hmm blue spruce are considered THE most prized ornamental out here


From: Steve Galehouse 
Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2010 7:08 PM
To: [email protected] 
Subject: Re: [ENTS] Re: Honorary native tree--a possibility?: Norway spruce


Bob--

The rankings are purely subjective and personal, and are based on 30+ years of 
offering for sale(Colorado and Norway), and actively selling(Serbian, Oriental, 
White) spruces:

Serbian-By far the most "elegant" spruce, with a narrow habit and branches that 
initially descend, then become upswept, in a Dr. Seuss-ish sort of way.

Oriental-The shortest needles of any spruce but at the same time lush, with a 
high gloss and a black-green color, which displays the lime-green new foliage 
to perfection.

White-Grey green foliage, medium short needles, utterly unpretentious----but it 
reminds me of my cabin in central Ontario, where it is abundant along with 
white pine, red pine, jack pine, and hemlock.  It is also the most forgiving 
spruce when planted in heavy clay, and an Ohio native from pollen records.

Norway-Lush and vigorous in youth; tattered, somber almost funereal with age. 
But it still is the authentic Tannenbaum.

Colorado-The green ones are fine, but the grafted blue cultivars are the 
Britney Spears of the plant world; all flash, no substance.

Again, just personal opinions, I hope I didn't offend anyone.

Steve

On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:44 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

  Steve, 


  Including appearance, what are the main reasons for the ranking you gave? 
Just curious.


  Bob

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Steve Galehouse" <[email protected]>
  To: [email protected]
  Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2010 6:14:44 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
  Subject: Re: [ENTS] Re: Honorary native tree--a possibility?: Norway spruce

  Gaines, ENTS-

  I have to admit Norway spruce is not one of my favorite conifers---they don't 
seem to grow old gracefully, and to me often look like a tattered flag in old 
age. This is not an issue in a forest planting or windbreak, but I think that 
is why Dirr sort of dissed it for ornamental plantings(combine this with 
improper siting in a landscape, too near a building, and a plant that looks 
lush and vigorous at 10 years looks entirely out of place 20 years later). As 
far as big tree fans, it probably is the largest and fastest growing spruce for 
the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Midwest states, and when grown in an ersatz 
natural setting it looks quite at home and attractive, but as a specimen 
landscape plant, which I think is the direction Dirr was coming from, it fails 
to develop character like an old white pine or eastern hemlock or Austrian pine 
might, in my opinion.

  I do very much like Oriental spruce(from the Caucasus, not China), and also 
Serbian spruce---when I owned and operated a garden center I liked to display 
Serbian spruce adjacent to the Bosnian pine, but not many people "got it".

  Of the available tree-form spruce in the nursery trade, my order of ranking 
of favorites from most to least would be: Serbian, Oriental, White, Norway, 
Colorado.  But that certainly doesn't represent their general popularity or 
sales velocity. I've attached a photo of an Oriental spruce from my yard.

  Steve


  On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 4:31 PM, spruce <[email protected]> wrote:


    ENTS:

      I just went into the species section of the website and looked up
    the Norway spruce stuff.  I saw a few things I think I should follow
    up on. I thought this topic, being more recent would be the best place
    to do that.

      I have been on a kind of crusade to correct some misinformation
    about Norway spruce.  There is a lot written in popular tree books
    that is flat wrong.  I don't see much of that misinformation among
    ENTS members, and that is a joy to me.  I won't go into a long
    catalogue of what has been said in books about what a lousy tree
    Norway spruce is, except to say that at one point I was so disgusted
    that I thought I had to do something--at least a little--to set the
    record straight.  My target was Michael Dirr, who wrote the "Manual of
    Woody Landscape Plants," probably the most used reference guide of its
    sort today.  I called, and in a very reasonable way quoted to him what
    he said about NS and explained why it was not fair.  He readily
    agreed, and his subsequent edition, while not giving NS all the praise
    it might deserve, is now much more fair.  A lot of books with mis-
    information are still out there, of course, and many of these are
    "set" and will not go through new editions.  I should have done more,
    I guess, with a few others. AFA's "Knowing Your Trees" is another
    prime offender.

      Michael Dirr, and myself also, are big fans of Oriental spruce
    (Picea Orientalis).

      Anyway, I saw some reference to the reproduction of NS and some
    speculation about the lack thereof in some places.  In many areas it
    reproduces readily, including on my timberland in Western MD.  In some
    cases a lack or reproduction may have to do with the specific strain
    involved.  But generally it reproduces in the cooler and wetter parts
    of the range where it is planted in the US.  In one case I saw a
    virtual carpet of seedlings under an old stand of NS. I never see any
    reporduction here around Winchester.

      About "specific strains," etc.  Norway spruce is just about the
    most variable species I am familiar with.  Another species with a
    large degree of variability is red maple.  Norway spruce has an
    extremely wide natural range.  It intergrades with the so-called
    Siberian spruce, but some taxonomists consider the two to be one
    species.  Many NS that have been planted in this country in the past
    have been from inappropriate seed sources, and thus have not grown
    very well, and hence some excuse for the bad press NS has had over the
    years. There is variation in the bark, needle length, degree of weep
    of the foliage, color, branching angles and "sweep," etc. etc. This
    variability is one of the really wonderful things about the species.
    If you plant a line of NS for a screen, each tree will be an
    individual and not look like all the others. Behind my house in
    Arlington, VA where I lived for a number of years, there was a line of
    NS.  Anyone not really familiar with NS could look at that line and
    think there were four different kinds of trees planted there.

      But NS seedlings, even if grown from a very good seed source,
    include a high proportion of "runts." The stand near Glady, WV which I
    have talked about in some earlier posts is a good example.  The
    dominant trees there are spectacular, but many of the trees that were
    growing with them are--or were--rather poor.  When I got permission to
    do some study there and to cut down some trees, I couldn't bring
    myself to cut any of the beautiful dominants, but I cut a couple of
    smaller, slower growing ones and measured and counted rings. I say the
    trees I cut were "runts," but at the time they were about 95 feet
    tall.

      When was NS first planted?  I discussed this a little in an earlier
    post.  I have heard on what I think is good authority-- two sources--
    that it was planted during colonial times.  I mentioned earlier trees
    that I thought were planted near 1835.  The time these trees were
    planted is somewhat better than a guess.  I have on a number of
    occasions done some research--talking to trees owners and learned
    about local history--and felt that there was some good evidence for
    those dates. I don't know of any ring counts of very old trees.

      I want to correct a bit what I said about the group of trees in
    Addison, PA.  These are, I now remember, next to a craft shop run by
    the Augustine family. I talked to the owner a few years back--he was
    in his late 80's at the time--and he had letters in his family records
    that dated the planting of these trees to 1870.  I said before that
    they were 130 years old--make that 140.  These are worth a bit of a
    detour to see if you are in the area. I had believed all I read in
    books about NS trees until I saw these trees--what an eye opener that
    was for me. And being able to talk to Mr. Augustine before he died was
    a joy to me. These trees in Addison, PA will always be close to my
    heart.  I have not seen them for about 7 years--I hope they are still
    OK.  The neighbor downwind was at that time doing all she could to get
    them cut down as a hazard.  I hope none have blown down.

      Somewhere someone expressed a concern about NS trees stability in
    wind.  They are not especially prone to windthrow, contrary to some
    opinions.  But they are not outstandingly windfirm either.  I would
    rank them about average for conifers. I never see nay blown down
    inside a forest stand, but in the open they may be.

      Growth rates:  I referenced a study on that done at SUNY Syracuse.
    I can summarize. On the best sites, after reaching a height of 4.5
    feet, on the better sites--generally class II soils, which are not
    uncommon--they will grow to about 112 feet tall after 50 years.  This
    is comparable to white pine on similar sites.  But at that point the
    growth rate of NS has not begun to diminish--the growth "curve" is
    still a flat ascending line.  So they will maintain their fast growth
    rate for a longer period than white pine, but after 60 years or so it
    begins to decline.  On my timberland, my trees are just a bit ahead of
    the growth curves established by the SUNY Syracuse study. For a period
    in their youth, white pine may grow a bit faster, but from 40 to 60
    years, my bet is with Norway spruce, at least if a good strain is
    involved.

      Really, which tree grows faster depends on the strain of each.  I
    have seen good NS outstrip poor white pine very easily. So don't draw
    any overall conclusions based on one comparison.

     One more thing--this is important.  I don't have any scientific
    documentation for this, but I believe NS is especially sensitive to
    some lawn weed control chemicals that work through activity in the
    soil. Roundup is fine.  I wish I had more specific info, but I have
    seen NS decline or die in so many places after these chemicals were
    used, I would warn anyone who has any of these trees in their yard to
    be very, very careful. I have not only observed this problem--I think
    this is what I have observed (no proof)--but I was also told about the
    problem some years ago by a forester in MD who was working on their
    outstanding/champion trees program.

      Well, I hope I have remembered everything.  If not, I will post
    again.

      --Gaines




Reply via email to