You've pretty much identified the single drawback, that of lesser initial stability. In all other ways that I'm aware of, such growing methods can and frequently do offer better root system characteristics. Sounds like a good outfit to me.

+oM

As for why its not used more, there are a couple reasons. Cost of the bags compared to a plain ole black plastic pot is a big reason Another is that the typical nursery person says "I've been grown them XYZ way for 20 plus year, seen lots of the "latest" come and go, but I'm still in business after growing them this way for more than 20 years". In short, most growers are resistant to change until they have to.

Arktrees

Agree with ark - change comes slow. Stake the tree and remove next season. Not a problem.

Not sure about less stability considering that there are a lot more roots ready to spread out once planted. Maybe you're talking about different root control bag??? Also the relative size of the tree to the size of rootball?

I've grown plenty of trees in RootTrapper bags and I think they are great. I prefer them over Rootmaker containers which had dozen of holes where bugs would get inside and haul out pieces of peat, pine bark fines, etc of the drainage holes leaving significant gaps inside. Pretty annoying.

Most customers don't really know much about it so they could care less and they often go for cheapest products.

They're becoming more common. There's a nursery about an hour and a half from here in Purcellville, VA that sells trees grown this way. I'm planning to make a voyage down there soon.

Thanks for the input, everyone. It's good getting confirmation that this approach is both progressive and has limited drawbacks from the purchaser's perspective. Sounds like I just need to stake properly to give the roots time to compensate for the lesser amount of soil they come with.

As an aside, when I googled "root control bags" I found that one niche group of growers has seemingly embraced the bags wholeheartedly--marijuana growers! Guess they're less tradition bound/have greater financial incentives to buy the bags and put em to use.

Steve, the indoor MMJ growers are largely responsible for the hydroponics in upscale greenhouses that are all the rage in big American cities right now as well. Here in Colo. we'll be growing hemp next year too, maybe in the future your trees will come in hempen bags.

There are the above-ground "soft pots" that some people call bags (Smart Pots, and the Roottrapper soft pots) and in-ground root control bags.

I'd be interested to see a study of side-by-side performance of same-caliper, same species trees, in the landscape, and their establishment and growth comparing smooth containers, root pruning containers, root control bags (in-ground) and B&B.

SOMEBODY has to have done that, right?

Might be something of interest in Whitcomb's list of studies. Of course, if you see something you want to check out you will have to be able to get access to it somewhere. Anything in a circulated journal at least might be available from a college near you.

Haven't looked to see what the internet presence of his papers could be. Google Scholar, maybe? I've never used it.

Here is a link that might be useful: Whitcomb

This post was edited by bboy on Fri, Aug 2, 13 at 18:31

These are probably one of the better, but lesser known methods of using root pruning technology to grow trees.

The benefits of field growing without having to use mechanical root pruning (or none at all).

Where it can still be a bit problematic is when the trees outgrow the bag. Since the root system is very dense and fibrous, supposedly a 24" bag can handle a 3" caliper tree successfully, with a smaller rootball than B&B yet still containing 80% of the rootmass at transplanting. Sounds great, right?

What if they don't sell it? I'll add a disclaimer that I'm no nurseryman, but my understanding is that in traditional field nursery production, if a tree isn't sold to an end consumer or as a B&B to a retail nursery at a particular size, it's feasible to just leave it in place until it does sell, since the root system can simply continue growing as normal. At worst they can move them to another place in the field where they have more space and can sell them as "specimen" trees that can be "spaded" at the right time.

If your tree outgrows the rootbag and isn't sold, you either have to leave it there, ending up with a tree that is rootbound anyway, or, dig it, remove the bag, replant with a larger bag, stake it (for the same reasons noted above), and, have to wait a year or three before it's sellable again since the rootbag won't hold together until the roots fill the new, larger bag...

Maybe I'm over thinking this.

hm4e, proceed cautiously when questioning root control bags on this forum. There are many here who absolutely kiss the ground that Whitcomb/Chalker-Scott walk on.
All of the articles about rootmaker & root control bag performance have been by Whitcomb. That's like asking Donald Trump how he likes that weasel on top of his head :)
Anyone remember the Tree Auction thread? Poor sales = auction= desperation. Those trees were in root control bags.
Who is the major buyer for fieldgrown trees? Landscape Contractors of course, they won't touch trees in those bags.The grower is stuck with a tremendous liability.
When hm4e points out the shelf-life of field grown stock he is introducing logic to the trees forum, Heaven forbid!

Well, I actually like root pruning pots/bags, I think they legimately do establish faster (more roots at planting, it's logical) if they're done right. I'm a soft proponent of them as compared to B&B or "regular" containers...again, WITH GOOD NURSERY PRACTICES I think they're superior, but even a traditional container with good nursery practice is better than a Rootmaker or root bag done poorly.

So, yes, I'm "softly" pro-root-control-bag et. al, as I said on another thread, however, I'm just looking at some of the logistical issues that can creep up.

FWIW Landscape contractors come in all flavors just like nurseries themselves...some are great and some are shysters (not sure I spelled that right, haha).

Edit

This post was edited by j0nd03 on Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 13:40

I tell ya I wouldn't want a plant grown in a root control bag unless I can pop it out of the bag. How do you do that?

I'd be more willing to roll the dice with a b&b plant and wait for it to establish itself. Unless I trusted or seen proven turn over of the product in root control bags for a PARTICULAR nursery.

I can't tell you how many times I walk after pulling a plant out of the container locally. Unfornately I can't do so with mail order but at least the majority of those purchased through that avenue are 1 to 3 gallon at most so the risk is slightly lower.

first hm4e & now whaas, OMG you guys are really on thin ice LOL It sounds like you are saying knowledge and experience trumps fantasy.
Those who use root control bags don't possess the knowledge or experience to properly grow and dig trees. Any moment now someone will provide a link to Aunt Nelly & Uncle Kebo's Tree Farm & Tatoo Parlor in McMinnville TN who uses root control bags.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The vast majority of deciduous trees have never been in a container, root undercutting starts while they are still in the seedbed such as these beautiul sycamores. You won't get premium quality nursery stock like this from a RCB:
{{gwi:350984}}

FWIW,
I remove the root pruning bags by rolling the top down at first, then work my way down the side turning it inside out, pushing the bottom up while pulling down on the sides. There are almost always some roots that have tips in the fabric, but this method has been very effective at removing the bag with minimal damage to the root system, What is lost seems to be of little to no concern.

On a side not, I do not consider root pruning bag full proof by any means. They tend to stay wet on the bottom unless elevated, or you cut small holes around the bottom edge to improve drainage. For many species the moisture retention does not matter or is even an asset, others it can spell death. They are also prone to algae/mosses growing on the side which can reduce the gas flow and/or drainage. Salt buildup on the otter edge can be an issue for some locations/climates as well. Also on windy days, they lose moisture VERY quickly. Some species are in fact capable of forcing roots completely though the fabric as well.

Even with these problems, for my purposes, they have been excellent and much preferred method. Even so, I do still sometimes use smooth pots for small plants. Or as temp containers etc. These can be successful as well. I just gave a friend a 2nd season White Oak almost 3' tall (was 6" when I put it in there) that was in a 1 gallon pot. It was there because I did not have the root pruning pot of proper size to put it in. When I pulled it from the pot, to my surprise, the root system looked pretty good. Cut a 2-3 small circling roots, small cut of the tap root, and it was ready to plant with most of it's root system intact. It can work the old way, it's just that the root pruning pot method appears to be far more for forgiving and flexible. Then again, I'm doing this as a hobby, and not for a living.

Arktrees

Mentioning what professional scientists undertaking literature reviews and organized studies using controls have had to say about a topic is not worship.

Misinterpretations based on limited exposure as well as random personal anecdotes, on the other hand are given a lot of credibility here.

Which is too bad.

This post was edited by bboy on Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 14:49

FWIW, as I said previously, good nursery practices are probably #1 over everything, but as Ark said, there is more flexibility w/root control products (let's just call them that - Root Control Products, an all-encompassing term for SmartPots, Rootmakers, Roottrappers, Root Control Bags, etc. etc. etc).

I actually LIKE plants grown this way for many reasons, I'm just stating the other side of the equation.

Whaas, you make a good point about being able to see the roots, although w/a B&B you really can't either, since once you start unraveling burlap you better plant it pronto. Container, sure, I always do that myself.

However, in a bag you can at least dig a bit around the trunk to check the root collar from above - the biggest thing to worry about with any growing method.

For mail-order, I'm much more interested in root-control-products plants than in-person, since you can't see them first. Since the root control products ARE more forgiving, you've got at least a somewhat lower chance of a plant with a crappy root system vs. a smooth container. Unless you're going REALLY small, like a band pot, but even those can be potbound, too, although the roots are likely to be more flexible, so you might have a better shot unraveling at least some of them.

Root pruning itself has been done for years, especially at the liner stage for trees like oaks. Undercutting, etc also is common.

I also wouldn't be surprised that most of the non-rootbound traditional container stock was itself rootpruned before being put in the container, either by slicing, or, it may be containerized but actually grown in some type of root pruning pot or bag.

I don't think anyone is questioning root pruning, just the methods of doing it.

Oh, and Aunt Nelly & Uncle Kebo's Tree Farm & Tatoo Parlor in McMinnville TN has a great "buy two Bur Oaks, get a tattoo that says "Mother" on your left buttock free" deal. Don't knock it till you try it.

Sam - why couldn't you get a nice sycamore like that in a so-called "root bag"?

I'm interested - because I guarantee no matter how well those Sycamores are grown, once I put it in the ground, it's going to look half-dead with sparse, 2" leaves and dieback on some limbs for 3 years until it establishes. If these bags can eliminate this phenomenon, it's worth it to me.

sam,
Respect and all, but I have seen great plants in RCB at large sizes. However, as I stated in my post, they ARE NOT the only way. In fact I prefer B&B for larger plants like you show. But if it's in a container, I much prefer the RC plant. But as seen in other recent threads, they have their own problems. Not the least of which is what happened to them before the field, and the almost certain burial of the root flare just as can be seen in your photo.

What these threads are really about is frustration by the end buyers (many of us here), paying often top $, only to have myriad issues to deal with more often than not. Often these result in the death of the plant we just spent $$$ on. If you bought a TV from Sears that looked good in the store, but then you get it home and find the power cord has been cut and spliced back together, that you couldn't adjust the sound level, that the base could not support the TV, that it got dim after 2-3 days, or that they removed the bevel around the screen on the one that you bought, or you bought a 60", but they sent you a 48" because they cut some of it off to save on shipping, you would be PO'ed too.

Most of us here are pretty plant savvy, and frankly you often have no ideal of the background of the person you may be talking to. I have never said on here what my background is, but I can assure you that I personally have significant background. That is not to say that your opinion has no value. It does. But so do others. I very much welcome outside input. I certainly am not the last word. However, you are showing considerable arrogance in your above post.

Arktrees

This post was edited by arktrees on Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 16:13

"Misinterpretations based on limited exposure as well as random personal anecdotes, on the other hand are given a lot of credibility here.

Would you rather everyone not involved in research keep their mouths shut when someone brings up the topic? Are there any regulars on the forum that are or have been involved in research?

Edit: after thinking about it, salicaceae and saccharum are academics but I don't recall them chiming in much on root issues

This post was edited by j0nd03 on Fri, Nov 15, 13 at 16:19

All I'm saying is that I'm not buying a plant in a root control bag (7 gallon and up) unless I can inspect it. For the in ground ones I wouldn't be able to so I'm going b&b for a larger tree.

If they sit in those things for too long they mat like a son of gun. Its just as bad if not worse than encircling, pot bound roots. Just my experience thus far.

I think there are multiple good points here on both sides of the debate. IMO, there is no one single "right" (or at least simple) answer to the topic, but believe the concerns expressed both ways are important to consider.

I am a little miffed at Sam's rants (if that's what they are) though. I almost always find Bboy's thoughts well considered. I can't remember ever hearing him give credence to something just because of who else was "for" it. Backing up what you think with references to research is a great practice, and I don't see anything wrong with it. I don't fall in lockstep with any researcher on every topic, but do find many of Bboy's references helpful.

hm4e hit on one of the many reasons that commercial growers rejected RCBs when they first appeared many years ago. What to do with the trees in the block that don't sell? You can't just hold them for another year and dig a larger rootball if they are in a RCB.
Below pic is an employee owned/operated nursery near me. They "pamper" every tree and every one is a winner, no deer damage because of fencing. Soil is sandy loam typical of the Eastern Shore. If you try really, really hard you can picture yourself on a landscape crew planting a trailerload of these in your town's streetscape median. If they were in RCBs by the time you pulled the bag off you have a bareroot tree which in short order will defoliate. Imagine the look on your client's face when you go to make your collection.
On my recommendation a group of visiting German nurserymen toured this nursery. Sauber! Baumschule Was heard many times which was a real compliment.
The managers of this nursery are sticklers for orderliness and cleanliness which is why it is so highly regarded. There are no culls and definitely no RCBs. BTW its worth repeating again and again, deciduous cvs such as these maples are propagated by budding which is a field procedure. They were never containerized.(McMinnville TN eat your heart out LOL)
{{gwi:350985}}

So Sam, what you are saying is that you think root control bags are an evil plot of some kind, a nursery down the street from you looks pretty, and you have no respect for Carl Whitcomb, Linda Chalker-Scott, or anyone that might appreciate their contribution to the field. You also seem to have something against McMinnville. Is that really all you are saying? Is there an overall point of some kind to these somewhat unrelated pet peeves? Did you wake up one morning, after a rough night, with a bad "I love Linda" tattoo from McMinnville? Or, are you just jealous of researchers and successful nursery production in other areas of the country?

Sam - that isn't a nursery in Chesapeake City, MD named after the common name for our planet's only natural satellite, is it?

"What to do with the trees in the block that don't sell? You can't just hold them for another year and dig a larger rootball if they are in a RCB. "
You pot them up same as any other good container nursery would. To be fair RCB cost more, and so you would probable want to salvage the old RCB which takes more labor. But at the same time, the root systems are much less likely to need real work, so that is a labor savings (again assuming everything else is done properly).

" If they were in RCBs by the time you pulled the bag off you have a bareroot tree which in short order will defoliate. Imagine the look on your client's face when you go to make your collection. "

FALSE ARGUMENT!
1. You do not use native soil in RCB. Therefore that scenario will not happen.
2. Even if very loose native soil was used, dense root systems will hold that material together one the pot is removed. Same principle that dense fibrous root system plants are planted on slopes to prevent erosion control. Therefore the scenario of planting bare root RCB plant is not going to happen.
3. Even if the plants ended up bare root, virtually all the roots will still be present. So once planted properly and waters as per proper procedure, all the roots will be surrounded by very moist native soil. Therefore the stated scenario will not happen.

"They "pamper" every tree and every one is a winner, no deer damage because of fencing. Soil is sandy loam typical of the Eastern Shore"

What about the other thousand growers? Very of them will take such care. Nor do I live on the eastern coast, so their trees will not be coming my way. Nor do I have soil of this type. Clay is much more common over most of the country, and that can lead to drainage issues.

With that said, I would love to have access to the plants grown in the pictures. No doubt a well run grower. However, that is simply not the case for most of us. Plus as nice as the pictures are, they both clearly show buried root flares. One of the most common causes of transplant failure is readily visible in those photos.

Arktrees

The research on the subject is mixed when it comes to actual field growth in bags vs. traditional field growth, and at establishment comparing the two.

As far as growth, most studies I've read suggest that it varies by species, with most growing at about the same rate in the ground whether in the bags or not. A few trees, like Tilia, seem to grow more slowly.

The root system size and amt of roots also seems to be one of those things that the data can say whatever the group conducting the study wants it to - some say the root bags have more roots, others say the B&B have more roots but the root bags have more ABSORBING roots, etc, etc, etc. What I didn't see was a study that showed the root absorption capacity comparing a properly dug B&B (proper rootball size) to a rootbag grown tree.

There was one study that showed that establishment rates in the first year were "similar" between the two, but the study didn't take it beyond that first year. Other research suggests that, although root control bag trees required more frequent watering the first year after transplanting, that they established faster after that point as long as the watering was sufficient.

So the consensus? Kinda good, kinda bad, probably OK, maybe great, maybe not.

Although B&B is "tried and true" I still get nervous about them - I've seen so many trees yanked out years later where the burlap never decomposed, the roots never really penetrated it, and the wire baskets were still intact. Even the fact that with rootbags you get direct soil-to-soil contact with the rootball might make it worthwhile.

I've planted B&B trees that have done very well - probably because of good nursery culture - that's the key. Yet others I've seen, see above.

Well, I've purchased maybe 10' Montezuma cypress grown in 30g Root Trapper bag years ago. The root system looked awesome. It was only 60 bucks so It was a great deal. Apparently they intended to grow them in 30g for another year for probably 2-3 times the cost.

Years later, wow... the tree is much taller. It's all about the timing. Listen to Whitcomb... Don't overdo it.

It doesn't matter.. in the end... it's all about proper maintenance. In the end, Root control kind wins.

Lou - my "gut" tells me root-pruned trees using root control methods (bags, pots, etc) are better.

A lot of the research seems mixed, but I think a lot of it is semantics, and has to do with post-transplant care. It seems that, due to smaller volume but more feeder roots, that root-controlled trees dry out a lot faster once planted out so they're probably not the best choice for areas that won't be or can't be carefully and meticulously watered for the first full season at the very least.

Some say that B&B has 5% of the root system left, some say 30%, some say 80% of root weight. However, root weight isn't the best indicator, since yeah, the thick, close in roots are the heaviest, and that's what's left, but the feeder roots, far lighter in weight, remain in the field. I still haven't found something that really measures root absorption capacity & compares it.

Rootbags are probably better than B&B but not quite as good as above-ground root pruning containers, but far better than smooth sided containers - IF - watered properly after planting.

I read about one nursery a while back (can't find the article now) that would grow in the field in 18" bags, and then when they reached 2.5 - 3" caliper, lift them out, then plant in Rootbuilders (the ones with the little conical ridges that can be made any size) about 6" larger than the rootball to sell once they "root in" which only takes a few weeks if done in spring and watered well (they used drip irrigation).

If they didn't sell all the trees, then they replanted them in the late fall in the field in larger root bags.