# The "When" of Tree Fertilization



## Jace (Oct 5, 2012)

Concerning tree fert with a "deep"(not) root feeding needle...on trees that are say, 2-6 yrs old, not trying really to replace lacking nutrience per a soil test, but rather just "tree feeding" with a Slooowwww release "balanced" liquid fertilizer.. After a hot drought summer..Im wondering if its best to do so about the time of leaf drop, or early spring when the ground becomes thawed. 

My thinking is, its not gonna hardly do squat to put it in during the "fall", as leaves are being released and uptake is shutting down, so the liquid slow release will likely not be uptaken, and instead will leach down thru the ground below roots(atleast somewhat) thru out winter (snow and rain), and will be a waste...
However, in the early spring would be best.

I say that, but I know there are large tree companies that soil inject in the fall, in hopes I think of: some uptake for winter storage, and it will still be there in the spring for new shoot uptake.

Then Im thinking too, that granular fert in comparison to liquid, would not leach and would be more appropriate for fall fert. While liquid would be better for early spring...


Anyway, anybody have any thoughts on any of this?


----------



## Ed Roland (Oct 5, 2012)

Jace said:


> Concerning tree fert with a "deep"(not) root feeding needle...on trees that are say, 2-6 yrs old, not trying really to replace lacking nutrience per a soil test, but rather just "tree feeding" with a Slooowwww release "balanced" liquid fertilizer..



The big yellow company might suggest their urea formaldehyde product can go down any time of the year. Being a synthetic organic it has to be passed through a worm's butt to be available to the plant. This can only happen when soil temps favor soil organism activity. With that said I do believe you are a little confused about soil fertility.

Prescription prior to diagnosis = malpractice.

We don't "feed" Trees. They feed themselves via photosynthesis. Why not perform some simple tests to determine the need for this billable service? You might very well exacerbate a soil's potential hydrogen problem with the wrong formula selection. Most soils contain adequate amounts of P and further apps are harmful to that environment.

I would play it safe for your reputation and the health of the tree by instead billing for a heavy application of nature's "complete" slow release fertilizer... Mulch. :msp_thumbsup:


----------



## Jace (Oct 5, 2012)

Thanks for your help and advice, Ed.
So then basically, the botton line, you'd only apply any as :
1.)Atleast only an *organic* fertilizer (for environments sake at the least)
2.) And only do so, always after doing a soil test to replace a lacking nutrient.
Correct?

I had bought a deep root feed rod earlier this year. Hadnt used it much this year. Got to talking a few days ago to a guy that does quita a bit of fall tree fertilization with a root feeder, for one of the large well knowns. He talked like it was an annuall fall deal (w/out testing in advance for a lack). Guess thats maybe not what I should be doing tho...


----------



## Ed Roland (Oct 5, 2012)

Yep, Jace, the science of arboriculture is in it's infancy but growing steady. New data leads to new methods. It is no longer acceptable to assume a soil is depleted in elements to be remediated with an injection of macroelements. 



Jace said:


> Thanks for your help and advice, Ed.
> So then basically, the botton line, you'd only apply any as :
> 1.)Atleast only an *organic* fertilizer (for environments sake at the least)



Slurry formulations of inorganic fertilizers do have their place in the industry. Personally, I would rather bill for applications of natures slow release fertilizer - coarse woody debris (mulch) over squirt and fert. You can make just as much $ with only just a little more time and effort. As an advocate for the tree you will be delivering a superior service. Emulate the forest floor. 



Jace said:


> 2.) And only do so, always after doing a soil test to replace a lacking nutrient.
> Correct?



YES! Prescription fertilization. A concept our very own International Society of Arborculture calls for but has trouble adhering to. ISA Tree and Shrub Fertilization Best Management Practice state “In the absence of soil and/or foliar analysis,…” but why should we assume the soil needs any fertilizer or amendment without at least performing some simple tests? In the absence of formal laboratory soil testing an arborist can, at least, still verify ph and fertility with a portable soil test kit for enhanced fertility treatment decisions. Ie, If you were to choose an acidic fertilizer and apply this to an acidic soil you could kill a tree with the exponential lowering of ph value. Always perform simple tests. They are cheap and they elevate your practice.



Jace said:


> I had bought a deep root feed rod earlier this year. Hadnt used it much this year. Got to talking a few days ago to a guy that does quita a bit of fall tree fertilization with a root feeder, for one of the large well knowns. He talked like it was an annuall fall deal (w/out testing in advance for a lack). Guess thats maybe not what I should be doing tho...



What is this fella is squirting into the soil? If these are fall applications of synthetic fertilizers he has no real understanding of how long lived woody perennials grow. 
Adding that big bag-O-macros to the soil disrupts the mycorr. relationship.
"Generally, mycorrhizae are only helpful to plants on soils that are extremely low in P. On soils heavily fertilized with P. the fungi do not provide sufficient P to the plants growing theron to be be effective." 
- Keefer
He is making a living inducing stress. When a tree is sick or stressed, its energy reserves are usually low. Trees can only store energy in living cells. The amount of energy reserves is then directly related to the amount of healthy living cells in wood and inner bark. When elements are added to the soil or injected into the tree, the elements stimulate the natural biological processes to increase their rate. To do this, energy is required. The energy can only come from stored reserves or from new substances produced by photosynthesis. Yearly applications of that big bag-o-macros forces top growth over root growth and destroys associations in the soil. Forcing a stressed tree to grow can KILL it!


----------



## ATH (Oct 5, 2012)

Jace said:


> .....quita a bit of fall tree fertilization with a root feeder, for one of the large well knowns. He talked like it was an annuall fall deal (w/out testing in advance for a lack). Guess thats maybe not what I should be doing tho...


Not sure if you see it...but you just nailed a way to differentiate yourself in the market.

Ask clients what they would think of a doctor that always and only ever wrote one prescription for every patient. Would they visit that doctor? Why is that practice, then, a good idea for the tree?


----------



## Jace (Oct 6, 2012)

ATH said:


> Not sure if you see it...but you just nailed a way to differentiate yourself in the market.
> 
> Ask clients what they would think of a doctor that always and only ever *wrote one prescription for every patient*. Would they visit that doctor? Why is that practice, then, a good idea for the tree?



I follow you, good point.

I havent done any fert injections at all since I bot the feeder needle in the spring. I have used "Essentials Plus 1-0-1". I have however, when diagnosing a very few trees, generally always encourage a soil test to find if there are any deficiencies. Then address. I guess talking to this guy had got me to thinkin a little misconscrued per proper practice....
Seems there are quite a few that do slow release fall fert injections..needed or not...I was checking it out on youtube.(doesnt make it "right"...)



And thanks again too Ed, for your expertise and keeping me on the right track...(even tho now and then you somehow leave me feelin like a certified idiot. Im still learning tho... )

"Prescription Fertilization" simple enough...

Is there any good reasonable soil tests on the market, better than Lowes brand, that would be quicker than paying $15 and waiting 1.5 weeks from the lab?


----------



## Jace (Oct 6, 2012)

These cites have my attention, Im looking into it...


A Report from the Compost Tea and Air Spading Workshop on August 9, 2012 | NOFA Organic Land Care

http://www.almstead.com/presentations/8-9-12.pdf

http://www.mrwigglers.com/


might be good aid - with the thread on construction damage "repair"... The worm guy said he can make me the liquid worm poop. And he is not far away..


----------



## ATH (Oct 6, 2012)

Jace said:


> Is there any good reasonable soil tests on the market, better than Lowes brand, that would be quicker than paying $15 and waiting 1.5 weeks from the lab?


I wait less than a week from Spectrum Analytic. They included recommendations by species.

Ben Meadows Has a lot of soil testing supplies. I haven't found a good publication that lists what each tree species prefers. There is some experienced-based knowledge, and have picked up other here and there, but I would like an inclusive book.


----------



## Raintree (Oct 7, 2012)

Our local State Extension Lab soil tests as a service.


----------



## Ed Roland (Oct 12, 2012)

Jace said:


> These cites have my attention, Im looking into it...
> 
> 
> A Report from the Compost Tea and Air Spading Workshop on August 9, 2012 | NOFA Organic Land Care
> ...



Jace, be careful not to buy into the leachate snake oil scams. Data discounts they're use in arboriculture. I previously made a rather lengthy case on the *Buzz Board* - *pesticides and ferts* - *compost tea* @ bottom of page. I am Knowledgequest over there.


----------



## Jace (Oct 13, 2012)

Ed Roland said:


> Jace, be careful not to buy into the leachate snake oil scams. Data discounts they're use in arboriculture. I previously made a rather lengthy case on the *Buzz Board* - *pesticides and ferts* - *compost tea* @ bottom of page. I am Knowledgequest over there.




Thanks, Ed, I read it. Interesting thread!

Came across these...
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~linda chalker-scott/FactSheets/Compost tea fact sheet.pdf

The Myth of Compost Tea Revisited:
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~linda ...tural Myths_files/Myths/Compost tea again.pdf

http://www.masslaboratory.org/aact---arboriculture-and-aerated-compost-teas.html


Whay do u think about backfilling radial trenched areas with "hauled away stump grindings"? Ive got a pretty large pile doing nothing but wasting space. Mostly dirt and sawdust, a few larger pieces...1 yr + old.


----------



## Ed Roland (Oct 13, 2012)

Jace said:


> Thanks, Ed, I read it. Interesting thread!
> 
> Came across these as well...
> http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~linda chalker-scott/FactSheets/Compost tea fact sheet.pdf
> ...



Be very careful to not use "fresh" material. Here is why: http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda ...ral Myths_files/Myths/Wood chip pathogens.pdf


----------



## Jace (Oct 13, 2012)

Ed Roland said:


> Be very careful to not use "fresh" material. Here is why: http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda ...ral Myths_files/Myths/Wood chip pathogens.pdf



I guess question is how long does it take before its considered safe to use as backfill compost. (setting in a pile undisturbed in mother natures weather).


----------



## Urban Forester (Oct 13, 2012)

Jace,
I would look into reading about the soil food web. Understanding the 5 trophic levels will show you that in nature not only do trees feed them selves, but soil does too. What we do is ADJUST mineral content, when needed or supply elements to the soil that it is lacking. What it boils down to is helping to create a balance in soil. Any ONE thing used exclusively will surely upset the balance. An Urban Forester's goal SHOULD be to help re-establish a soil profile similar to whats in a true (?) forest setting, nature will do the rest. We can INFLUENCE a soil profile, we can't create one. There are / will be times when despite our best efforts, the tree will die. That is also the way of nature, our problem is that in the urban forest, we then have to REMOVE the tree. In nature that tree decays back into the soil, maintaining the balance. While in the urban forest we return a couple weeks later to amend the soil of the surviving trees in the area, because we just chipped up and took away the soil's food source   And it goes on and on...


----------



## sgreanbeans (Oct 14, 2012)

Good stuff. 

"The worst thing we do to the trees, is rake the leafs below them"- Ihavenoclue


----------



## Jace (Oct 14, 2012)

Urban Forester said:


> Jace,
> I would look into reading about the soil food web. Understanding the 5 trophic levels will show you that in nature not only do trees feed them selves, but soil does too. What we do is ADJUST mineral content, when needed or supply elements to the soil that it is lacking. What it boils down to is helping to create a balance in soil. Any ONE thing used exclusively will surely upset the balance. An Urban Forester's goal SHOULD be to help re-establish a soil profile similar to whats in a true (?) forest setting, nature will do the rest. *We can INFLUENCE a soil profile, we can't create one*. There are / will be times when despite our best efforts, the tree will die. That is also the way of nature, our problem is that in the urban forest, we then have to REMOVE the tree. In nature that tree decays back into the soil, maintaining the balance. While in the urban forest we return a couple weeks later to amend the soil of the surviving trees in the area, because we just chipped up and took away the soil's food source   And it goes on and on...




What is your opinion on the use of liquid amendments to influence a soil
Profile?
And, I will heed your advice on "soil food web" study, thanks. Just came across this, seems to have a good short series.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnYburADpi4


----------



## Urban Forester (Oct 14, 2012)

I prefer oganic soil amendments where for whatever reason, mulch rings, proper irrigation can't be used. Or, where the trees have been planted in highly compacted / poor soil. The reason is that biological nitrogen fixation produces 15 billion metric tons of usable nitrites and nitrates per year throughout the world. In MOST cases additional N sources are not needed, What IS needed (in the urban forest) is the food source (in the form of humus) that the soil microbes need to continue fixing N. What happens by continuing to introduce N (even in fixed forms) is soil burnout of the microbial elements we depend on. We expect them to continue to "work" without "eating". A soil test showing less than 5% organic matter OR a solvita test showing less than 2.5 indicates a soil lacking an adequate "food source". I use alot of Growth Products Essential 1-0-1 and Plant Health Care's Compete Plus, which is a rhizosphere inoculant.


----------



## Jace (Oct 15, 2012)

Ed Roland said:


> Jace, be careful not to buy into the leachate snake oil scams. Data discounts they're use in arboriculture. I previously made a rather lengthy case on the *Buzz Board* - *pesticides and ferts* - *compost tea* @ bottom of page. I am Knowledgequest over there.



Concerning the use of ACT....
I was watching this video, Ed, and long about the 4 min mark this guy starts talking about something relevant to your point on the other forum concerning ecoli and ACT. 
Soil Secrets 1 - YouTube



"To tea, or not to tea"
http://www.whatcom.wsu.edu/ag/compost/composttea.htm

While I havent looked into this(ACT), up untill the last few days, I follow your line of reasoning...


----------

