|
Tree Ferns hardiness
Just how hardy are Tree Ferns.
I live in SW UK John |
Tree Ferns hardiness
"Serendipity" wrote in message ... Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK John I had a small tree fern and forgot to bring it in when the frosts hit a few years ago. It died. They aren't very hardy - especially when small. I think larger ones can be got through Winter outdoors by binding then in straw - but wouldn't like to risk it. Drakanthus (in the Midlands). |
Tree Ferns hardiness
"Serendipity" wrote in message ... Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK John It depends which Tree Fern you have. Dickinsonia antartica has survived several years in my London garden without any protection other than letting fallen leaves stay in the crown. Natalie |
Tree Ferns hardiness
"Serendipity" wrote in message ... Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK John John, Drop in here http://www.meudon.co.uk/ for lunch one weekend, then wander down into their garden and you'll see the kind of shelter needed by treeferns unlagged. If your conditions don't match this deep, sheltered valley, then grow them, but lag them well. Chris Webb |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Serendipity wrote:
Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK Depending upon what part of the SW you live, there are several species of tree fern which should be fine with you. The hardiest is probably Dicksonia antarctica and unless you live on the top of Bodmin moor Dartmoor or Exemoor, you should be able o overwinter it totally unprotected. Dicksonia fibrosa is almost as hardy and a very good bet for the SouthWest. Cyathea australis rates as tough if not tougher than D. fibrosa and is a comparatively fast grower with attractive pale green fronds. In regions where winter lows drop to minus 5C or more with regularity, D. antarctica is your best bet. It should survive quite well to minus 5C without protection, but to be safe, lagging the trunk with several, loose layers of horticultural fleece and stuffing leaves into the crown will suffice. If you live in one of the more sheltered or warmer parts of the SW, you could opt for stunning beauties such as Cyathea dealbata and C. medullaris. Both do well in the near frost-free conditions of sheltered south coastal regions and often retain their leaves well. My favourite is C. dealbata, which does magnificently here in one of the coldest corners of my garden. Its delicate, apple green leaves are backed a ghostly bluish white and almost fluoresce if back-lit at night. Ideal conditions are light overhead or dappled shade, moist yet well drained, humus enriched soils and regular additional watering during hot dry weather. Applying water to the trunk on a daily basis in summer help create the humidity they crave and ensures regular 'flushes' of new fronds. All tree ferns relish regular feeding and an application of pelleted poultry manure around their roots in spring plus another in mid summer will keep them moving and producing ever larger fronds. HTH. David Poole TORQUAY UK |
Tree Ferns hardiness
|
Tree Ferns hardiness
"Serendipity" wrote in message
... Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK John All the usual gardening programs suggested wrapping the fern in a wire mesh, inside which you stick a mass of straw. As far as I know though the only growing point is the very tip or the plant, and thus it's really only this that should need protection. Mind you this was an Antartica species. I think if it's fairly small still then bringing it indoors or into a greenhouse is probably the safest bet. Duncan |
Tree Ferns hardiness
On Tue, 22 Oct 2002 08:21:27 +0100, "Duncan Russell"
wrote: "Serendipity" wrote in message .. . Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK John All the usual gardening programs suggested wrapping the fern in a wire mesh, inside which you stick a mass of straw. As far as I know though the only growing point is the very tip or the plant, and thus it's really only this that should need protection. Mind you this was an Antartica species. I think if it's fairly small still then bringing it indoors or into a greenhouse is probably the safest bet. Duncan .................................................. ... Thank you for the suggestion Duncan. As you will probably have noted from other contributors. there doesn't appear to be a general concensus on what is right and what is wrong. In the event, I'm using the best pieces of all your suggestions so I have little fear of any serious harm coming to my 'Dicksonian' even if the weather should turn arctic on me. Regards John .................................................. ....... |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Serendipity wrote:
Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK John I would urge you to think twice (and preferably several times more) before buying a tree fern. They are very fashionable at the moment but are all taken from the wild. Tree Ferns are very slow growing and a 4-6 ft specimen can easily be over 100 years old. At the moment, some specimens are very common in New Zealand and, as large areas of ancient New Zealand forest are cleared for development, the New Zealand government has issued licenses for their export. An argument is that they would probably be burnt anyway, so why not buy them and they are very common. However, would you be happy for 100 year old English oaks to be pulled up and sold as a sideline for building development in England? And if you wouldn't, I really don't think you should be buying Tree Ferns, however "trendy". -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
An argument is that they would probably be burnt anyway, so why not buy
them and they are very common. However, would you be happy for 100 year old English oaks to be pulled up and sold as a sideline for building development in England? And if you wouldn't, I really don't think you should be buying Tree Ferns, however "trendy". -- Larry Stoter Larry, if the Oaks were going to be cut down or destroyed in any way whatsoever, I'd rather they were sold off and relocated. I wouldn't be bothered where to. If they went to China, I wouldn't care, at least they'd be alive. I think you have a problem with the NZ government's policy on development, and that's another issue entirely. The only way to really address the issue in a way that'd make you happy would be to stop development all together wherever there are Dicksonia antarctica. As the NZ government are unlikely to stop all development where there are Dicksonia antarctica I think relocation is a good second option to fall back on. At least the ferns are being preserved, only being taken from sites that are being developed, and the government are regulating. I'm not sure that you actually understand all the issues involved here. Whether people buy Dicksonias or not is unlikely to affect anything at all. Dave. |
Tree Ferns hardiness
DaveDay34 wrote:
An argument is that they would probably be burnt anyway, so why not buy them and they are very common. However, would you be happy for 100 year old English oaks to be pulled up and sold as a sideline for building development in England? And if you wouldn't, I really don't think you should be buying Tree Ferns, however "trendy". -- Larry Stoter Larry, if the Oaks were going to be cut down or destroyed in any way whatsoever, I'd rather they were sold off and relocated. I wouldn't be bothered where to. If they went to China, I wouldn't care, at least they'd be alive. Very short term view point. By concentrating on individuals (whether plants or animals) you miss the real problem - distruction of habitat. And you give an excuse to developers - " it's OK to dig up all these trees, they'll be planted somewhere else" Well, yes but the habitat that allows such trees to thrive is destroyed. So, finally, you end up with the native habitat gone and a few pathetic specimens strugling to survive in "parks" or "gardens". I think you have a problem with the NZ government's policy on development, and that's another issue entirely. The only way to really address the issue in a way that'd make you happy would be to stop development all together wherever there are Dicksonia antarctica. No - I am prepared to accept development. However, I'm not happy that development is encouraged by Europeans buying Dicksonia antarctica. That might just be the key that makes a questionable development financially possible. By taking the money that can be made on selling this "waste" product out of the financial equation, it might give locals enough leaverage to stop development - if that is what they want. This trade could be viewed as cultural imperialism. As the NZ government are unlikely to stop all development where there are Dicksonia antarctica I think relocation is a good second option to fall back on. At least the ferns are being preserved, only being taken from sites that are being developed, and the government are regulating. I'm not sure that you actually understand all the issues involved here. Whether people buy Dicksonias or not is unlikely to affect anything at all. Dave. Sorry, as I have said, providing a market for these plants might tip the balance on a questionable financial development. And the preservation of individual plants is not really very important - it is the destruction of their habitat which is serious. To go back to an emotional arguement, nobody in the UK would accept 100 year old oaks being pulled up as part of a development project and sold in garden centres - so why is it acceptable for 100 year old tree fearns to be cut down and sold in UK garden centres? -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
|
Tree Ferns hardiness
DaveDay34 wrote in message Larry, if the Oaks were going to be cut down or destroyed in any way whatsoever, I'd rather they were sold off and relocated. I wouldn't be bothered where to. If they went to China, I wouldn't care, at least they'd be alive. I think you have a problem with the NZ government's policy on development, and that's another issue entirely. The only way to really address the issue in a way that'd make you happy would be to stop development all together wherever there are Dicksonia antarctica. As the NZ government are unlikely to stop all development where there are Dicksonia antarctica I think relocation is a good second option to fall back on. At least the ferns are being preserved, only being taken from sites that are being developed, and the government are regulating. I'm not sure that you actually understand all the issues involved here. Whether people buy Dicksonias or not is unlikely to affect anything at all. I think the thing is that the Dicksonia will survive the removing and relocating whereas a full or even half grown oak would never do that. As long as they do have the export license then I see no reason not to have them in the UK, it is those people who dig up and sell plants from the wild with no controls that is the real problem. Mike www.british-naturism.org.uk |
Tree Ferns hardiness
I don't think Larry understands how little the Dicksonia are actually worth in
NZ. They aren't worth developing a site just to get at them. They wouldn't make the difference between a site being profitable to develop or not. They don't tip the balance, and as the sites would be developed anyway, it's better that the plants are relocated rather than destroyed. If the long term view is that we should stop developing sites where tree ferns grow, then all well and good. In the mean time, I see no point in stopping the relocation of such ferns. Dave. |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of any government licensing the controlled marketing of native species, lets first understand that Dicksonia antarctica is *not* a New Zealand native. All plants entering this country as mature or semi-mature, unrooted logs are from Australia & Tasmania where the species is very widespread and locally extremely common. Certificated logs come from areas where development is taking place and in some cases, the density of tree ferns is so great that vast numbers have to be uprooted. It is these that would otherwise be burnt since there is little or no local market for them. New Zealand species such as semi-mature Dicksonia fibrosa and D. squarrosa occasionally arrive into this country, but the quantities involved are minute compared to those of D. antarctica. Many tree ferns are now nursery raised, often imported from areas where they grow comparatively quickly and buying those has absolutely no effect upon wild stocks. My own Cyathea dealbata is such a plant - a sporeling raised to saleable size prior to importation. David Poole TORQUAY UK |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Michael Berridge wrote:
snips ..... I think the thing is that the Dicksonia will survive the removing and relocating whereas a full or even half grown oak would never do that. I beg to differ. Although it is not done now, in the 18th century (?) Capability Brown dug up, moved and successfuly replanted large, mature trees. There are a number of contemporary drawing/painting around showing this being done. Most of the lords having their parks lanscaped were not the sort of people to wait 150 years for a sampling to mature! As long as they do have the export license then I see no reason not to have them in the UK, it is those people who dig up and sell plants from the wild with no controls that is the real problem. Couldn't agree more - from ignorant vandals digging up Bluebells in English woods to groups in in for money, taking snowdrop and tulip bulbs from the wild in Turkey and Greece. Mike www.british-naturism.org.uk However, just because something may currently be legal doesn't mean the situation won't, and shouldn't change. -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
DaveDay34 wrote:
I don't think Larry understands how little the Dicksonia are actually worth in NZ. They aren't worth developing a site just to get at them. They wouldn't make the difference between a site being profitable to develop or not. They don't tip the balance, and as the sites would be developed anyway, it's better that the plants are relocated rather than destroyed. If the long term view is that we should stop developing sites where tree ferns grow, then all well and good. In the mean time, I see no point in stopping the relocation of such ferns. Dave. But they aren't worthless, are they, because many people in Europe are prepared to buy them. And while their value won't stop many developments, in the case of marginal developments, it could be the deciding point. Anyway, I think my main concern is that these plants are old - as these forests are destroyed, they are gone for good. And in perhaps 100 years time, they will be gone and not easily regrown. I just wish people would conside a rather longer term view than next week. -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Serendipity wrote:
Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK They had a few outside at The Eden Project when I visited it last week. -- Nick Wagg TranscenData Europe Ltd, Oakington House, Oakington, Cambridge CB4 5AF Email: URL: www.transcendata.com Tel: +44 (0)1223 237111 Fax: +44 (0)1223 234192 |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Xref: 127.0.0.1 uk.rec.gardening:161341
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:27:13 +0000, Nick Wagg wrote: Serendipity wrote: Just how hardy are Tree Ferns. I live in SW UK They had a few outside at The Eden Project when I visited it last week. .................................................. .................................................. ................ Nick. Yep, I noticed them when I visited last week also. (for the seventh time!) It appears that my question lots of advice and comment. A very upset Kiwi had quite a bit to say about the export - from New Zealand - of these lovely plants. Although he took quite considerable flak from affecionados, I think it's good to see that there are still those around who care about the plants for more than looking good in the garden, what say you? By the way, the one which I planted six months ago has thrown up lots of suckers. I was going to pull them out but they look so attractive and have transformed an uninteresting spot into a talking point with friends and neighbours. John .................................................. .............................................. |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Tristan Hatton-Ellis wrote:
On 27/10/02 8:51 am, in article , "Larry Stoter" wrote: DaveDay34 wrote: I don't think Larry understands how little the Dicksonia are actually worth in NZ. They aren't worth developing a site just to get at them. They wouldn't make the difference between a site being profitable to develop or not. They don't tip the balance, and as the sites would be developed anyway, it's better that the plants are relocated rather than destroyed. If the long term view is that we should stop developing sites where tree ferns grow, then all well and good. In the mean time, I see no point in stopping the relocation of such ferns. Dave. But they aren't worthless, are they, because many people in Europe are prepared to buy them. And while their value won't stop many developments, in the case of marginal developments, it could be the deciding point. Anyway, I think my main concern is that these plants are old - as these forests are destroyed, they are gone for good. And in perhaps 100 years time, they will be gone and not easily regrown. I just wish people would conside a rather longer term view than next week. Larry, As a conservationist myself I have a lot of sympathy for your position. I also feel rather sorry for the gnarled, prehistoric looking trunks selling for massive prices in our garden centres. Most of them, I suspect, are destined for a rapid death. You are right to emphasise the importance of the habitat - there are many other species at stake than just tree ferns, and it is not appropriate to kid ourselves that we are bringing plants into cultivation to 'conserve' them. The average lifespan of a garden is much less than that of a forest. However, that said, I really don't see the problem with a strictly controlled programme of tree fern removal from sites that are earmarked for development anyway. The problem comes when tree fern 'harvesting' becomes the reason for the 'development'. I don't know what the situation is in new Zealand but digging up of plants for horticulture is certainly a problem elsewhere in the world, either illegally or by abuse of permit systems. How does the planning system work in NZ - is tree fern removal taken into account inn the cost-benefit analysis? If it isn't, then the sale of ferns can't be used to encourage development, at least in the formal process. Has anybody in NZ tried growing tree ferns on a sustainable basis for export? Not all tree ferns in the UK are old trunks stripped from the wild though. Many are young plants grown from spores. These grow more quickly than you might think in our rainy isle, are more likely to transplant successfully, and given a little protection, are more likely to adapt to our winters. Tristan I don't kmow the details of the regulations in New Zealand but am prepared to accept that it is regulated (but are the regulations properly enforced?). My concerns are principally: 1. Regulation makes it legal but doesn't make it right and who says the regulations will ensure the plants are not wiped out. Large scale destruction of natural resources - regulated or not - is, historically, the prelude to their demise. For example, the fishing industry in the North Sea has been regulated for years - and it has been equally obvious to anybody who thinks about it that for years we have been heading straight towards where we are now - closure of the whole fishery because Cod are on the brink of extinction around our coasts. 2. Emotionally, I find it impossible to accept the removal of 150 year plants from the wild - as do many others. Look at the fuss there is in this country when developers - completely legally - remove old trees. If it isn't acceptable in the UK, then it isn't acceptable in New Zealand or anywhere else. -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
I don't kmow the details of the regulations in New Zealand but am
prepared to accept that it is regulated (but are the regulations properly enforced?). My concerns are principally: 1. Regulation makes it legal but doesn't make it right and who says the regulations will ensure the plants are not wiped out. Large scale destruction of natural resources - regulated or not - is, historically, the prelude to their demise. For example, the fishing industry in the North Sea has been regulated for years - and it has been equally obvious to anybody who thinks about it that for years we have been heading straight towards where we are now - closure of the whole fishery because Cod are on the brink of extinction around our coasts. 2. Emotionally, I find it impossible to accept the removal of 150 year plants from the wild - as do many others. Look at the fuss there is in this country when developers - completely legally - remove old trees. If it isn't acceptable in the UK, then it isn't acceptable in New Zealand or anywhere else. -- Larry Stoter Considering the relatively minimal amount of development going on in NZ I find it incredible that Larry's pursuing this point. There's a lot more damage being done in the rain forrests of South America. I would have thought if anything was going to upset anyone, it would have been the wholesale destruction of hundreds of thousands of acres of rainforest, not the relatively small number of tree ferns being relocated from NZ to other parts of the world. I understand Larry being concerned about the environment, and I think we've all heard what he has to say, but this is a UK based gardening newsgroup, not a newsgroup for environmental campaigners. This issue involves the NZ government and can only be changed there, not within the UK. Maybe this thread could be wound up now? Dave. |
Tree Ferns hardiness
|
Tree Ferns hardiness
DaveDay34 wrote:
Considering the relatively minimal amount of development going on in NZ I find it incredible that Larry's pursuing this point. There's a lot more damage being done in the rain forrests of South America. I would have thought if anything was going to upset anyone, it would have been the wholesale destruction of hundreds of thousands of acres of rainforest, not the relatively small number of tree ferns being relocated from NZ to other parts of the world. I understand Larry being concerned about the environment, and I think we've all heard what he has to say, but this is a UK based gardening newsgroup, not a newsgroup for environmental campaigners. This issue involves the NZ government and can only be changed there, not within the UK. Maybe this thread could be wound up now? Dave. Not sure where I said I wasn't concerned about destruction of rain forests (South American and elsewhere). Indeed, I would urge anybody considering buying currently trendy hardwood garden furniture to at least check that it originates from a managed and sustainable source. Although, I read a while back that almost no tropical hardwood has such origins, despite certification to the contrary. Widespread corruption in Indonesia, for example, makes most such certification worthless. English oak or beech - from a properly managed woodland - is a much better choice. I am also concerned about gardeners persistent use of peat, extracted from lowland English peat bogs - definitely not sustainable. And sorry, from personal experience, I simply do not believe that there are not acceptable substitutes. Possibly not as good but still very effective. The whole point of my argument is precisely that consumer choices in the UK do have an influence on what happens in other parts of the world. And that includes what gardeners buy for their gardens. Almost every gardening programme is now promoting tree ferns for their architectural qualities (hence my view that they are a "fashionable" plant). And while I quite appreciate that not buying tree ferns, in itself, won't stop their destruction, every little will help. Especially if they can be grown from spores easily, as somebody has commented. And if you aren't interested in reading my views, nobody is actually forcing you to so do. -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
Janet Baraclough wrote:
The message from (DaveDay34) contains these words: I understand Larry being concerned about the environment, and I think we've all heard what he has to say, but this is a UK based gardening newsgroup, not a newsgroup for environmental campaigners. This issue involves the NZ government and can only be changed there, not within the UK. That's a cop out. Whether or not one agrees with Larry's particular concern here, there's no ducking away from the fact that UK consumers are responsible for far-distant ethical and environmental issues driven by their long-reaching spending power. Precisely. Maybe this thread could be wound up now? Dave, if you hope a thread can be wound up when any individual participant rings the bell, you have a great deal to learn about usenet. Janet. -- Larry Stoter |
Tree Ferns hardiness
"Larry Stoter" wrote:
... Indeed, I would urge anybody considering buying currently trendy hardwood garden furniture to at least check that it originates from a managed and sustainable source. I can assure you Larry that there is absolutely nothing trendy or fashionable about garden furniture or garden anything else round here just now. In fact, the entire garden is shut down until this weather gets a little more pleasant as far as I am concerned. -- William Tasso - The road to hell is littered with fallen webmasters. http://www.tbdata.com/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:41 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter