Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Peter Jason" wrote in message
It is about 1/2 meter tall and the top is growing fast. I don't have a garden and it lives in a pot on the patio. I just want to train it into an attractive shape because it has branches lower down that grow out horizontally. I think you wasted your money. The Wollemi Pine belongs to the Araucaria family and this family all grow into huge trees. The really spectacular thing about this family is their shape in that they grow enormously tall with stunning trunks and have superb pointy tops. There are many wonderful and enormous examples in older gardens in Oz (especially old farm gardens) that were planted in the 19th century and in many Victorian era cemeteries (such as Rookwood in Sydney). The official site for the Wollemi Pine says that the biggest one in the wild is 40 metres high so I don't fancy your chances of keeping it looking good as a pot plant given the preferred way that these trees grow. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Mike Lyle" wrote in message
I find they're growing at half a metre a year in Oz That's a different experience to my friends. They've had them nipped badly from frost and despite what the official site says, they are finding them rather more cold sensitive than reported. They'd be delighted to get any growth from the things (mind you we do live in a part of Oz that is cold in winter). and being sold almost as grow-anywhere-anyhow trees. Which I think is a mistake given that they are from the Araucaria family. This is a wonderful family of trees but owning a lot of land (like a farm) is required to do this family justice IMHO (and even then they must be carefully sited to be the star attraction which will look stunning at about 100 years old). |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message ... "Peter Jason" wrote in message It is about 1/2 meter tall and the top is growing fast. I don't have a garden and it lives in a pot on the patio. I just want to train it into an attractive shape because it has branches lower down that grow out horizontally. I think you wasted your money. The Wollemi Pine belongs to the Araucaria family and this family all grow into huge trees. The really spectacular thing about this family is their shape in that they grow enormously tall with stunning trunks and have superb pointy tops. There are many wonderful and enormous examples in older gardens in Oz (especially old farm gardens) that were planted in the 19th century and in many Victorian era cemeteries (such as Rookwood in Sydney). The official site for the Wollemi Pine says that the biggest one in the wild is 40 metres high so I don't fancy your chances of keeping it looking good as a pot plant given the preferred way that these trees grow. I am probably the odd one out but I see nothing wrong with planting a tree you like and accepting that it will have to be removed long before maturity. There are plenty of wonderful examples of Araucaria around here which will eventually have to go. Even the most modest British trees are probably unsuitable for the average garden but they do enjoy a 20/30 year life before the chop. Must go now -I need to check the Sequoia:-) |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" wrote in message
"Farm1" please@askifyouwannaknow wrote in message "Peter Jason" wrote in message It is about 1/2 meter tall and the top is growing fast. I don't have a garden and it lives in a pot on the patio. I just want to train it into an attractive shape because it has branches lower down that grow out horizontally. I think you wasted your money. The Wollemi Pine belongs to the Araucaria family and this family all grow into huge trees. The really spectacular thing about this family is their shape in that they grow enormously tall with stunning trunks and have superb pointy tops. There are many wonderful and enormous examples in older gardens in Oz (especially old farm gardens) that were planted in the 19th century and in many Victorian era cemeteries (such as Rookwood in Sydney). The official site for the Wollemi Pine says that the biggest one in the wild is 40 metres high so I don't fancy your chances of keeping it looking good as a pot plant given the preferred way that these trees grow. I am probably the odd one out but I see nothing wrong with planting a tree you like and accepting that it will have to be removed long before maturity. I have no problems with planting certain trees that will be removed long before maturity. I live on a farm in a very windy spot and have another farm also in a very windy spot so we plant pioneer trees to provide wind slowing and shelter for more tender species or as cattle shelter. These will mostly all be sacrificed at some stage as preferable species grow to a size where they can cope. These pioneers are the trees I put into the green weed category - like Radiata pines and acacias. I do however, have problems with buying certain trees knowing that they will not be treated with the due respect that I believe they deserve. That is why I have planted oaks and elms and other trees which will grow long after I'm worm food. Even in a severe drought we water them at the expense of the rest of the garden. Trees (and especially mature ones) cannot be replaced but the rest of it can. But then I love big trees and YMMV. Yesterday I visited a forest and an Arboretum and saw for the first time a grove of mature Sugar Pines (Pinus lambertiana) and it was love at first sight. I now have to find a spot for some of these amazing trees but I can't do that till the drought breaks as after 6 years of reduced rain there is no more water for more hungry mouths. There are plenty of wonderful examples of Araucaria around here which will eventually have to go. Even the most modest British trees are probably unsuitable for the average garden but they do enjoy a 20/30 year life before the chop. I recognise that it happens. Very sad TMWOT. There is nothing more majestic or impressive than a huge elm, oak or something similar and it's very sad to me to see trees chopped down because of poor planning. I visit certain open gardens repeatedly to see a number of the big trees which I know I won't be able to grow in my short remaining life. Must go now -I need to check the Sequoia:-) I hope you aren't checking it to plan it's demise. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" writes
I am probably the odd one out but I see nothing wrong with planting a tree you like and accepting that it will have to be removed long before maturity. There are plenty of wonderful examples of Araucaria around here which will eventually have to go. Even the most modest British trees are probably unsuitable for the average garden but they do enjoy a 20/30 year life before the chop. Must go now -I need to check the Sequoia:-) No, you're not. I've argued this line on urg before. I don't see it's much different from growing hedges - better, perhaps, to let a tree have a few years of freedom, than to keep it 'cooped up' at 6ft high for ever ;-) -- Kay |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Sacha" wrote in message ... On 4/12/06 18:35, in article , "K" wrote: "Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" writes I am probably the odd one out but I see nothing wrong with planting a tree you like and accepting that it will have to be removed long before maturity. There are plenty of wonderful examples of Araucaria around here which will eventually have to go. Even the most modest British trees are probably unsuitable for the average garden but they do enjoy a 20/30 year life before the chop. Must go now -I need to check the Sequoia:-) No, you're not. I've argued this line on urg before. I don't see it's much different from growing hedges - better, perhaps, to let a tree have a few years of freedom, than to keep it 'cooped up' at 6ft high for ever ;-) Why grow it at all, if only for personally selfish reasons? Would we grow oaks to act as windbreaks, only to remove them to allow the laurels planted inside them to take over? Trees are not animals in the sense of allowing them 'a few years of freedom'. Many trees live for a very, very much longer time than any animal, including the human and IMO, should be planted with that in mind. -- Sacha http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/ But we do grow most, if not all, things for selfish reasons. Vegetables don't stand a chance before they get noshed. Taking your example to extremes we would never remove any shrub,tree or perennial or even a weed. We manage our gardens and plots and as such we do interfere with nature. "Working with nature" -perhaps,maybe,sometimes but usually not. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
I think you wasted your money. Not really. Where else can you buy a 150,000,000 year old bonsai? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"K" wrote in message ... "Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" writes I am probably the odd one out but I see nothing wrong with planting a tree you like and accepting that it will have to be removed long before maturity. There are plenty of wonderful examples of Araucaria around here which will eventually have to go. Even the most modest British trees are probably unsuitable for the average garden but they do enjoy a 20/30 year life before the chop. Must go now -I need to check the Sequoia:-) No, you're not. I've argued this line on urg before. I don't see it's much different from growing hedges - better, perhaps, to let a tree have a few years of freedom, than to keep it 'cooped up' at 6ft high for ever ;-) Kay Like this one at the Australian National Botanic Gardens? http://maeg.textdriven.com/wp-content/cage.jpg (from http://maeg.textdriven.com/?cat=2) :~)) Jenny |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
On 5/12/06 00:15, in article , "Rupert (W.Yorkshire)"
wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message ... snip Why grow it at all, if only for personally selfish reasons? Would we grow oaks to act as windbreaks, only to remove them to allow the laurels planted inside them to take over? Trees are not animals in the sense of allowing them 'a few years of freedom'. Many trees live for a very, very much longer time than any animal, including the human and IMO, should be planted with that in mind. But we do grow most, if not all, things for selfish reasons. Vegetables don't stand a chance before they get noshed. Taking your example to extremes we would never remove any shrub,tree or perennial or even a weed. We manage our gardens and plots and as such we do interfere with nature. "Working with nature" -perhaps,maybe,sometimes but usually not. I suppose I belong to the "plant trees for future generations" school of thought. And even though it's sometimes necessary, I feel real sadness when I see a tree being felled. I could never plant a tree telling myself it's just a temporary arrangement. We're getting some dieback in some of the older trees in our garden, like the beeches, which is my favourite tree. I dread the day we're told any of them have to come down and hope most sincerely I won't be around to see it happen! -- Sacha http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/ |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Sacha" wrote in message ... On 5/12/06 00:15, in article , "Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message ... snip Why grow it at all, if only for personally selfish reasons? Would we grow oaks to act as windbreaks, only to remove them to allow the laurels planted inside them to take over? Trees are not animals in the sense of allowing them 'a few years of freedom'. Many trees live for a very, very much longer time than any animal, including the human and IMO, should be planted with that in mind. But we do grow most, if not all, things for selfish reasons. Vegetables don't stand a chance before they get noshed. Taking your example to extremes we would never remove any shrub,tree or perennial or even a weed. We manage our gardens and plots and as such we do interfere with nature. "Working with nature" -perhaps,maybe,sometimes but usually not. I suppose I belong to the "plant trees for future generations" school of thought. And even though it's sometimes necessary, I feel real sadness when I see a tree being felled. I could never plant a tree telling myself it's just a temporary arrangement. We're getting some dieback in some of the older trees in our garden, like the beeches, which is my favourite tree. I dread the day we're told any of them have to come down and hope most sincerely I won't be around to see it happen! -- Sacha http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/ Well if it's any consolation once a tree has been planted around here and attained either 2m in height or a girth of not much then the tree preservation man gets involved . He is of your school of thought and will make you underpin foundations before allowing anything to be chopped. A very nice man but not to be messed with. About now the tree surgeon man comes to remove dead wood from one huge beech (having got permission from the tpo people). I am reliably informed the tree is dying but will it will be towards the end of this century before it will be a goner. When something eventually goes it is a grand opportunity for a re-design. (Memories of Kew and the great storm) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
On 5/12/06 11:57, in article , "Rupert (W.Yorkshire)"
wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message ... snip I suppose I belong to the "plant trees for future generations" school of thought. And even though it's sometimes necessary, I feel real sadness when I see a tree being felled. I could never plant a tree telling myself it's just a temporary arrangement. We're getting some dieback in some of the older trees in our garden, like the beeches, which is my favourite tree. I dread the day we're told any of them have to come down and hope most sincerely I won't be around to see it happen! Well if it's any consolation once a tree has been planted around here and attained either 2m in height or a girth of not much then the tree preservation man gets involved . He is of your school of thought and will make you underpin foundations before allowing anything to be chopped. A very nice man but not to be messed with. I remember being really horrified and even rather cross, with a friend of mine who wanted to chop down a huge old tree so as to build a conservatory. The local planning officer said he was going to get a tpo on it to prevent her doing so. While he went off into town to do just that, she got the builders to cut it down and when he came back she told him it had been cut down before he could put a tpo on it and too bad. About now the tree surgeon man comes to remove dead wood from one huge beech (having got permission from the tpo people). I am reliably informed the tree is dying but will it will be towards the end of this century before it will be a goner. That, at least, is something! I want us to plant something to replace the bit Cedrus atlanticus we have at the almost-bottom-of-the-garden but the problem is what and where. Too far back and it's too close to the wall and too far forward and it's in the shade of the cedar and competing for food, too! When something eventually goes it is a grand opportunity for a re-design. (Memories of Kew and the great storm) It certainly is but that's already happened in this garden. They had a big storm here in 1990 and a great many trees came down, including two cedars almost as big as the one we have left. Ray says that it let a lot of light into the garden! Whoever planted it up 150 years ago must have be a real dendronologist! -- Sacha http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/ |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
Sacha writes
On 4/12/06 18:35, in article , "K" wrote: "Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" writes I am probably the odd one out but I see nothing wrong with planting a tree you like and accepting that it will have to be removed long before maturity. There are plenty of wonderful examples of Araucaria around here which will eventually have to go. Even the most modest British trees are probably unsuitable for the average garden but they do enjoy a 20/30 year life before the chop. Must go now -I need to check the Sequoia:-) No, you're not. I've argued this line on urg before. I don't see it's much different from growing hedges - better, perhaps, to let a tree have a few years of freedom, than to keep it 'cooped up' at 6ft high for ever ;-) Why grow it at all, if only for personally selfish reasons? Why else are any plants grown that aren't being grown for food or utility? Or do you mean that we grow our gardens to create a thing of beauty for others to enjoy? If so, why not grow a tree for the same reason, even if it has to be removed after 20 years or so when it outgrows its space? Would we grow oaks to act as windbreaks, only to remove them to allow the laurels planted inside them to take over? Of course not, but for purely practical reasons - the requirements of a nurse tree are that it is a) tougher b) grows more rapidly in the early stages than the thing it is nursing - neither of these apply to oaks as compared to laurels Trees are not animals in the sense of allowing them 'a few years of freedom'. Precisely. Which is why I find it hard to get worked up about planting trees to 'selfish' reasons. Is it possible to be selfish if the only ill effects of your 'selfishness' are on a non-sentient being? Many trees live for a very, very much longer time than any animal, including the human and IMO, should be planted with that in mind. IMO, too, but from a different perspective. -- Kay |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"JennyC" wrote in message
"K" wrote in message I don't see it's much different from growing hedges - better, perhaps, to let a tree have a few years of freedom, than to keep it 'cooped up' at 6ft high for ever ;-) Kay Like this one at the Australian National Botanic Gardens? http://maeg.textdriven.com/wp-content/cage.jpg (from http://maeg.textdriven.com/?cat=2) An obvious plant theft prevetion device which will be removed when the tree gets too big to be carried away. The ANBG is in a very open position and any tea leaf could have away with a small tree very easily. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Wollemi Pine
"Sacha" wrote in message
"Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" wrote: "Sacha" wrote in message snip Why grow it at all, if only for personally selfish reasons? Would we grow oaks to act as windbreaks, only to remove them to allow the laurels planted inside them to take over? Trees are not animals in the sense of allowing them 'a few years of freedom'. Many trees live for a very, very much longer time than any animal, including the human and IMO, should be planted with that in mind. But we do grow most, if not all, things for selfish reasons. Vegetables don't stand a chance before they get noshed. Taking your example to extremes we would never remove any shrub,tree or perennial or even a weed. We manage our gardens and plots and as such we do interfere with nature. "Working with nature" -perhaps,maybe,sometimes but usually not. I suppose I belong to the "plant trees for future generations" school of thought. And even though it's sometimes necessary, I feel real sadness when I see a tree being felled. I'm generally of the same view as you Sacha. Some trees do have to go sometimes but I get quite irritated when I see truly magnificent and significant trees being felled when a bit of simple thought could prevent it. This often applies to housing developments. A lovely tree goes and in its place go in shoddy housing stock which would so easily could have been given a slightly different configuration and the whole development would ahve been vastly improved by leaving the tree (shoddy building stock notwithstanding). The tree often goes simply because of devoloper greed rather than any real need. I could never plant a tree telling myself it's just a temporary arrangement. I do but then it's the weed trees that are sacrificial and they are there for protection of the more significant trees which will come on as the weed trees are culled. The other thing which we haven't yet gotten around to doing is to plant firewood trees specifically for culling or coppicing later - these will be Oz natives which grow like weeds anyway. We're getting some dieback in some of the older trees in our garden, like the beeches, which is my favourite tree. I dread the day we're told any of them have to come down and hope most sincerely I won't be around to see it happen! I sympathise. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Wollemia nobilis [Wollemi pine] | United Kingdom | |||
Wollemi pine plants "soon" available | Plant Science | |||
Wollemi Pine | Australia | |||
Wollemi pine plants "soon" available | Plant Science |