Eucalyptus vs alternatives - FIGHT!

Lumen

Sorry for length, I'm trying to get my thoughts in order.

So....

BACKGROUND

I've been researching screening trees for two edges of my 3/4 acre site where there are year-round privacy/view issues. On one side there are overlooking windows and driveway of a 2-storey dormer bunglalow, on the other a housing estate will be built over the next few years which I just don't want to see.

I'm dealing with low-level boundary screening on one side with Virburnum Tinus and Eleagnus Ebbingei hedge, with the more vigorous Eleagnus handling the section with the windows. There is a line of ugly-lollipop-shaped LLeylandii on the boundary (which will be behind the hedge line) and I'll take those down once new high level screening is in place.

On the other boundary I have a scruffy ditch on the far side of a post-and-rail fence with various native trees, brambles etc which I'm planning to tidy up and thicken, maybe with some thorny natives for the birds to nest in and eat the berries off. If need be I'll plant some more hedging inside the boundary.

THE REQUIREMENT

What I need is a row (or double row) of trees about 4-6m inside the two hedge lines to provide year round high-level screening from 2m up to at least 6m.

I don't need or want heavy year-round foliage like a Thuja provides, I want light to get through. I'm after a dappled, moving screen.

ALTERNATIVES

Bay Willow (Salix pentandra)
Not evergreen, but quite dense so might provide enough screening esp in a double row, but that's a lot of willow, and if it gets diseased I'll lose it all and have to start again/

Hazel (Corylus avellana).
Like the Bay Willow, good dense deciduous screen but don't think I can grow it as I have acid soil (Rhododendrons are happy).

West Himalayan birch (Betula utilis var. jacquemontii)
Another decent deciduous screen but I'll need a few rows to get a proper screen.

Monterey Pine (Pinus Radiata)
Some nice examples but difficult to control shape when mature - as the canopy lifts there's no way to get back those lower branches.

Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris)
Not really enough screening, esp. when mature.

Stone Pine (Pinus pinea)
Lovely shape, edible nuts, not fully hardy but I'm on east coast so don't expect serious cold temps. Slow growing though, can take a decade to do anything useful, better suited to a specimen tree further in the site.

Strawberry Tree (Arbutus unedo)
Like the stone pine, lovely tree but can't rush it, better off as a specimen further inside.

EUCALYPTUS

OK, so I've read loads about Eucalyptus the last couple of weeks and it seems to have a lot to offer structurally even if it's useless from a biodiversity perspective.

A lot of the bad rep seems to be from massive Gunnii planted in the wrong place on a site, or non-hardy varieties planted too far inland and killed by the severe winters in 2010/11, or people fearing falling branches from Dalrympleana (the "widowmaker").

So, positives:
- Provides high-level, year round dappled screening without blocking the light like cedars and cypresses do.
- Very fast growing BUT will regenerate so can be coppiced or pollarded to control height and shape, and will regrow very quickly.
- Produces lots of firewood which is fine for most stoves.
- Interesting shape and attractive bark (subjective).

Negatives:
- Non-native dirty foreign muck weed tree etc.
- Expensive to maintain at height (climbing = cost).

Example varieties
Information sources: RHS, Future Forests, Grafton Nursuries (UK):

Eucalyptus archeri (Alpine Cider Gum)
"Differs from E. gunni in that E. archeri responds well to pruning and coppicing"
Growth rate: 1.5-2m/year

Eucalyptus glaucescens (Tingiringi Gum)
"It makes a very attractive nicely shaped specimen tree, both in the juvenile and adult stages of growth; it coppices well and as a pruned tree, it grows into a striking multi-stemmed screening plant (2-3m tall)".
Growth rate: 1.5-2m/year

Eucalyptus parvula (Kybean gum)
"Eventually around 10 m, but can be pruned to keep it a good deal shorter or coppiced/pollarded every 5-8 years and grown as a multi-stemmed specimen."
Growth rate: 1m/year

Eucalyptus pauciflora subspecies niphophila - Snow Gum
"A slower growing Eucalyptus, very hardy and with the most beautiful bark detail."
Growth rate: 1m/year

That said, despite lots of talk of coppicing and pollarding, I can't find any good pictures of what this would look like, other than this old one: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Nhgh9bVEC8c/UR17OJXtbqI/AAAAAAAAEPw/rhwwJAzfPuc/s1600/NBG+old+E+mannifera+0213.JPG

THE PLAN

At this stage I'm thinking of mixing up some eucalypts, pines, and bay willows at maybe 3m separation, seeing how they work out after a few years and then thinning out a bit.

So what say ye, tree people?

PICS
Please don't quote! Or else the thread will become unreadable.

Archeri



Glaucescens



Parvula



Pauciflora ss niphophila

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Probably not what you want to near but a screen of mixed species staggered in a couple/few rows works best for appearance, effectiveness in blocking a view and as a wind break.

Lumen

Penny Grumpy Workbook wrote: »

Probably not what you want to hear but a screen of mixed species staggered in a couple/few rows works best for appearance, effectiveness in blocking a view and as a wind break.

I do want to hear.

Which mix will give me year-round screening up to 6m?

my3cents

Just a note on any eucalypts that you might plant.

Plant small and don't bother planting anything that is the slightest bit pot bound.

Anything more than a foot high is too big imo.

The problem is the way eucalypts produce their roots. If they go round and round a pot they tend not to produce any new roots from the base of the stem so you are in effect planting them on a coil spring so they will jump out of the ground in high winds.

Penny Grumpy Workbook wrote: »

Probably not what you want to near but a screen of mixed species staggered in a couple/few rows works best for appearance, effectiveness in blocking a view and as a wind break.

Given space I'd go for a massive deep bed planted so the plants get mutual benefit from each other. Leaves room for sun lovers and plenty of shade lovers tucked in.

Why not think about marking out a very large area of the garden for this instead of a shelter "belt" and then putting a path or two through it so you have access to see the beauty of the gems hidden under the canopy of the larger plants. Start by randomly (well random + common sense) planting taller wind tolerant species and then use them as a nucleus to plant tall shrubs grading the heights down to your paths and the front facing the house.

Treat it like a shelter belt and its a waste of planting space.

Lumen

Here's a couple of shots from my 3d site model to give some context.

The trees in white in the first two (coloured in the third pic) are the pines I was intending to plant before I started off down the Eucalypt rabbit hole.

The other trees are correct for placement and size but not species, I've a mix of big prunus, conifers and beech.

I guess I was trying to "contain" the trees into a shelterbelt to leave enough space for the "garden" proper (and a future boundary path between shelterbelt and hedge), but my3cents is making me think that I should integrate the trees with other planting.

...the small apple trees are going to go with new orchard/permaculture strip down the other (south facing) side of the site where there is full sun...

Lumen

my3cents wrote: »

Just a note on any eucalypts that you might plant.

Plant small and don't bother planting anything that is the slightest bit pot bound.

Anything more than a foot high is too big imo.

Yes, this matches the advice on the Grafton site. They sell specimens in "airpots" from Australia, dunno whether this is the case with other suppliers.

http://grafton-nursery.co.uk/the-best-size-eucalyptus-to-plant.htm

Lumen

Oh, and this is the eastern boundary with the row of Lleylandii that are going to go in a few years when the new hedge and tree screen is in place.

my3cents

Lumen wrote: »

Yes, this matches the advice on the Grafton site. They sell specimens in "airpots" from Australia, dunno whether this is the case with other suppliers.

http://grafton-nursery.co.uk/the-best-size-eucalyptus-to-plant.htm

Nice link We lost our last magnificent seed raised eucalypt in Ophelia and my wife was really upset about it. So I've emailed them to see if I can get the foliage collection delivered here. I don't hold out too much hope but if you don't ask....

macraignil

Lumen wrote: »

I do want to hear.

Which mix will give me year-round screening up to 6m?

It would depend on the density you plant at but in the opening post you do say you want some light to be able to get through so all evergreen trees could block out too much light in my opinion.

You mention Salix pentandra which sounds like a good option but why not mix this with some other native species like whitebeam, alder, crab apple and cherry varieties. There is also Salix chrysocoma and even oak, ash and sweet chestnut if you want to go for something that would get a bit bigger in time.

my3cents

I'd rule out the pines to a certain extent as they can tend to dry out the soil below them and make it unsuitable for other plants. However I've seen some world class Rhododendron collections growing under pines.

Betula "jacquemontii" really isn't a tree for this situation but the real paper bark birch Betula papyrifera might be a better choice but all birches are short lived but excellent nurse trees. By nurse tree I mean ones that you plant with your main crop slower growing trees and help shelter them and can also improve the soil. In your case some of the birch species would be fine but you'd want to plan to remove them eventually and plant them in addition to the trees you want in the long term.

Very long term but had you thought about any of the ceders or perhaps a really fast growing Taxodium distichum maybe as a group of 3 or 5 trees?

Edit Taxodium distichum grows fine away from water but likes a deep soil, if its at all damp then Metasequoia glyptostroboides would be another nice fast grower. Both being deciduous.

Lumen

my3cents wrote: »

Very long term but had you thought about any of the ceders or perhaps a really fast growing Taxodium distichum maybe as a group of 3 or 5 trees?

Are there rules of thumb for how and when to group trees? i.e. spacing and species?

At the moment I'm using 3m as a guide for single trees of different species that I expect to get big.

Is it normal to overplant and then pick a winner that looks good and chop the rest? Like X Factor for trees?

my3cents wrote: »

I'd rule out the pines to a certain extent as they can tend to dry out the soil below them and make it unsuitable for other plants. However I've seen some world class Rhododendron collections growing under pines.

Excellent! They like my soil....

my3cents

Lumen wrote: »

Are there rules of thumb for how and when to group trees? i.e. spacing and species?

Plenty but I don't take any notice of any of them. Most of the rules that work are for forestry type plantations in your case you most likely want to see the full spread of some of the trees and aren't out to produce good straight timber.

At the moment I'm using 3m as a guide for single trees of different species that I expect to get big.

Is it normal to overplant and then pick a winner that looks good and chop the rest? Like X Factor for trees?

Decide on the winner before you even start planting, it doesn't always work out the way you plan but at least then you have a plan. I wouldn't for example plant 5 Pinus radiata at 3m intervals in a garden and then expect to keep one. I'd plant the one I wanted in the middle and then put four different less important spp around it. So I'd put in the trees I wanted to grow to maturity then infill with nurse and smaller ornatmental spp like (nurse) birch, larch and hazel and (ornamental) sorbus, prunus, malus etc.

Excellent! They like my soil....
Then you can also throw in a couple of the larger magnolias and ornamental cornus (eg cornus kousa but lots of others and cornus canadensis makes a super ground cover).

With an acid soil you have loads of possibilities.

Lumen

my3cents wrote: »

So I'd put in the trees I wanted to grow to maturity then infill with nurse and smaller ornatmental spp like (nurse) birch, larch and hazel and (ornamental) sorbus, prunus, malus etc.

Can I grow hazel in acid soil?

I'd love some nuts, am also considering common walnut as a specimen tree to replace a weeping birch that I hate with a passion.

my3cents

Lumen wrote: »

Can I grow hazel in acid soil?

I'd love some nuts, am also considering common walnut as a specimen tree to replace a weeping birch that I hate with a passion.

I used to garden on Bagshot sand (you could literally dig it with a shovel) and it was acid. I had no problem growing most things and we had an old oak woodland with hazel underneath along with plenty of rhododendrons, only thing I had trouble with was clematis.

Lumen

Thanks for all the suggestions and advice.

I've been reading and thinking a lot about all this, and I'm coming around to the idea that planting Eucalyptus is a missed opportunity.

Instead, I'm planning to drop the "row of evergreen screening trees" idea and go with a deeper planted permaculture approach, with:

- Hazel planted in a rough hedge-y fashion and with the odd standalone tree, hopefully non-grafted so I can get productive suckers. Some Rotblatterige Zellernuss for colour.
- Common walnut interplanted with Elaeagnus Umbellata nurse shrubs (evidence).
- Stone pine towards the centre of the site running into the lawn area where I don't need other things growing under it, for long-term production of pine nuts.
- Dwarf-ish (prob. M26) cider orchard on the south facing end where I don't need the privacy.
- Bushes of Aronia and Blueberry scattered or in groups (not sure about pollination technique).
- Mulberry tree (or group of trees) for its long picking season.
- The odd Rowan (Mountain ash) for colour and thrushes.
- Maybe some crab apple for pollination.
- Holly in the deep shade (not sure there are any edible shrubs or trees that will grow in deep shade).

If I can find the space I might stick a couple of Scots or Monterey pine near one of the boundaries to add a bit of high level interest, but I'm a bit nervous about screwing up the productive species.

macraignil

Lumen wrote: »

Thanks for all the suggestions and advice.

I've been reading and thinking a lot about all this, and I'm coming around to the idea that planting Eucalyptus is a missed opportunity.

Instead, I'm planning to drop the "row of evergreen screening trees" idea and go with a deeper planted permaculture approach, with:

- Hazel planted in a rough hedge-y fashion and with the odd standalone tree, hopefully non-grafted so I can get productive suckers. Some Rotblatterige Zellernuss for colour.
- Common walnut interplanted with Elaeagnus Umbellata nurse shrubs (evidence).
- Stone pine towards the centre of the site running into the lawn area where I don't need other things growing under it, for long-term production of pine nuts.
- Dwarf-ish (prob. M26) cider orchard on the south facing end where I don't need the privacy.
- Bushes of Aronia and Blueberry scattered or in groups (not sure about pollination technique).
- Mulberry tree (or group of trees) for its long picking season.
- The odd Rowan (Mountain ash) for colour and thrushes.
- Maybe some crab apple for pollination.
- Holly in the deep shade (not sure there are any edible shrubs or trees that will grow in deep shade).

If I can find the space I might stick a couple of Scots or Monterey pine near one of the boundaries to add a bit of high level interest, but I'm a bit nervous about screwing up the productive species.

I think you're right not to over rely on eucalyptus and the varieties you describe sound like good choices. I have one blueberry and one aronia that have had fruit with no particular pollination technique used. I have read that having more than one variety of blueberry gives a better crop and originally had two different ones for that reason. One of them was unfortunately killed by a tractor so only had the one since then and it still had plenty of blueberries this year.

I found the birds got to the aronia berries and many of the blueberries before I could but the aronia is still a nice shrub to have in the garden anyway with bright red autumn colour to its leaves and nice flowers early in the year. I wanted to get mulberry myself as well but found it difficult to source when I was planting. Just did an internet search and clarenbridge garden centre have it listed for sale but you might find it cheaper somewhere else.

Lumen

I tried planning my tree positions on paper but it wasn't really working out due to my crushing lack of imagination.

So I dug out a roll of thin plastic sheeting from B&Q left over from a summer project and got busy with the scissors...

magicbastarder

are they the bodies of previous trees being used to weigh it down?

Lumen

magicbastarder wrote: »

are they the bodies of previous trees being used to weigh it down?

Yeah, but they are Lleylandii logs so it's a victimless crime.

macraignil

Noticed as well that futureforests have black mulberry listed in their potted tree page.

magicbastarder

Lumen wrote: »

Yeah, but they are Lleylandii logs so it's a victimless crime.

reminds me of that richard pryor line - something along the lines of 'don't get me wrong, murder is bad, but sometimes, y'know, they deserve it...'

magicbastarder

looks like a nice garden already - is that your work, or did you inherit it from a previous owner?

Lumen

magicbastarder wrote: »

looks like a nice garden already - is that your work, or did you inherit it from a previous owner?

Inherited from previous owner, largely. I've mostly been chopping things down for the last year, which is soul destroying but had to be done as large areas were overgrown and not really fixable by aggressive pruning. And the fencing required a lot of clearance for access.

Now I'm in the fun stage of planting new things. Eleagnus and viburnum hedging is in, I've a spring order in for aronia, cornelian cherry, walnut, cobnut, more eleagnus, cherry, plum, and medlar.

I got a handful of Eucalyptus in the end as it means I can get rid of the Lleylandii quicker, but the long term plan is to plant a row of Arbutus for year round screening and then lose most of the Euc. in 20 years or so if I'm still around.

Still on a very steep learning curve!

Squiggle

Sowing stuff in the middle of the grass area is to be avoided imo. You are giving yourself an even bigger obstacle course in terms of cutting the grass than is already there. Good luck with it though.

Lumen

Squiggle wrote: »

Sowing stuff in the middle of the grass area is to be avoided imo. You are giving yourself an even bigger obstacle course in terms of cutting the grass than is already there.

Good point, although it's not mown with a ride-on so I don't think it'll cause major issues. I'm mulching heavily for several feet around each trunk.

I spent the first year adding grass and now I'm taking it away. This is how gardening works, right? :pac:

my3cents

Squiggle wrote: »

Sowing stuff in the middle of the grass area is to be avoided imo. You are giving yourself an even bigger obstacle course in terms of cutting the grass than is already there. Good luck with it though.

Unkind I know but that sounds a very Irish opinion and possibly a reason why so many gardens here are crap.

Gardening is more than sitting on a mower.

baaba maal

my3cents wrote: »

Unkind I know but that sounds a very Irish opinion and possibly a reason why so many gardens here are crap.

Gardening is more than sitting on a mower.

To be fair, I don't think it is just an Irish thing- there is a very large global industry fronted with big advertising budgets telling us that a billiard table lawn is a mandatory feature of a proper garden- check out how much of the shelf space in a Woodies or wherever is devoted to lawns- seeds, fertilizers, pesticides and so forth.
I grow the majority of my front garden as a species-rich grassland (not enough colour yet to call it a wildlflower meadow!)- one of two neighbours ask me if I don't like gardening!

Love the attention to detail Lumen- great thinking in the OP! I should have done the same when I planted trees around mine.

Lumen

baaba maal wrote: »

I grow the majority of my front garden as a species-rich grassland (not enough colour yet to call it a wildlflower meadow!)- one of two neighbours ask me if I don't like gardening!

Yes, that's the kind of thing I'm now leaning towards. I was initially aiming for a bit of a parkland feel but it's quite sterile.

Got any pics?

Squiggle

my3cents wrote: »

Unkind I know but that sounds a very Irish opinion and possibly a reason why so many gardens here are crap.

Gardening is more than sitting on a mower.

The only plant in the garden that needs weekly attention for 7 months of the year is grass so it makes sense to make the task of cutting it as easy as possible. The notion that you have to have trees/shrubs/flowers dotted all over the place to make a garden attractive is utter rubbish and there aren't too many who would advocate it.

Lumen

Squiggle wrote: »

The only plant in the garden that needs weekly attention for 7 months of the year is grass so it makes sense to make the task of cutting it as easy as possible. The notion that you have to have trees/shrubs/flowers dotted all over the place to make a garden attractive is utter rubbish and there aren't too many who would advocate it.

Lawn is not really comparable to trees/shrubs/flowers since you can't walk on those.

It's like sllghtly-lower-maintenance paving. Although maybe if I added up the costs of lawn maintenance over 20 years, tarmac would be cheaper.

But I don't think you can really argue that pushing a mower round a 1m diameter mulched tree hole is more difficult than mowing the grass where the hole was.

my3cents

Squiggle wrote: »

The only plant in the garden that needs weekly attention for 7 months of the year is grass so it makes sense to make the task of cutting it as easy as possible. The notion that you have to have trees/shrubs/flowers dotted all over the place to make a garden attractive is utter rubbish and there aren't too many who would advocate it.

You don't dot them all over the place you have a plan and plant them in large groups called beds. The more beds there are the less grass there is, win win.