Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
scotjute

Consider the Other Native Elms

scotjute Z8
15 years ago

There are other native Elm trees besides American Elm that you might want to consider when planting shade trees. Most of them are sort of smaller, vase-shaped versions of American Elm, and are quite nice trees in their own right.

Cedar Elm grows up to 90' and has small leaves. It is common over much of Texas and is often planted as a shade tree here. Very hardy, and soil-adaptable, it is also drought resistant, and yet can tolerate poor drainage. Fall color is beautiful golden-yellow. Some resistance to DED.

Winged Elm grows 30-60' and also has small leaves. Yellow fall color, drought resistant, soil adaptable, and rapid growth. I planted one by mistake and it is thriving in 7.5 soil pH.

Slippery Elm grows to about 70'. Soil adaptable, some drought tolerance. Someone else will have to chime in on this tree. I know it exists but not personally familiar with it.

Comments (58)

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    probably why I saw my friend raking the leaves and bagging them up.

  • mikeygraz
    15 years ago

    lkz5ia - .....lol.....always good for a laugh...

  • palustris81
    15 years ago

    Goodness, you take your head out of the books for awhile and I guess you miss some stuff. Thanks, resin, for the update; I never knew Celtis had been moved out of Ulmaceae. I do however, still believe it is a tree worthy of much more attention than it receives, and I have seen it being used quite a bit in Chicago and a little bit in Ann Arbor. However it is still removed quite a bit here in Cincinnati.

  • scotjute Z8
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    AaaaGGHHH! Oh the horror. :(
    Ikz5ia you are an Elm tree terrorist!
    We have hackberry dieing all the time down here and yet I don't go around skinning live ones just because they may get sick and die!

  • Iris GW
    15 years ago

    yet I don't go around skinning live ones just because they may get sick and die

    That's right, lkz5ia , you might be killing the one with the miracle gene that will save all others!

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    haha, when you say skinning, you mean like this?
    {{gwi:326121}}
    but don't worry, I love elms. I'm planting many proven resistant ones around here.

  • Iris GW
    15 years ago

    I'm planting many proven resistant ones around here.

    Siberian?

  • arktrees
    15 years ago

    "I would say I kill any elm under 2 feet in diameter, because anything over it I would consider mature, and I'll leave those few. Elms have been dying here nonstop for 40 years, and they just reseed themselves, so its just a cycle of dying all the time."

    lkz5ia, those that can survive in the face of DED to the size you show in your photo's will have at least partial resistance to DED. As for the reseeding growing, then dying, and reseeding etc. that is how the species evolve resistance to the disease. Each reseeding shuffles the genes around, and over time resistance will emerge. Classic host/parasite plant pathology. But it's exceedingly difficult to evolve resistance to DED and axes at the same time. Just something to think about.

  • giantslug
    15 years ago

    American and Slippery Elm are the only ones where I live as well. Not much difference between them except for the bark and leaf texture. They both are susceptible to DED. I like both species but I kill them if they are competing with more desirable trees like Bur Oak and Basswood. I have intentionally injured most Elm trees on my land to test them for disease resistance. About half the trees I have injured die, but the others have recovered. Hopefully they have some resistance and will reproduce. I like to think that any native Elm that grows large enough to set seed may help breed resistance to DED in the future. lkz5ia, that first pic you posted is a beautiful Elm tree. I rarely see them that large here except for the more isolated street trees in cities.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    esh_ga, That is quite plausible, but I don't narrow it down to just one silly tree, but I look into having hybrids and various species.

    arktrees, I would disagree to the point that its not reasonable to wait for evolution to occur. Maybe in what, a thousand years they might make it to maturity easier? haha during that time I can plant various other less disease-prone trees in their place.

    I agree with giant slug, its reasonable to kill them in pursuit to having a better, healthier forest. Yeah, that is a beautiful elm, but its american elm and I know it would die at some point. I underplanted that area with black walnut seed, so have to get the elm competition dying sooner. Slippery elms are more resistant, but maybe the more powerful strain of DED has come through the last ten years, because a whole swath of them are all dying too now. And the old giants have their days numbered even if they are resistant, because as they get in old age, they loose the ability to fight it off.

  • mikeygraz
    15 years ago

    arktrees - very well said, especially the addition of the development of resistance from generation to generation. Its a shame that so many people who are managing their property don't have the appropriate knowledge to do so responsibly. There's so much more to managing land than just planting what will grow well. While he might have good intentions, the practices he boasts on this forum are ones that are rarely exhibited by more well-read individuals.
    ~Mike

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    I don't claim to be an advocate for the native habitat of the 1500s. I'm into permaculture and use what plants God has given this world.

  • mikeygraz
    15 years ago

    lkz5ia - on what are you basing your estimate of one thousand years to develop resistance? Using rough, personally determined estimates without any data often leads to rash and irresponsible decisions. It is a common misconception that evolution takes thousands of years; evolution is best measured in the generation time of the species at interest. For fruit flies (Drosophila sp.), this might be only a few weeks, for tortoise it might be 30 years for a generation. In a temporal sense, a fruit fly would exhibit genetic eccentricities very quickly. By destroying larger elms such as the ones pictured, in many ways you are acting in an against how the species would evolve naturally by eliminating them from the population. For example, fish clutch sizes are positively correlated with body size. In other words, the larger the female the more eggs she will lay and vice versa. Due to overfishing, larger individuals of many species are eliminated from the gene pool leaving the smaller individuals to breed (which normally would not compete well against these larger individuals in breeding events). There is quantitative data showing that the average size of several species has significantly decreased in very recent history. As a result, you have less-fit animals reproducing, producing smaller clutch sizes, which produce weaker animals, eventually resulting in a decrease of the species overall.

    This was merely an example, but similar logic can be applied to plants as well - perhaps you should rethink your methods. If you want to manage for other more desirable native species - then by all means go for it. However, it would probably be incorrect to boast that your management techniques result in a win-win situation.

    ~Mike

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    I'm not going to argue with you about this stuff, because it ends up in a lose-lose situation for both of us and the integrity of the forum. We can both just accept we are both environmentalists that have traveled in different directions. This just reminds me of g.i. joe with storm shadow and spirit.

  • basic
    15 years ago

    What a decent thread this is turning out to be. We've got scattered populations of U. thomasii (Rock Elm) around here, but not nearly as common (or nice IMO) as American Elm. I wish I could see things in black and white like some of you. I appreciate both sides of the arguement, but would have a very hard time deliberately killing a tree as nice as what lkz girdled. In the twenty-something years I've live here, I've had a few volunteer U. americana seedlings, which quickly grow to about about 35' and then succumb to DED. Its heartbreaking and a nuisance to deal with.

    Bob

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    On a positive note, a girdled dead tree can have a certain beauty in the right setting
    {{gwi:326122}}

  • quercus_macrocarpa
    15 years ago

    Ikz,

    Aren't you one of the ones on here who also loves to plant ailanthus?

  • gandle
    15 years ago

    Does anyone still supply red elm?

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    quercus, Yeah, I've planted tree of heaven before.


    gandle, Reeseville Ridge Nurseries lists Ulmus rubra in their catalog. It can be quite a beautiful tree when it lives to maturity.
    {{gwi:326123}}
    Does anyone know how to propagate starts off an old elm?
    I was thinking maybe graft it onto seedling stock and then bury it below the graft.

    Here is a link that might be useful: Red Elm Reeseville

  • scotjute Z8
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    Not an expert on grafting, but the graft is normally done above the "ground-line" and should remain in that position normally.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    yeah, but what we would want to do, is for the graft to form roots at some point and take over. I'd imagine tissue culture would be another way to do it, but haven't really looked into that.

  • quercus_macrocarpa
    15 years ago

    Ailanthus, the tree that stinks to high heaven, and displaces valuable native species. No wonder you skinned that poor elm alive!

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    oh quercus, go dry up and go make your own ailanthus topic.

  • quercus_macrocarpa
    15 years ago

    Aren't you nice, Ik.? No wonder you have to post under several different names. If I did as you suggested, you'd bomb me with how fantastic ailanthus and mimosa are, wouldn't you.

    Tree terrorist!

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    Not really sure what your ranting has to do with elms. But obviously you just like to try to flame me.

  • alexander3_gw
    15 years ago

    >I like to think that any native Elm that grows large enough to set seed may >help breed resistance to DED in the future.

    Any given elm has some small chance of being resistant (USDA estimates about 1 in 100,000), but the fact that one has made it to seed bearing age is no indication of that. They reach reproductive age before they are attractive to the elm beetle that spreads the disease.

    One place that sells Valley Forge American Elm has a 10 year guarantee that they won't die from dutch elm disease....a very safe guarantee, since even a susceptible elm is unlikely to get the disease at that age!

    Alex

  • giantslug
    15 years ago

    alexander3, Point taken, the native elms here usually don't get DED until after they are able to set seed. They generally start dying from DED when they are about 6 inches in diameter or larger. However, I believe as long as native elms are reproducing there is the possibility that future generations of trees could develop resistance.
    Does anyone in colder zones (3-4) have experience growing Valley Forge, New Harmony or other DED tolerant American Elm varieties?
    I like this thread, lets keep it going.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    So what about the elms that reach over 3ft in diameter and have been around dying elms for 30 years such as my last pic in this thread shows. Is it just luck, or is there a chance this tree has alot more resistance than the ones that have died around it?

  • scotjute Z8
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    Don't think you can really know whether its just luck or its actually resistant. But killing it stops it from spreading its DNA any further. I would have left it myself if it wasn't in the way of anything. As with fire wood, I choose trees that are either newly dead or defecticve or something. The best are left.

  • pteroceltis
    15 years ago

    I can only wish for having a viable enough population of American Elms for them to be setting seed in my neck of the woods. The swampy area below our farm has several 1' dbh trees, and our woodlands a half mile away has ONE seed tree. Aside from this single tree, there are only suckers poppping up here and there. The one tree had about 80% of its crown ripped off in the Labor Day storm of 1998 and still pushes on. Any trees able to set seed in this area are sought out and preserved by many local landowners in this area.

    Hard to beleive that anyone would actually cull them from the wild because they will "die soon". Everything will at some point.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    Yeah, you are right, most people wouldn't cull such trees for the fact they aren't a part of active woodland management. Most people around here just bulldoze trees over and replace it with cornfields and whatnot.
    Pteroceltis, you've been here before talking about planting a variety of exotic trees. Is that on bare dirt? of course not, you destroy something in order to plant them. I think some of you get way too sentimental over something that doesn't need to be such.

  • pteroceltis
    15 years ago

    My exotic species are planted on an abandoned farm. I do displace some blades of grass and other small herbaceous species as well as the occasional Black Walnut seedling. The sheltered gully that houses my more tender species sees a white mulberry and boxelder mortality every now and again as well. The majority of my more destructive work focuses upon european buckthorn, Japanese knotweed, and Ailanthus.

    Some people on this board are a bit too sentimental, that's more true than not. I'm not one to tell you what to do on your own land. I do think it's a shame, but I respect your right to do it. It also appears that you have a plan in replacing it with other species, which I can also respect. Personally, I would let nature take care of itself, especially since it appears your trees are having some measure of success in their battle just by reaching reproductive maturity. Finding an American Elm on my property with the resistance genetics of the ones on yours would be, to me, a treasure- if even a short lived one.

  • quercus_macrocarpa
    15 years ago

    Ik,

    Disagreeing with you is flaming you?

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    Quercus, there have been people in this topic that have disagreed with me and they aren't flaming me, just a difference of opinions being shared. What you are doing is not simply disagreeing, but are trying to steer the conversation away from elms and attack me. You have added nothing to the elm discussion. I'm sorry you are so delusional to think I'm the only person that has expressed interest in Tree of Heaven in this forum.

  • iforgotitsonevermind
    15 years ago

    Some things never change.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    Well, obviously some things change, such as the id you have.

  • rcnaylor
    15 years ago

    If the question in debate: "It is better to let natural selection develop DED resistant elms rather than cutting down naturally propogated A Elms in favor of putting up American elms already bred for the purpose of increased immunity"?

    If so, I weigh in on the side of planting the already improved varieties. We don't leave children unimmunized to increase the chances of developing people naturally resistant to disease do we?

    Also, planting trees that tree scientist have already selected for enhanced resistance and letting them breed in "the wild" stands a much better ratio of success than going with the lower odds of non-DED resistant trees randomly surviving wiht an improvement. Selective breeding by scientist and geneticist have already done much of the work it would take nature many cycles, on average, to duplicate.

    Some times "natural" doesn't necessarily mean better. Just like with inoculation of children to whooping cough, etc.

    That's my take on the debate, if I understood the two sides being argued correctly.

  • Iris GW
    15 years ago

    rcnaylor, I don't think that is the debate that lkz5ia brings to the discussion. He prefers to plant trees that have proven themselves to be aggressive survivors. That includes Siberian elm and tree of heaven. Maybe he has planted some of the resistant Am. Elm cultivars but I have not heard him say that. But he did say "I don't narrow it down to just one silly tree, but I look into having hybrids and various species."

    Correct me if I'm wrong, lkz5ia, but I think no new wild Am. Elms will reach maturity on your property - they are either big enough now to stay or they will be girdled eventually.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    You are correct to believe that no new wild american elms will reach maturity here. The last American elm that was biggest enough to stick around died back in 2005 I think.
    {{gwi:326124}}
    that pretty much was voice enough to plan to take out the rest of the american elms, since no others were even comparable to mature specimen. The Red elms are a little different story since they have various degrees of resistance possibly. Should be 10 or so that never meet my hatchet because of their large size. Hope to propagate the largest two.

    Regarding siberian elm, yes I like the tree. I wouldn't say the form is as good as the other two if they attain maturity, but it typically becomes 60ft tall, 3ft in diameter. That can't be said about American or Red elm, except on a rare occurrence.

    But it doesn't mean that American elm is gone from my sight. I am growing the disease-resistant ones such princeton, jefferson, valley forge and new harmony. Also, probably have some chinese ones and many of the asian hybrids. Elms are one of my favorite trees, but for a healthy woodlands, I have to discard the natives and plant a whole group of more resistant ones for the future.
    {{gwi:326125}}

  • pteroceltis
    15 years ago

    "...but for a healthy woodlands, I have to discard the natives and plant a whole group of more resistant ones for the future"

    Reducing native plant diversity actually makes for an unhealthy woodland and an even more unhealthy local ecosystem. And you are doing that in a couple of different ways. Replacing them with absolute trash- and I' being kind- like siberian elm and ailanthus is even worse. I think if you knew how many millions of dollars some DOTs spend each year just trying to keep these species off the shoulders off local roads, you might have a different perspective. Good intention I think, but poor idea all around.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    You are a riot Pteroceltis. Obviously what you do is just as risky as me. Different regions mean different protocol. YOu aren't exclusively planting natives, so I think its quite hypocrital, especially for you to think that way. If I want a 'native' environment, then I may as well just burn down the forest. And yes, people on this forum have said as much.

  • Iris GW
    15 years ago

    If I want a 'native' environment, then I may as well just burn down the forest.

    I don't understand what you mean by that?

  • mikeygraz
    15 years ago

    I'm glad that others are chiming in here...I honestly hope that the advice and opinions of others might cause some to rethink their stances on certain subjects.

    Esh ga - he is likely referring to posts that I have made concerning the management of his property. The entire region just one hundred years ago (more or less, depending on location) was tallgrass prairie - an ecosystem that didn't support forests largely due to annual fires that would sweep through the region, keeping trees restricted to ravines and riparian areas that fire didn't affect. One of his claims for planting Ailanthus and Siberian Elm are because no other trees will grow on his property. I have advised in the past that he should work with the land and plant prairie, participate in annual burns, etc. Fire is a natural part of the local ecosystem and most non-woody plants actually benefit greatly from it. Native tallgrass prairie is actually the most endangered ecosystem in North America when compared to the amount of area it once took up. One other thing as incentive on a side note - there are many programs where you can get significant tax cuts from the government for planting prairie, appealing to Pheasants Forever and other organizations. Anyway - that is what he is referring to by the people (i.e. myself) who recommend planting prairie and "burning" the forest...
    ~Mike

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    Native = prairie. Therefore, if I was truly fanatical about natives, I wouldn't even be messing with a forest. My intentions are selfish, just as all of us have selfish intentions. We are number 1 and everything else is below us. Alot of people will come on this forum will push their agendas, just as I push my agenda. They may say they are right, and I may believe I am right. Who's to say. We just have to do what we believe in.

    People on this forum can all be hyped about their native causes, but how much do they really sacrifice? Does anybody that curses me for what I do, go without toilet paper? Just think what landscape they damage with such addictions to paper. Its really silly that people harass me, when its possible they may be more damaging to this beautiful Earth. Yes, its something to think about.

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    And to Mike-
    I never said that Siberian elm and Ailanthus are the only trees that I can grow here. I probably have over a hundred tree species by now. If you want a tallgrass prairie, then by all means make one with your own land. Not everyone has the luxury of putting land to no use. Trees take decades to mature, so the land still can be utilized. I obviously have to still make money to live.

  • pteroceltis
    15 years ago

    Funny to see what the real story was behind what the poster lkz5ia claimed told him to "burn down the forest" haha. As for my exotics, I have some very effective management practices in place. Anything that may be harmful to the locals (plant animal, or human)I am extremely careful with or leave out altogether. Rest assured you will never see anything about a rogue Sorbus pallescens population choking native species in upstate New York. If you have to fight nature to get anything to grow due to your prairie environment, you're in the wrong place to be doing what you're doing. In my case I found a farm that has been cultivated for nearly 300 years, complete with big north facing slope for a peach orchard and sheltered ravine for things that might not otherwise have a chance. Location, location, location.

    To compare my practices with yours (and most of the other folks that have participated in this thread) is absolutely ludicrous. You can't reasonably expect to come on a forum like this, flaunt a "management practice" like THAT, and not expect people to raise some concerns.

    Nothing I do with my planting is risky, period...but thanks for calling me a riot- and a hypocrite. I'd like to also thank you for saving me the trouble of bringing up how each region (and ecosystem) calls for different protocol. Unfortunately you just don't seem to realize that yours could not be more wrong. That is, unless you start paving over the areas as well (I almost said "or plant Ailanthus"- but you actually have done that!). Beleive it or not, this is actually a topic I have spent a large amount of time and money studying AND implementing. I tried to be quite civil in my messages, but by all means continue your name-calling and foolish posts. They are becoming amusing and a "you won't beleive what this guy is doing" type story for my coworkers and other local landowners.

    Anyone know the conservation status of American Elm in Iowa?

  • lkz5ia
    15 years ago

    Pteroceltis, I can't help that you hate Ailanthus. And that's your own burden to carry with your Ailanthus phobia. But many people like Ailanthus and have no problem with it, I really see no point in being scared of a plant. If you want to live in a natural world devoid of the world's plants, then switch careers and make a video game of that. Then you can relax and calm down, and relize not everyone does things like you want them to. This whole 'the sky is falling' nonsense on this forum is quite the joke. Next I'll be hearing how Ailanthus is causing global warming. I look forward to it.

  • palustris81
    15 years ago

    I don't see why one tree needs to die to make way for another. In Cincinnati, we are looking at the possible loss of all native ash trees soon, but instead of removing all of my existing ash, I am beginning to underplant with succession trees such as red oak, sugar maple, and redbuds. These are all trees that can grow quite well in the understory and still flourish when the ashes will most likely die. I just can't usually bear to remove a healthy plant but I can still be prepared for the future. Let's not be so cynical about things.

  • scotjute Z8
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    palustris81, I am doing something similar to you. I'm on prairie in central part of Tx. with only trees along creek. 90% are Hackberry and they are dieing at 5-10% each year. I'm adding Pecan, Bur Oak, and Shumard Oak along creek where there is a break in their foliage, sort of preparing for an improved future with varieties from the reigon. By the house, I used Eastern Red Cedar and Arizona Cypress with 3 Elms and 3 oaks on south.

  • rcnaylor
    15 years ago

    Notwithstanding denials, it seems to me the main point of this thread is the "let nature be wild and unmanaged" point of view versus a managed tree area approach. While some of the choices might be debatable, I don't think there is any real argument that managed areas should be better, if done properly.

    Repeating, what is best or proper may be debatable, but simply saying "let native trees take their course" isn't the best solution, ESPECIALLY when we are talking about trees that we know are almost certainly, if left to their own devices, going to fall victim to DED.

    Management, such as DED resistant varieties, and other trees that stand a better chance of not being struck by disease, is clearly the better choice than "letting nature take its course. We are not talking about acres and acres of unimproved national parks. We are talking about private property of a very "manageable size". Culling disease prone trees is absolutely supportable. Leave nature alone and let trees do it "naturally" is simply being pollyanaish.

    On the other side of the coin, around here Siberian elms do horribly after they start getting mature. Broken limbs, leaves eaten by bugs so they are thin and gray. Ugh. But, other locations may be different. Around here I'd add them to the cull list. But, personal taste makes the world go round.

    Culling and trying to manage personal property trees is certainly an appropriate approach. Others with their own property can try the "let nature take its course" approach. Its what makes the right of property ownership work. We each get to choose.

Sponsored
Bull Run Kitchen and Bath
Average rating: 4.9 out of 5 stars273 Reviews
Virginia's Top Rated Kitchen & Bath Renovation Firm I Best of Houzz