Janet wrote in
:

Plain old hawthorn can make a very beautiful and reliable tree,
interesting all year round ands submits to any amount or pruning and
shaping. If you want to push the boat out get one of the fancier
species with bigger berries, like Crataegus orientalis.

Thanks for this suggestion. I was unaware of the Crataegus orientalis
variety. Very pretty leaves - I like that. Very slow-growing though, I
suspect, are they?

Al

harry wrote in news:c626d701-99a9-4f81-a0aa-
:

I don't think any of these suggestions will grow in an exposed coastal
area with shallow soil.

I've just stubled across this interesting/attractive option:

Vitex agnus-castus: http://tinyurl.com/6vxgco9

However, they attract bees, which could be a pain when you are sitting
under it, in close proximity!

Al

In article ,
says...

Janet wrote in
:

Plain old hawthorn can make a very beautiful and reliable tree,
interesting all year round ands submits to any amount or pruning and
shaping. If you want to push the boat out get one of the fancier
species with bigger berries, like Crataegus orientalis.

Thanks for this suggestion. I was unaware of the Crataegus orientalis
variety. Very pretty leaves - I like that. Very slow-growing though, I
suspect, are they?

Maybe not as fast as native C monogyna. C Prunifolia is relatively fast
but the long thorns may not be appropriate for the location (handsome
though they are)

You'll find a small specimen grows away faster than a larger one.

Janet

Janet wrote in
:

In article ,
says...

Janet wrote in
:

Plain old hawthorn can make a very beautiful and reliable tree,
interesting all year round ands submits to any amount or pruning
and shaping. If you want to push the boat out get one of the
fancier species with bigger berries, like Crataegus orientalis.

Thanks for this suggestion. I was unaware of the Crataegus orientalis
variety. Very pretty leaves - I like that. Very slow-growing though,
I suspect, are they?

Maybe not as fast as native C monogyna. C Prunifolia is relatively
fast
but the long thorns may not be appropriate for the location (handsome
though they are)

You'll find a small specimen grows away faster than a larger one.

Janet


Thanks... Two other shrub/trees that I am considering are griselinia and
tamarisk. Both grow happily in my area.

I gather tamarisk can grow very tall whereas griselina grows to only a few
metres.

Can anyone comment on their suitability for planting close to a house?
Which one grows quickest?

The grielina seems suitable for container growing, but I'm not sure about
tamarisk, since it seems to have a way fo growing off to one side, rather
than vertically. Griselina is evergreen, which is nice, but if I grow it in
a container it's liable to get blown over when the gales arrive.

Al

In article ,
says...

Janet wrote in
:

In article ,
says...

Janet wrote in
:

Plain old hawthorn can make a very beautiful and reliable tree,
interesting all year round ands submits to any amount or pruning
and shaping. If you want to push the boat out get one of the
fancier species with bigger berries, like Crataegus orientalis.

Thanks for this suggestion. I was unaware of the Crataegus orientalis
variety. Very pretty leaves - I like that. Very slow-growing though,
I suspect, are they?

Maybe not as fast as native C monogyna. C Prunifolia is relatively
fast
but the long thorns may not be appropriate for the location (handsome
though they are)

You'll find a small specimen grows away faster than a larger one.

Janet


Thanks... Two other shrub/trees that I am considering are griselinia and
tamarisk. Both grow happily in my area.

I gather tamarisk can grow very tall whereas griselina grows to only a few
metres.

Oh no it doesn't....the greenleaf one will grow to 40 ft (there are many
examples locally). I have griselinea hedges (one of them planted by me,
which I may regret in old age) and it grows like a rocket in our coastal
conditions here. It also self seeds like a weed. I have spent whole days
at a nearby NT garden,. just quelling griselinea in its bid to rule the
world. If you plant one be warned, it's high maintenance to keep it under
control and within reach.

The variegated griselinea is much slower IME but I have one I keep
pruned hard at 4 m and locally there's an unpruned one at double that.

TBH I wouldn't plant either griselinea as a solo feature plant because it
has no seasonal interest, just looks the same all year round... better as
a sturdy windproof privacy screen or evergreen background to something
more interesting.

Janet.

kay wrote in news:kay.9bf50f6
@gardenbanter.co.uk:


Jake;951978 Wrote:


Something with a tree canopy that's at least 6' above ground, no more
than 6' above that but 16' in diameter is going to look like an alien
mutation.

I've got a cherry tree that matches that. Except that the 16ft is mainly
to one side of the trunk. And it would look like an alien mutation if it
were free standing. (Fortunately, it's growing over the roof of the
terrace).

I wonder whether you could do something with something that's slightly
weeping. I have a weeping crab apple which is on the right lines. I
managed to keep it going upwards by taking out the lowest branches each
year, but it's now stopped at about 5ft and is producing only
horizontals. Overall effect is indeed of a patio umbrella ;-)


I thiink a semi-weeping tree ia the answer. Can anyone suggest a quick-
growing semi-weeping cherry that grows to a maximum of 18ft and produces
plenty of quality cherries?

Al

On Mar 25, 11:42*am, "AL_n" wrote:
kay wrote in news:kay.9bf50f6
@gardenbanter.co.uk:







Jake;951978 Wrote:

Something with a tree canopy that's at least 6' above ground, no more
than 6' above that but 16' in diameter is going to look like an alien
mutation.

I've got a cherry tree that matches that. Except that the 16ft is mainly
to one side of the trunk. And it would look like an alien mutation if it
were free standing. (Fortunately, it's growing over the roof of the
terrace).

I wonder whether you could do something with something that's slightly
weeping. I have a weeping crab apple which is on the right lines. I
managed to keep it going upwards by taking out the lowest branches each
year, but it's now stopped at about 5ft and is producing only
horizontals. Overall effect is indeed of a patio umbrella ;-)

I thiink a semi-weeping tree ia the answer. Can anyone suggest a quick-
growing semi-weeping cherry that grows to a maximum of 18ft and produces
plenty of quality cherries?

Al- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



And one that the birds will leave alone.

Dave Hill wrote in news:92809ae0-a23c-41fb-
:


And one that the birds will leave alone.

And one that bees don't like! (I forgot to mention that. It's going to be
my shade tree for sitting outside under, and I don't want to be pestered
with bees (much as I know their importance to the future of the planet)!

An alternative to a good fruit-producing strain, a good blossom-producing
strain woyuld be a good alternative, although, I suppose more blossom =
more bees buzzing around, yes?

Perhaps I should be looking at a different type of 15ft high semi-weeping
tree altogether. I've been looking at dogwoods, and salix, and the
aforementions bottlebrush. I also have a tamarisk sapling that is already
3ft tall. I wonder if that will end up being the winning candidate! I'm
right on the South Coast, but my soil is far from "well-drained"; it is
seriously clayey.

Al

On 25/03/2012 14:55, AL_n wrote:
Dave wrote in news:92809ae0-a23c-41fb-
:


And one that the birds will leave alone.

And one that bees don't like! (I forgot to mention that. It's going to be
my shade tree for sitting outside under, and I don't want to be pestered
with bees (much as I know their importance to the future of the planet)!

An alternative to a good fruit-producing strain, a good blossom-producing
strain woyuld be a good alternative, although, I suppose more blossom =
more bees buzzing around, yes?

Perhaps I should be looking at a different type of 15ft high semi-weeping
tree altogether. I've been looking at dogwoods, and salix, and the
aforementions bottlebrush. I also have a tamarisk sapling that is already
3ft tall. I wonder if that will end up being the winning candidate! I'm
right on the South Coast, but my soil is far from "well-drained"; it is
seriously clayey.

Al



If you want a cherry tree that won't attract bees, you're better off
looking at a double-flowering form. However, with this type, you will
not get fruit. In double-flowerers the reproductive organs (stamen,
etc) are mostly developed into the extra petals you see, therefore bees
aren't interested and there is no fertilisation, so the plant cannot
reproduce. This also means that the flowering season is extended
because the flowers do 'go over' as fertilised flowers do prior to
forming fruit.

--
Spider
from high ground in SE London
gardening on clay

Spider wrote in
:

Perhaps I should be looking at a different type of 15ft high
semi-weeping tree altogether. I've been looking at dogwoods, and
salix, and the aforementions bottlebrush. I also have a tamarisk
sapling that is already 3ft tall. I wonder if that will end up being
the winning candidate! I'm right on the South Coast, but my soil is
far from "well-drained"; it is seriously clayey.

Al



If you want a cherry tree that won't attract bees, you're better off
looking at a double-flowering form. However, with this type, you will
not get fruit. In double-flowerers the reproductive organs (stamen,
etc) are mostly developed into the extra petals you see, therefore
bees aren't interested and there is no fertilisation, so the plant
cannot reproduce. This also means that the flowering season is
extended because the flowers do 'go over' as fertilised flowers do
prior to forming fruit.


Many thanks for this info, which I wasn't aware of. That's helpful, because
a prolific-flowering cherry doeas appeal to me - especially if bees aren;t
interested in it. The presence of the extra blossom more or less mitigates
the lack of fruit, for my purposes.

Can anyone suggest a particular variety to look for, that is semi-weeping,
or wide-spreading, and grows to a maximum of about 16 ft? (preferaby not a
grafted type, because I think those look unnatural, and I gather are also
more prone to disease).

Al

WOW, this guy nailed it!
What a great idea, I've seen friends from california do that, we call it an "arbor" here in the states. They used english ivy to plant at the bottom and it creeped up and over it in no time to give it a tropical feel. It is so peacful and serene year round! They lived in a zone 6-7! So, its definetly possible!

If your stuck on a tree....
I just got 4 dwarf Montmorency cherry trees. Each season brings a new and interesting look, I can shape it to carry a canopy if I choose, it only growns to 10-12 feet high, resistant to disease, is considered to be a rapid growing tree (So you can buy it as a 2 year old for a quarter of the cost , and it will be full grown in 2 years), can grow in any type of soil, and the best part is..... The cherries!

oh and not to mention. We planted ours about 8 foot from our foundation! Its just fine.. Pluse we have an oak tree about 20 foot from out foundation and its over 60 foot tall. No problems there either!

oh, and adding bone meal to the soil and then watering it directly after should help with the clay factor.

Just another thought to chuck in the pot: how about a weeping pear?

The fruits are ornamental only (and in fact I didn't spot any on our tree last year!) The flowers are out now, but the bees in our garden seem much more interested in the pulmonaria under it (and anyway the blossom doesn't last very long).

It is possibly more dense than you want, and I think it would naturally have a lower canopy than you want (I've seen pictures with branches nearly down to the ground). So you'd need to remove lower branches to sit under it: but the one in my garden is very small/neat and you can stand up under it (just), so worth thinking about. I think the leaves are beautiful, and all the photos I've seen suggest they naturally make a really nice neat shaped tree and don't seem to get too big. The RHS site suggests they are not too fussy about setting:

RHS Plant Selector Pyrus salicifolia 'Pendula' AGM / RHS Gardening

Let us know what you go with!

P.S. I've seen the RHS website reckons they get to 8-12 metres high in 20-50 years. My best guess is ours is 20 years old (that seems to be when everything in the garden was put in), and it's only about 10 ft high and showing no obvious signs of upward growth (tends to grow out more than up for us): so either they vary or you can limit its growth.

Gardeners World says its maximum height/width is 3m. Mail order tree companies seem to say between 3-6m tall, but that it can easily be restricted to lower heights by pruning.

On 27/03/2012 10:46, AL_n wrote:
wrote in
:

Perhaps I should be looking at a different type of 15ft high
semi-weeping tree altogether. I've been looking at dogwoods, and
salix, and the aforementions bottlebrush. I also have a tamarisk
sapling that is already 3ft tall. I wonder if that will end up being
the winning candidate! I'm right on the South Coast, but my soil is
far from "well-drained"; it is seriously clayey.

Al



If you want a cherry tree that won't attract bees, you're better off
looking at a double-flowering form. However, with this type, you will
not get fruit. In double-flowerers the reproductive organs (stamen,
etc) are mostly developed into the extra petals you see, therefore
bees aren't interested and there is no fertilisation, so the plant
cannot reproduce. This also means that the flowering season is
extended because the flowers do 'go over' as fertilised flowers do
prior to forming fruit.


Many thanks for this info, which I wasn't aware of. That's helpful, because
a prolific-flowering cherry doeas appeal to me - especially if bees aren;t
interested in it. The presence of the extra blossom more or less mitigates
the lack of fruit, for my purposes.

Can anyone suggest a particular variety to look for, that is semi-weeping,
or wide-spreading, and grows to a maximum of about 16 ft? (preferaby not a
grafted type, because I think those look unnatural, and I gather are also
more prone to disease).

Al




A white double-flowered cherry might be Prunus 'Shirotae'.
A pink double-flowered cherry might be Prunus 'Pink Perfection'.
There are many others.

Most ornamental cherries that you see are likely to be taller than you
require and probably grafted. Grafted is not actually a dirty word,
although bad grafts have contributed to this impression. In fact, for
someone such as yourself who requires a smaller tree, grafting (on a
dwarfing rootstock) is exactly what you need.

Try and buy from a nursery where you can see the tree and its graft,
rather than on-line where you can't. Have a good look at the graft.
Ask for advice if you're not sure it's firm enough. Many nurserymen
will tell you that you don't need to stake a grafted tree but, if it
saves you some anxiety, stake it until it's obvious that the graft is
thoroughly established. There may very well follow a discussion on how
a tree needs to flex in the wind (ie no stake) in order to strengthen
itself. This is a perfectly valid argument, with which I agree
whole-heartedly. Therefore, free your tree from its stake as soon as
reasoanbly possible. I have often left the stake in place for a year or
two after untying it, so that I can secure the tree again over winter
when it might be seriously whipped by strong winds.

The other thing you need to know about all the Prunus family, is that
they must be pruned in warm dry weather (say, April to August). Cuts or
damage made in cold wet weather may invite the fungal disease Silver Leaf.

--
Spider
from high ground in SE London
gardening on clay