-
The forum has been upgraded to support both light and dark themes. Click here for directions.
White oak fertilization
- Thread starter Deadeye53
- Start date
Native Hunter
Well-Known Member
Here is what Craig Harper says about it:
This was a good read thank
This was a good read thank you
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
If you google this question you will get ten different opinions. The one thing you have to consider is it's no longer politically correct to spread fertilizer, yet farmers spread the same rates that they always have, because it works. Even the primitive American Indians knew that plants have to eat and buried a fish in each corn hill.
I have several 48" DBH white oaks that are prolific nut producers and probably date back to the revolutionary war. I do crown release for these trees, cutting any other tree with a touching crown, and also give them a little bit of fertilizer. I took several bags of 19-19-19 corn fertilizer that I had left over and spread it around in the area directly below the crown.
I can tell you that my trees nut production is good without a university study that uses a susceptible practice of setting bins on the ground under white oak trees to collect nuts. In Craig Harper's University of Tennessee study saying not to use fertilizer I'm sure the squirrels grinned about those helpful bins all the way to their dens with a mouthful of nuts. His research said some trees didn't produce any nuts... However, Mossy Oak Gamekeeper says; Mast producing trees, whether they’re soft mast like apple or persimmon, or hard mast like hickory nuts or oak acorns, should all be fertilized.
I have several 48" DBH white oaks that are prolific nut producers and probably date back to the revolutionary war. I do crown release for these trees, cutting any other tree with a touching crown, and also give them a little bit of fertilizer. I took several bags of 19-19-19 corn fertilizer that I had left over and spread it around in the area directly below the crown.
I can tell you that my trees nut production is good without a university study that uses a susceptible practice of setting bins on the ground under white oak trees to collect nuts. In Craig Harper's University of Tennessee study saying not to use fertilizer I'm sure the squirrels grinned about those helpful bins all the way to their dens with a mouthful of nuts. His research said some trees didn't produce any nuts... However, Mossy Oak Gamekeeper says; Mast producing trees, whether they’re soft mast like apple or persimmon, or hard mast like hickory nuts or oak acorns, should all be fertilized.
Native Hunter
Well-Known Member
This slightly less than 18 foot DBH white oak and others in my yard produce well without fertilization.
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
No fair, you live down in bluegrass country with that highly fertile silt loam phosphatic limestone topsoil that grows big heavy racks (and drops acorns like peanuts on jimmy carters farm)
yoderjac
Well-Known Member
I would suggest there is a difference between young trees we plant that are trying to establish and put on initial growth. I think fertilizer benefits them, because the root system is limited. Mature oaks have huge root systems. I believe that is the likely reason studies show no benefit from adding fertilizer. The other interesting believe that was debunked a number of years ago is that if you fertilize an oak, the acorns will be more attractive to deer than the unfertilized acorns nearby.
You can find any opinion you want on the internet. There are lots of habitat things we can spend our money on. I think that when we follow the science, we waste fewer dollars allowing more to be applied to the things we know work. There are many things that have not been studied. I think this is the area where the best you can do is use anecdotal evidence and testimonials from others to decide what opinion you want to follow.
You can find any opinion you want on the internet. There are lots of habitat things we can spend our money on. I think that when we follow the science, we waste fewer dollars allowing more to be applied to the things we know work. There are many things that have not been studied. I think this is the area where the best you can do is use anecdotal evidence and testimonials from others to decide what opinion you want to follow.
Native Hunter
Well-Known Member
Jimmy's peanuts and Billy's Beer
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
Poor soils and only two big oaks on an 80 acre property with fertilizer only being $18 for 50 lbs makes this common sense decision easy for me, in fact, it isn't really a decision, it's just another line item on my list of things to do such as mineral licks, trimming trees, clearing roads and fixing water bars, but I only throw a bag out to the white oaks every five years or so.
Following the science is a good principle in general, but people who can temper science with common sense get a much better value. Take eating eggs for instance; eggs are now considered a "nutritional powerhouse" but following the science back when baby powder caused cancer in 1970 would have had someone limited to eating only 3 eggs a week , eating sugar to “curb their appetite, taking Fen-Phen to lose weight, avoided dark chocolate, ate margarine instead of butter to be healthy, not went swimming until an hour after they ate, and took heroin in their cough syrup. Scientists are doing valuable research that benefits all of us, but some things we just have to figure out on our own.
