Deep root fertilization

[TreeJunkie]

Mike,

Your analogy is a bit off. I think it unfair to compare the method which i've used to making 10 holes w/ 5 lbs of fert each.
In reality i'd say were taking more in the range of 200 holes per 1,000 sq. ft. Maybe 1/3-1/2 cup of fert per hole.

The fertilizer if you're familiar w/ doggetts is a slow release over 9 months and has a very low salt index. These two things make me think it might not be quite as harsh as you may imply.

I do broadcast spread over the general area as well this way to keep away from dark patches of lawn around the fertilization areas. And as of now i'm yet to see any lawn burning as Mike might like to imply would happen.


Is there something wrong w/ using peat??? Would i be better off mixing w/ another product?

I know i may be better off using composted materials however i don't currently have a bunch of this kind of thing readily available at all times.


Thanks for the input guys. Lets not turn this into a nut and berries discussion though; if you know what i'm getting at.

 

[alanarbor]

The dogget 32-7-7 is mostly water insoluble, it won't leach, it's low salt, as mentioned above. Still, it over does it. The drill hole method is fine, but liquid injection would be better. Keep in mind, it will form a suspension, not a solution, so using a filter that is not too fine is important as is good agitation. If you cut the rate of 32-7-7 down to about 2 lbs/100 gallons, about 25% of the labeled rate of 5-10lbs, and add some additional organic materials, you'll be a lot better off. I would also consider running soil tests 100% of the time, to be sure you're putting down the right things, in the right amounts.

 

[Stumper]

John, I question the auger glazing holes-I'm not saying it is impossible but it isn't what I observe. I used to feed with a 'feeding ' bar that I pounded holes with-no doubt that was glazing holes(it was visible) but we still saw a response from formerly chlorotic trees. I can't argue too much with Mike's point about burning burning in spots and leaching to others while leaving areas untouched- However, faults and allspiking columns of fert into the dripline has generated growth reponses from trees for generations and has turned dying to thriving more than once-Not quite as bad as the Civil war field hospital approach to tree health that it resembles.

Brandon, For composted materials check out your local garden centers -even, dare I say....WalMart. They sell composted stuff from composted manure, to composted cottonseed hulls by the bag. Mixing chemical ferts into that will help prevent the concentrated spots that may burn subsurface roots or you can dump chemical ferts down a few evenly distributed holes and stuff compost into the others-many of the composted materials even have an analysis on the bag so they are "fertilizer" too. The bottom line for me is this-If a customer wants fertilizer I will provide it-since they depend on me to determine dose I do so-nowadays I make more holes than I used to but apply a lot less concentrated chemical fert. Most of the hoses just get humus(composted something or other) The tree responses are gratifying without stimulating them to grow themselves to death.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I've seen the glazing, and as said Lew posted sope pics here a while back of the little pots formed by the augers that were left over after the used an air tool. I'm not saying that I think it trapps all the product in the hole, jsut that it's been shown in small studies to not add to aeration in clayey soils.

 

[pmuscato]

I love me some fish emulsion, I've never burn anything with it. A little pricey though. I even like the smell, reminds me of my *** growing days.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I can remember mixing/rinsing tanks of it and allmost loosing my breakfast. I learned very quickly to watch for drift when doing follianr apps of the stuff (ewwwww!)

Funny how I was cavalier with the orthene et. al. but stinky fish I was carefull with.

I had to stop doing regular spray routes because cabaryl was making my lymph nodes swell up.

 

[treeseer]

I had to stop doing regular spray routes because cabaryl was making my lymph nodes swell up.

That freaks me out; lymphoma is worse in some ways than leukemia, which is no picnic. 2 oncos suspected lymphoma before leukemia was diagnosed; it's all =very bad.

I still use chems but wear a space suit every time.

 

[murphy4trees]

Oh Ya MM.....
That's what I AM talkin about "slow release" 32N.... makes your 10-10-10 sound like lite beer.

 

[treeseer]

Radical Soilbuilding Method

The results I've seen from vm with an auger, from
Marx wPHC and other research, also does not show appreciable lateral movement.

"If you still want to do vertical mulching, drill the holes at an angle, and
you will affect a slightly greater percentage of the soil volume, especially
if something other than perlite and original soil is included as backfill."

This is right, so my (radical?) method of vm uses 45 degree angled holes, made with
a miner's pick. Using this tool allows fracturing of the soil well beyond the hole,
by simply pushing back on the handle. I typically fill the holes with 1 part compost,
1 part soil coniditioner (mostly fine pine bark and gravel fines), and 1 part expanded
slate aggregate (stalite). This mix is similar to Cornell's blend of CU soil.

The mix is blended into the holes with a jet of water from the garden hose. Yes
all this is high-labor going in--I've demo'd it at workshops like macisa and gotten
a lot of blank disbelieving looks from folks who seem to think that no method can
be feasible if it does not involve the use of power machinery. Add to the disadvantage
of augering the FACT that it cuts roots, no matter the distance from the trunk.

I've used airspades and airknives on compacted clay. It felt like my arm was going
to break, like that poor fellow's did while augering. Neither tool made acceptable
progress, and watching that air blast the skin off of 1" oak roots was injury
on top of insult. I'm perplexed by the patenting of this method, as it has been
widely used for over ten years, since Gary Watson brought over the concept of radial
trenching from London from Tienanmen square (you think we have compaction problems--they
have tank traffic grinding human bones into the earth to mitigate!).

The topdressing idea makes good sense on trees that are not in rapid decline, but
is too slow to help most of the trees I am called to. On mildly streesed trees
I aerate with a pick, then topdress w compost, then mulch. Maybe I should patent
this method--it's called Pickin' and Grinnin". But wait, maybe i'll have to
get permission from the producers of the old tv show Hee Haw to use that name...

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I'm perplexed by the patenting of this method, as it has been
widely used for over ten years,

It's not the methodology being patented, but the design of the thier tip wich suposedly gives optimal supersoinc speed/volume/distance from tip.

 

[treeseer]

It's not the methodology being patented, but the design of the thier tip wich suposedly gives optimal supersoinc speed/volume/distance from tip.

John, that doesn't seem to jibe with this press release, which is typically long on hype and short on details. It does seem to state that it is the method that is patented, no mention of the tip.

http://www.bartlett.com/au710.cfm?ID=24

 

[treeseer]

The way I read it it's not the tip or the technique...............................it's the patent that makes all the difference.
I bet marketing did the research!

What they call process I called technique, same difference.

Cornell got a patent on their structural soil mix, which gets specced based on the research they did with it. Trouble is, it's priced thru the yangadyying. Other companies blended similar mixes but I haven't read about them getting sued or anything. Bartlett can patent all they want, they deserve some props for the work they do.

I just hope they don't ask me to send them a check every time I inject compost using an airspade. I first saw it done in '96, before i read or saw Bartlett's work on it, so I'm grandfathered so to speak.

And yes if marketing and research are in the same company, they must influence each other. So? It works, that's the main thing.

 

[treeseer]

I'm all for research but I hate it when the results are not for public use. I would be willing to bet they have used tons of data from the US Dept. of Ag. paid for by taxpayers.

The universities use public grant $ to fund research that develops stuff they patent; seems to be the trend.

If tree care goes the way of hostas, does that mean the kiss of death will be smooched upon root invigoration? Let's hope not.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I emailed Bartlett on the subject. Seems to mee that if you don't call it root invigoration, and use your own special additive to your backfill, you should be OK.

Mr. Sanborn:

Regarding your question about our Root Rx patent, On January 25, 2005, we were issued patent number 6,845,587 for the tree root invigoration process that was developed by staff at the Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories. Our process includes both the use of an air excavator to loosen existing rooting soil in a defined improvement area, and the treatment of existing soil with a process using soil amendments to encourage the growth of plant roots. Our process is unique in nature.



There are numerous articles and sources of information regarding the use of air spades around tree roots, as well as the use of soil amendments that preceded our patent. In fact, in addition to a thorough patent search, public information dating as far back as 1994 was reviewed and considered by the United States Patent Office, prior to granting our patent. So, your use of an air excavation tool in the past does not invalidate our patent, nor does it necessarily mean that your continued use of an air excavator violates our patent.



Our primary goal in patenting Root Rx was to protect the process of tree root invigoration which we developed. If you have concerns that you might be in violation of our patented process, you should consult a patent attorney who can access the specific patented process language through the United States Patent Office in Washington DC. If in fact the attorney finds that you are in violation, contact us regarding a license to perform our specific process.



Bruce Fraedrich



Bruce R. Fraedrich Ph.D.

VP/Research

Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories

13768 Hamilton Rd.

Charlotte, NC 28278

704-588-1150 x122

[email protected]

 

[treeseer]

I emailed Bartlett on the subject. Seems to mee that if you don't call it root invigoration, and use your own special additive to your backfill, you should be OK.

I think you're right big guy. I routinely use the phrase "root invigoration", but I won't use it in the biz anymore. Good of Bruce to respond thoroughly; very professional as usuaL. Not sure what 'Our process is unique in nature" means, but we'll let that pass. I'll stick to calling it "soilbuilding", since that's my own phrase, colloquially called Pickin' and Grinnin'.

Some ASCA (my post above is off that forum) guys are supposed to be talking to other patent attorneys; I'll pass along anything significant that comes out of there.

 

[Nickrosis]

Sorry, the irony of this thread's title cracks me up.

Lemme know if you need the name of a good patent attorney.