are dying.

We have consulted commercial tree growers, arborists, specialty
nurseries, reference books, and even the Center for Urban Forest
Research at the University of California at Davis. Some say that
irrigating the turf is killing the trees. Some say it's the mere
presence of turf within the trees' root zones that is killing
them. Others say that it's a lack of deep water and that
sufficient water to keep the turf alive will not harm planted trees
that were nursery grown. Some point to the fact that Q. ilex is
not a long-lived tree and that -- at 30+ years -- some should be
expected to decline. Others claim that Q. ilex should thrive for
75-100 years. These are all professionals, giving very conflicting
information.

--

David E. Ross
URL:http://www.rossde.com/

I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
complies with Web standards. See URL:http://www.mozilla.org/.

I wonder if it depends on the particular cultivar. The #1 source for woody
plant info, hands down, is Michael Dirr's, Manual of Woody Landscape
Plants: Their Identification, Ornamental Characteristics, Culture,
Propagation and Uses.

Suzy O, Zone 5 Wisconsin

"Steve" wrote in message
. ..
I am in no way any kind of gardening expert, just a hobbyist that has done
it a few years and learned from reading or doing. However, something I
noticed and seem to think is getting worse over time is conflicting
information on the identical plants. I mean the same common and technical
named plants - ie, exactly the same, not just offshoots or slightly
different species, but identical . I am located in SE Wisconsin. I rely
on
tags, nurseries, experience, books, mags, the net, etc for what I want to
plant and where. The information on size if very conflicting though I
notice. So, overall I am very much a gardening newbie.

For example, a few years back when I really knew nothing - I bought
some
green velvet boxwoods and I still have the tag that came with that that
says
grow 3 ft tall and 3 ft wide.. Both at local nurseries and on the net, I
have found the same plant with descriptions of the following:

1) 2-3 ft tall and wide
2) 3 ft tall and wide
3) 4ft tall and wide
4) 5 ft tall and wide
5) 3-5 ft tall and wide

I've seen many plants like this - another example is a Blue Muffin
Vibirnum
that I've seen at:

1) 4-5 ft
2) 5-6 ft
3) 4-6 ft
4) 6-8 ft
5) 8-10 ft
6) 10-12 ft

All of these are from tags at various nurseries in my area over a few
years
or even the same nursery at different times. I'm not so concerned when
you're talking 3 ft vs 4 ft or even 3 ft vs 5 ft - but 2 ft vs 5 ft and
4-5ft vs 10-12ft is a significant difference and affects what I plant and
where.

I've asked nursery owners locally and across the net on these and how I
can
determine what to expect, but their answers conflict as well. Some example
explanations:

1) The tags from Oregon where the climate lets them get larger
2) The tags is based on no pruning
3) I've never seen one that (large, small - pick one)
4) On the boxwood at different nurseries - "It will stay around 3 ft" or
"It
will definately get to 5 ft"
5) On the Blue Muffin - "those are small versions, only 5-6 ft tops" or
"those get 8-10 ft or larger"
6) "They say there so small because they grow slow, but they'll be much
larger over a few years"

I understand that climate, location, etc, etc will have an impact. I also
understand pruning is a way to keep size to desirable. How I look at it
though is that I don't want to unnecessarily create more work so if I have
a
location that would fit a 5 ft plant nicely then I don't want to drop in a
plant I should expect to get to 10ft and then require 2x's the
maintenance.
If I have a 5ft space to fill, I seek out a plant I like around that size,
not twice as large.

Any tips, advice, or resources where ones gets reliable information on
plant
charateristics? Is the only way to figure this out by experience when
something becomes way overgrown for its spot and you have to dig it up? I
suppose its like our Wisconsin forecast though - 1 to 4 inches of snow in
the morning, 3 to 6 inches in the afternoon, and 4 to 8 inches overnight -
adds up to 8 to 18 inches! If only paychecks were the same where I make my
normal rate this week and then 60% more next week!