I want to buy a large (6" or greater diameter) live oak for my S-SW Austin
backyard. Does anyone know where to get one that big, and have it installed.

p.s. - I have heard about very big oaks being moved/transplanted before,
even 16-24 inch and larger diameter ones, but how is this done without
damaging some roots?
And I don't want to deal with Teds Trees again, as they often sell lemons
that die within a year. The survival of one of their trees is a 50/50
proposition, is seems, because they simply dig up sizeable trees to sell at
the lot, and they are not very careful transplanting. I have several
personal and neighbor experiences that will bear witness to this.

Thanks!
gologa

"If you want it done right,do it yourself."g
It's not impossible to educate yourself using the web and a few phone calls
to A&M.
Next would be equipment rental................................
Good luck.

wws

"gologa" wrote in message
...
I want to buy a large (6" or greater diameter) live oak for my S-SW Austin
backyard. Does anyone know where to get one that big, and have it
installed.

p.s. - I have heard about very big oaks being moved/transplanted before,
even 16-24 inch and larger diameter ones, but how is this done without
damaging some roots?
And I don't want to deal with Teds Trees again, as they often sell lemons
that die within a year. The survival of one of their trees is a 50/50
proposition, is seems, because they simply dig up sizeable trees to sell
at
the lot, and they are not very careful transplanting. I have several
personal and neighbor experiences that will bear witness to this.

Thanks!
gologa

"gologa" wrote in message
...
| I want to buy a large (6" or greater diameter) live oak for my S-SW
Austin
| backyard. Does anyone know where to get one that big, and have it
installed.
|
| p.s. - I have heard about very big oaks being moved/transplanted
before,
| even 16-24 inch and larger diameter ones, but how is this done
without
| damaging some roots?
| And I don't want to deal with Teds Trees again, as they often sell
lemons
| that die within a year. The survival of one of their trees is a
50/50
| proposition, is seems, because they simply dig up sizeable trees to
sell at
| the lot, and they are not very careful transplanting. I have several
| personal and neighbor experiences that will bear witness to this.
|
| Thanks!
| gologa
|
|

Live oaks grow much faster than people commonly believe. We have
photos of our house from circa 1930 and the now-supergiant oaks
appeared puny by comparison back then. For pecan-tree reasons we've
consulted more than one arborist lately & they've confirmed what the
picture evidence shows, so why not start out with trees of a size that
can be managed?

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:57:24 GMT, "Texensis"
wrote:

Live oaks grow much faster than people commonly believe.

Yes, and the occassional reference to 400 year-old specimens always
rings a little funny to me.

A healthy young live oak, properly transplanted should be growing at a
rate of diameter increase of at least 1/2 inch per year. Thus a 2"
container plant transplanted correctly with good soils and care should
approach 8" diameter in less than 10 years.

A little patience is much better than paying to transplant an 8"
diameter tree.

Rusty Mase


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

I have to defend Ted's Trees only because I've had my own garden center where
people would return with perfectly healthy specimens and the death happened
because the plants were not watered properly. Not saying you did this, but I
will say with the many years of growing experience I had, over or under watering
causes ninety percent of the trees to die.

That said, a tree the size you are looking for will be in the 400 dollar range.
The transplanted by tree spade (huge truck costing a hundred thousand dollars)
can move trees the size you describe, but it can cost twenty thousand dollars.

What proof do you have that Ted's Trees "dig up..." trees? Is this from the
wild? Or do they heel their trees in because that would be the correct way to
store large specimens? Those are some pretty big accusations and I'd like to
know what proof you or neighbors have of this happening?


On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:41:54 -0500, "gologa" wrote:

I want to buy a large (6" or greater diameter) live oak for my S-SW Austin
backyard. Does anyone know where to get one that big, and have it installed.

p.s. - I have heard about very big oaks being moved/transplanted before,
even 16-24 inch and larger diameter ones, but how is this done without
damaging some roots?
And I don't want to deal with Teds Trees again, as they often sell lemons
that die within a year. The survival of one of their trees is a 50/50
proposition, is seems, because they simply dig up sizeable trees to sell at
the lot, and they are not very careful transplanting. I have several
personal and neighbor experiences that will bear witness to this.

Thanks!
gologa

"Rusty Mase" wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:57:24 GMT, "Texensis"
| wrote:
|
| Live oaks grow much faster than people commonly believe.
|
| Yes, and the occassional reference to 400 year-old specimens always
| rings a little funny to me.
|
| A healthy young live oak, properly transplanted should be growing at
a
| rate of diameter increase of at least 1/2 inch per year. Thus a 2"
| container plant transplanted correctly with good soils and care
should
| approach 8" diameter in less than 10 years.
|
snip

These trees, spindly and short in the photo, are now at least two and
a half stories tall and not one has a trunk that anybody can come
close to getting one's arms around. The canopy of each of course
extends much, much farther than in the photo.

In article , "gologa"
wrote:

I want to buy a large (6" or greater diameter) live oak for my S-SW Austin
backyard. Does anyone know where to get one that big, and have it installed.

p.s. - I have heard about very big oaks being moved/transplanted before,
even 16-24 inch and larger diameter ones, but how is this done without
damaging some roots?
And I don't want to deal with Teds Trees again, as they often sell lemons
that die within a year. The survival of one of their trees is a 50/50
proposition, is seems, because they simply dig up sizeable trees to sell at
the lot, and they are not very careful transplanting. I have several
personal and neighbor experiences that will bear witness to this.

Thanks!
gologa



You are doing more than damaging some roots - the link I provide below (by
Dr. Gary Watson from the Morton Arboretum) says that greater than 98% of
the root system will be left behind when transplanting a tree of this
size: he says a 4 inch caliper tree has an 18 foot root spread. If the
transplant root ball is 44 inches you can see how much you have left
behind. Further the article also says, that roots grow about 18 inches a
year. So it will take a very long amount of time (five years) to come
back in balance. Naturally, till the crown and root are in balance you
need very intensive care for a sucessful transplant - clearly the people
who are complaining about Teds trees may not realize how badly out of
balance the root system is relative to the canopy and may not realize how
intensively they need to care for the tree to compensate.

Here is the link to the article:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fid/may97/transhck.html

Roland

gologa wrote:
I want to buy a large (6" or greater diameter) live oak for my S-SW Austin
backyard. Does anyone know where to get one that big, and have it installed.

p.s. - I have heard about very big oaks being moved/transplanted before,
even 16-24 inch and larger diameter ones, but how is this done without
damaging some roots?

It's usually never worth it to transplant a large tree. Sure, you get the
immediate shade, but the tree itself will almost never recover from the
shock, assuming it lives.

You'll be better off getting a smaller tree and just waiting for it to grow.
In a few years, you'll have something much larger than any tree that you
transplant.

Joe D
--
Don't EVER give your wallet to a stranger.

They are probably referring to oaks found up north, not Live Oaks.


"Rusty Mase" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:57:24 GMT, "Texensis"
wrote:

Live oaks grow much faster than people commonly believe.

Yes, and the occassional reference to 400 year-old specimens always
rings a little funny to me.

A healthy young live oak, properly transplanted should be growing at a
rate of diameter increase of at least 1/2 inch per year. Thus a 2"
container plant transplanted correctly with good soils and care should
approach 8" diameter in less than 10 years.

A little patience is much better than paying to transplant an 8"
diameter tree.

Rusty Mase


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---

"Molly Fredericks" wrote in message
...
| They are probably referring to oaks found up north, not Live Oaks.
|
|

No; Texas live oak. You can see lots of evidence of this sort by
picking a house you know now that has a live oak and then going to the
Austin History Center and finding a photo of that house in the 1890's,
1920's, or whenever.


| "Rusty Mase" wrote in message
| ...
| On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:57:24 GMT, "Texensis"
| wrote:
|
| Live oaks grow much faster than people commonly believe.
|
| Yes, and the occassional reference to 400 year-old specimens
always
| rings a little funny to me.
|

| A healthy young live oak, properly transplanted should be growing
at a
| rate of diameter increase of at least 1/2 inch per year. Thus a
2"
| container plant transplanted correctly with good soils and care
should
| approach 8" diameter in less than 10 years.
|
| A little patience is much better than paying to transplant an 8"
| diameter tree.
|
| Rusty Mase
|
|
| ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure
Usenet
| News==----
| http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
100,000
| Newsgroups
| ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via
Encryption
| =---
|
|

Texensis wrote:
No; Texas live oak. You can see lots of evidence of this sort by
picking a house you know now that has a live oak and then going to the
Austin History Center and finding a photo of that house in the 1890's,
1920's, or whenever.

2003 - 1890 = 113 years. Not 400. Not even close.

--
Victor M. Martinez

http://www.che.utexas.edu/~martiv

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 22:31:05 +0000 (UTC), (Victor M.
Martinez) wrote:


2003 - 1890 = 113 years. Not 400. Not even close.

I was told, and it may not be true that, live oaks are difficult to age unless
you cut it down and count sections. Some years it can grow in a spurt which
burst open it's own bark. During years of drought, the tree may not put out any
new diameter, only enough of a ring to determine what kind of year it was.

So, the live oak trees we have on our property are numbered by Williamson County
and we have an idea. One of the multi trunked trees is upwards of two hundred,
the ones in the front are about 200 years old. The trees are the only reason we
bought this house. I nurture them as if they were precious jewels. I don't
water shallowly, or over fertilize AND never use weed and feed products.

I also have a core aeration done once a year. It's cheap at about 40 dollars to
have someone come in and use a plug core aerator. The payback is remarkable in
how the turf needs less water due to the compost I lay down and fill the plug
holes with.

V

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:47:05 GMT, animaux
wrote:

I was told, and it may not be true that, live oaks are difficult to age unless
you cut it down and count sections.

That is true and I wonder if anyone verified the purported age of
Treaty Oak by sectioning one of the larger main branches they had to
remove. But I never saw a report on it and I think the politically
correct position of claiming it is 400 to 700 years old was protected.

I had a 36" dbh live oak that I babied for ten years after I moved in
my home and it died of oak wilt in 1986. I sectioned it for aging it
and then split the tree into fire wood. My best estimate was the tree
was born prior to 1825 but after 1820. By about 1836, the tree was
large enough for some camper to use a brace and bit to drill a hole in
the tree that was used to hold a support for a cooking pot that he
built a fire under - killing the bark on that side of the tree. Then
someone took an adze to the tree, etc. There was alot of history
buried in that wood - sort of the science of dendroarcheology as trees
have the capacity of burying their wounds.

By the 1870's the tree was large enough to attract other campers,
including military units, as I have retrieved a number of artifacts
buried in the soil under where the tree stood. That could have been
George Custer, himself.

Rusty Mase


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 10:43:44 -0500, Rusty Mase wrote:

I had a 36" dbh live oak that I babied for ten years after I moved in
my home and it died of oak wilt in 1986. I sectioned it for aging it
and then split the tree into fire wood. My best estimate was the tree
was born prior to 1825 but after 1820. By about 1836, the tree was
large enough for some camper to use a brace and bit to drill a hole in
the tree that was used to hold a support for a cooking pot that he
built a fire under - killing the bark on that side of the tree. Then
someone took an adze to the tree, etc. There was alot of history
buried in that wood - sort of the science of dendroarcheology as trees
have the capacity of burying their wounds.

By the 1870's the tree was large enough to attract other campers,
including military units, as I have retrieved a number of artifacts
buried in the soil under where the tree stood. That could have been
George Custer, himself.

Rusty Mase



You raise an interesting point. I would think that could be an excellent way to
determine age. That, or they may not have done it because the limb may not have
been as old as the base trunk? I've personally never seen the tree. Tell me
where it is?

I do know the first crime I recall hearing on the news when we moved down here
was about that nut who poisoned it. Fortunately, it didn't die.

Anthropology and archeology are two topics I wish I would have taken more
interest in when in school. I mean, there's probably just as LITTLE money in it
as horticulture and growing! In growing, the only people making the money are
the owners of the huge greenhouse operations.

Eh, I'm tired and they're climbing the hill in Tewer Duh Frayance...said as
Brooklyn as I can just for Steven!

V

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 02:12:37 GMT, animaux
wrote:

You raise an interesting point. I would think that could be an excellent way to
determine age. That, or they may not have done it because the limb may not have
been as old as the base trunk? I've personally never seen the tree. Tell me
where it is?

Baylor St. between 6th and 7th (one block west of Lamar)
For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www2.champaign.isa-arbor.com/.
For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www2.champaign.isa-arbor.com/.../consumer.html