Re: Must one plant a redwood at all? WAS RE: Responses to Sequoia sempervirens 'Soquel'

---

I agree. Even in northern California, most of the redwoods planted as single trees outside the fog belt are not healthy, with dry branches or sparse foliage. If they're mostly green, other shrubs and trees planted nearby may have a harder time surviving, both because of the heavy leaf drop and because the redwoods greedily take all the water they can get.

Many trees require some regular water to get established in the first couple years, but then are fairly drought tolerant. Redwoods need a lifetime supply of ample water.

According to arborist Barrie Coate, a redwood tree needs 20 gallons of water per inch of trunk every month. So a 12-inch-diameter tree would require 240 gallons of water a month to stay healthy. Birch trees are the only other trees that require as much water as redwoods, Coate says.

Tanya Kucak

sunset zone 15

At 8:28 AM -0800 2/23/08, Reidfamily wrote:

>I would heartily contest the idea that any redwood fits comfortably on any
>urban lot.  This is, in my opinion, the biggest, most common landscape error
>made.  I have seen these trees placed more often where they should not go
>than any other species.  I have spoken with several city arborists who
>lament its misplacement repeatedly in urban situations. A 50' tree with its
>subsequent spread is too large in scale for most urban lots, and most
>suburban lots for that matter.  And the eventual spread of such a tree is
>always underestimated, making for an awkward aspect of structure and tree
>when mature, and the tree shades out anything else under it except shade
>loving ground covers hearty enough to compete for the water these trees
>need.  With the increasing need for conserving water, especially in Southern
>California where their water isn't really their own in most cases, it is
>ecologically irresponsible to plant a tree that uses that much water.  If a
>gardener in So. Cal just must have some thirsty species, they really should
>limit them to small areas and numbers of specimens, and not make the lion's
>share of the landscape a water-hogging plant like the COAST redwood.  I
>think Sean's adage of "a garden suited to its place" should be the by-word
>of all mediterranean gardens.  Frankly, I am surprised this species would
>even be considered in So.Cal. outside an arboretum setting.  Surely the
>encyclopedic minds on this forum could suggest far more appropriate
>drought-tolerant trees for this purpose.
>That's my very opinionated opinion, anyway.
>
>Karrie Reid
>Folsom Foothill Gardener
>Zone 9
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-medit-plants@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-medit-plants@ucdavis.edu]
>On Behalf Of Ben Wiswall
>Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 7:44 PM
>To: medit-plants@ucdavis.edu
>Subject: Responses to Sequioa sempervirens 'Soquel'
>
>Thanks for the input from everyone.  I've seen just
>the straight species and also 'Aptos Blue' redwoods
>get up to 100'+ in Los Angeles, and given moderate to
>high irrigation (2-4" per month), they seem to do OK
>even in the hot inland valleys.  Boething Nursery did
>list 'Aptos Blue' as growing to 150'+, so I figured
>maybe 'Soquel' listed at 50' was legit.  Redwoods
>aren't the best fit for the southern California
>landscape, but they're very handsome trees, and any
>tree narrow enough to fit comfortably on a small urban
>lot is worth consideration, especially if they don't
>get too tall.
>-Ben Wiswall