Shallow soil and high water table, fruit trees question

I'm looking at the parcel which has a mix of soils.
Much of the parcel, about 80%, is Nixa-Noark complex, says soil report.  Location is US Southeast.

Nixa soil is 41 centimeters (16 inches) deep to flagipen/hard layer and 39 cm/15 inches to water table, according to soil report.
It says clayey, also, around 50% clay.

It's roughtly 45/40% Nixa and Noark soils in that part of the parcel which has less slope (but report doesn't show me where is Nixa and where's Noark).
Noark doesn't seem to have this shallowness (possibly) according to some parts of the report, but I can't tell where Noark soil is located from it, so I best assume shallow soil and high water table throughout majority of the parcel.

Can any fruit trees or berries grow in 40 cm to both hard layer and water table?

I am in the southeast and have a clayish soil that has a capillary action which fills the holes with water within minutes. The top layer is a loam soil but clay below that. I have to build on small mounds and fill in the holes with gravel.  Sort of an automatic watering system.
I am growing many fruit trees, vines and brambles. They all do really well.

Dennis Bangham wrote:I am in the southeast and have a clayish soil that has a capillary action which fills the holes with water within minutes. The top layer is a loam soil but clay below that. I have to build on small mounds and fill in the holes with gravel.  Sort of an automatic watering system.
I am growing many fruit trees, vines and brambles. They all do really well.

But the main issue with this soil I decribed is 16 inches to hard layer (flagipen,  which I believe is impermeable to roots) and to water table.
Can any fruit tree or berry grow under these conditions?
I was looking at a table showing minimal soil depths for plants and they all show a lot deeper soils required for fruit trees and berries, several feet, not sure how accurate that is.

I looked it up more and it says shallow restrictive layer, flagipen is non-cemented, whatever this means for roots.
Normally this land supports woods, stuff like oaks and pines. It sounds terribly but I wonder since it supports woods can it support some fruit trees.

Alice, welcome to the forum.

Trees have successfully been planted in rock so yes, they can.

Alice said, " Can any fruit trees or berries grow in 40 cm to both hard layer and water table?

After digging the hole and drilling the holes, it is what is placed in with the fruit trees that will make this possible.

My suggestion would be hummus.

Here are some threads that you or others might find of value:

https://permies.com/t/48718/plant-tree-solid-rock

https://permies.com/t/98934/Building-soil-building-soil

Anne Miller wrote:Alice, welcome to the forum.

Trees have successfully been planted in rock so yes, they can.

Alice said, " Can any fruit trees or berries grow in 40 cm to both hard layer and water table?

After digging the hole and drilling the holes, it is what is placed in with the fruit trees that will make this possible.

My suggestion would be hummus.

Here are some threads that you or others might find of value:

https://permies.com/t/48718/plant-tree-solid-rock

https://permies.com/t/98934/Building-soil-building-soil

I can purchase a truck of soil to put into holes and build rows for vegetables.
But I thought those trees have to put their roots at least several feet deep, and not sure how they could do it with solid layer under and also if high water would cause their roots to rot (in the rocks, there's usually no high water).

In the soil report, one part says the restrictive layer is flagipen and that it's "cemented" - and when I look it up flagipen is supposedly impermeable to roots - then, in another part of soil report it says that the layer is "not cemeted", it's confusing. One thing for sure, there's water sitting somewhere very close to surface.
With other trees growing on that land, they got to root somehow, but not sure if fruit trees have higher soil requirements than oaks and pines.

Maybe the Ellen White Method of tree planting is what is needed:

Here is the pdf link to the modern adapted method and how EGW stated the method used then in Australia, where she was at at the time (drained swamp land.)

https://permies.com/t/160325/Ellen-White-Method-tree-planting#1256627

Anne Miller wrote:Maybe the Ellen White Method of tree planting is what is needed:

The diagram has 3 feet deep hole, though.
3 feet  of soils naturally enough for many fruit trees, my understanding, but the soil report says restrictive layer/flagipan is 16 inches deep, so there should be only a foot and a quarter of soil
My understanding is that flagipan is a continuous layer, unlike rocks that have spaces for roots to grow in between.

There's another soil there too, that shouldn't be that shallow, but it's not specifically mapped. I guess I could go around pocking the ground and digging to see what's going on, it's just I'm not located there, it's a very long drive and I only have a chance to come for home inspection, want to make sure I won't buy useless land.
If hardwoods grow there (this is highlands, top of the ridge), my guess is some kind of fruit trees and berry shrubs should be able to grow too.
I've been trying to find a place with better valley land, but it's always some industrial agruculture, pipeline or fracking  right nearby, so I couldn't find anything being on the budget.

Alice Fast wrote:
My understanding is that flagipan is a continuous layer, unlike rocks that have spaces for roots to grow in between.

There's another soil there too, that shouldn't be that shallow, but it's not specifically mapped. I guess I could go around pocking the ground and digging to see what's going on, it's just I'm not located there, it's a very long drive and I only have a chance to come for home inspection, want to make sure I won't buy useless land.

Here are a couple of ideas:
1. Yes - if you take the time to visit, wear solid shoes and bring a narrow shovel and insist on digging some holes in various locations to see if you can get through that layer. Even if you just end up with deep pockets of water, you will have learned something.

2. If water is close to the surface, try to determine where it's coming from and going to. Water doesn't just "sit" on a ridge - gravity doesn't let it???
"(this is highlands, top of the ridge)"

3. Can you get any idea in advance as to what trees are already growing there - if any? Nature abhors a vacuum, so if nothing is growing there has to be a reason. That said, Geoff Lawton has greened deserts and there are many permies who are growing things in incredibly harsh environments, so there may still be ways to make it work.

4. Are there loose rocks on the land? If so, can they be dry stacked into pockets for the trees? Is there much dead wood around that can be the basis for building soil such is done with a Hügelkultur?

5. What is your time frame? Yes, the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the next best is today, but will planting 5 years from now after building soil in key locations work for you?

Water is a really precious resource. It sounds as if this land has it, but your question is genuine - can and if so how, can you make it work for you? Some indication of how large the parcel is might help - the smaller it is, the less you may have the space to get that water working for you.

I would recommend talking with the County Extension Agent as they would be familiar with soil and condition in the area.  Their service is free.

Jay Angler wrote:

Alice Fast wrote:
My understanding is that flagipan is a continuous layer, unlike rocks that have spaces for roots to grow in between.

There's another soil there too, that shouldn't be that shallow, but it's not specifically mapped. I guess I could go around pocking the ground and digging to see what's going on, it's just I'm not located there, it's a very long drive and I only have a chance to come for home inspection, want to make sure I won't buy useless land.

Here are a couple of ideas:
1. Yes - if you take the time to visit, wear solid shoes and bring a narrow shovel and insist on digging some holes in various locations to see if you can get through that layer. Even if you just end up with deep pockets of water, you will have learned something.

2. If water is close to the surface, try to determine where it's coming from and going to. Water doesn't just "sit" on a ridge - gravity doesn't let it???
"(this is highlands, top of the ridge)"

3. Can you get any idea in advance as to what trees are already growing there - if any? Nature abhors a vacuum, so if nothing is growing there has to be a reason. That said, Geoff Lawton has greened deserts and there are many permies who are growing things in incredibly harsh environments, so there may still be ways to make it work.

4. Are there loose rocks on the land? If so, can they be dry stacked into pockets for the trees? Is there much dead wood around that can be the basis for building soil such is done with a Hügelkultur?

5. What is your time frame? Yes, the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the next best is today, but will planting 5 years from now after building soil in key locations work for you?

Water is a really precious resource. It sounds as if this land has it, but your question is genuine - can and if so how, can you make it work for you? Some indication of how large the parcel is might help - the smaller it is, the less you may have the space to get that water working for you.

Just realized that ridge spot is named after fruit trees...a good sign.

1. I will visit but to inspect the house . I don't have opportunity for extensive land inspection or walking away unless something is really wrong with that house. Will have to go with soil report (online Web soil survey) and topo.

2. There're drainages from the area, from that ridge, but soil report says 39 cm to water table in around 40% of the parcel. I have no idea why it'd be this way - may be because that restrictive layer doesn't let water drain and soil is half-clay - the parcel has concave and convex areas, so may be water sits in some of them.

It's just few acres, but these days these are priced like they're made of gold, it's not some kind of huge acreage. What attracts me, also, is low tornado danger there, I'm very afraid of tornados, all the flat parcels with good soil seem to sit in prime F-4 tornado spots.

3. Soil report says various oaks and pines should grow there. Also what may grow is paw-paw, dogwood, serviceberry, hickory,  white ash, hawthorn, persimmon, sassafras, coralberry, redcedar, plum - but that's general for this type of soil (which is not always as shallow as this location)

4. Yes, there're small loose rocks based on pictures and soil survey says some "gravely" soils present.

5. My time frame is short. I just want to put some dwarf fruit trees that can start giving fruit sooner and put various kinds of berries.
No one seems to be growing  fruit trees in America, almost no homes for sale with land had any mature fruit trees, may be some not-fruiting and not cared for, rarely, very surprising lack of fruit.

Anne Miller wrote:I would recommend talking with the County Extension Agent as they would be familiar with soil and condition in the area.  Their service is free.

I can definitely try on Monday. Might take a while to get a hold of anyone.

I would plant at the top of an elevated berm that is out of material from the adjacent area, possibly the path or a pond I might dig to absorb some of the excess water. I’d also slope flow away from the trees to get the elevation of the trunk-root junction at least 2ft above the high water table. Ideally it would be more like 4ft above. If you’d like more on how I approached a similar challenge at the Crescent City food forest, there is a thread about the design and implementation.

Ben Zumeta wrote:I would plant at the top of an elevated berm that is out of material from the adjacent area, possibly the path or a pond I might dig to absorb some of the excess water. I’d also slope flow away from the trees to get the elevation of the trunk-root junction at least 2ft above the high water table. Ideally it would be more like 4ft above. If you’d like more on how I approached a similar challenge at the Crescent City food forest, there is a thread about the design and implementation.

I see, elevated berm from digging the pond and adding some drainage make sense.
These trees are not Bald Cypresses to grow in water  I'd guess need something like 4 feet at least to avoid rot... hopefully it'll all turn out much better than soil report plus even soil report says 40% of land doesn't have soil this shallow, I'm just going with worst-case scenario of water and flagipan being high everywhere. I have a feeling that very high water table would be in the depressions in the ground/concave areas, so may be just avoiding those spots (these spots would be hard to add drainage to anyway without much earthworks)

Alice Fast wrote:I see, elevated berm from digging the pond and adding some drainage make sense.

Yes - look at the water as an asset, rather than a liability.
"Chinampas"  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86gyW0vUmVs  are some of the most productive and sustainable food growing systems in the world. Your land might not fit this exact pattern, but look at the concept and consider if some of those wet areas can be put to good food-growing use. Look at which wetland plants Indigenous people used and spread across North America. Even if you just grow them as biomass to improve soil depth and fertility elsewhere on your land, you've still won!

Jay Angler wrote:

Alice Fast wrote:I see, elevated berm from digging the pond and adding some drainage make sense.

Yes - look at the water as an asset, rather than a liability.
"Chinampas"  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86gyW0vUmVs  are some of the most productive and sustainable food growing systems in the world. Your land might not fit this exact pattern, but look at the concept and consider if some of those wet areas can be put to good food-growing use. Look at which wetland plants Indigenous people used and spread across North America. Even if you just grow them as biomass to improve soil depth and fertility elsewhere on your land, you've still won!

Wow, I had no idea Mexico City used to be a lake.
Looks like Chinampas have water about 6 feet under.

Alice Fast wrote:Looks like Chinampas have water about 6 feet under.

In that example yes, but I've read of it shallower. Also, if you take the approach of excavating some areas so that the water collects there, and move the soil higher up (which is what they do with Chinampas as well as adding branches and plants that compost eventually), you may end up with deeper water at some point. We're trying to give you ideas to adapt to the land you're considering, but unless/until you actually buy it and move there, we don't really have enough info to do more than throw darts!

One of the important principles that permaculture is built on, is to take worn out or unproductive land and turn it into a healthy eco-system. It's all about experimenting with possible approaches and observing how they work and carrying on from there. Some experiments will work, others may not - or at least not as you expected them to.

I had a garden with a high water table similar to what you describe.  It was in western Oregon. After years of improvements, it had about 8-12 inches of topsoil, then solid clay as far as we ever could dig. And we dug a pond in there, so we did get pretty deep.  

When digging a hole, just 1 foot down would start filling with water.  The solid clay was soaked year round - it was part of the water table. It did make creating ponds easy, well except for digging up wet clay while you stand in water. I will never forget that sound.

Over the years I learned that only certain fruit trees can grow sitting in water year round.  Plums and persimmons are the only ones we had luck with in that garden.  I'm sure there are others (mayhaw is one from the south that grows in wet areas) but they aren't necessarily your standard fruit trees.  

Our other fruit trees (apples, pears, shipova, Asian pears, peaches, cherries) had to go outside the wet area, on the rocky hillsides or rocky flat area.  The ones on the hillsides didn't ever grow super fast, but they did eventually grow and fruit.

Strawberries, blackberries and raspberries did very well in the wet garden. I had currants in a different, but also very wet spot, and they did well also.  Kiwi plants grew well, but I didn't get fruit (however, that could have been from other factors, like lack of sun - the plants grew fantastically). Also in that garden year round were leeks, cardoon, garlic and some perennial brassicas.  Celery and parsnips did extremely well in that situation, too.

Could you consider growing a menagerie of small fruits instead, and get tree fruits from other sources?

Thanks for all the good advice, a lot to learn about shallow soil.

I will not be buying this place, but I'm sure I'll come across shallow soil or high water table, down the road in my search of a place (I often saw shallow mountain soils in my search, just not that shallow).
I think high water table and hard layer under shallow soil both are too much to deal with.
The place even got septic tank problems because of that.
May be such soil for a young person who can be sure they'll live in the same place for many years and can built up soil, put a lot of efforts into it. I think I need to look for more productive land. Where I grew up I'm used to deep, productive soils.
Starting to think of moving back to Eastern Europe (US land and house prices are too insane)
Also, when I came to investigate the soil in person I got bitten by an army of ticks despite showering after, and I hardly even walked in the woods, mostly just in grass barely above ankle. Not used to that. I'm used to sleeping, sitting and rolling in the grass. Can't give up ability to enjoy the nature without the crazy stuff like pouring toxic chemicals all over. Even in the US southeast, where I walked a few parcels I never got bitten by even one tick from doing that.
I'd have to live in a spacesuit to survive there.
Will be looking up North now or will move back to Europe, it's a bummer with ticks.

Ticks do suck, but here in NW California they aren’t that bad, and they hardly exist further up the NW coast.

As I saw the reply notice on my email, it occurred to me that the best solution to the high water table problem is to not take it on in the attempt to grow semi-arid climate fruit trees. Use well drained moderate slopes for these trees, and in the wet areas have native wetlands, rice, cranberries etc. Good luck in your search.

Ben Zumeta wrote:Ticks do suck, but here in NW California they aren’t that bad, and they hardly exist further up the NW coast.

As I saw the reply notice on my email, it occurred to me that the best solution to the high water table problem is to not take it on in the attempt to grow semi-arid climate fruit trees. Use well drained moderate slopes for these trees, and in the wet areas have native wetlands, rice, cranberries etc. Good luck in your search.

Yes, I had lived in California for 15 years and camped all over it, I have many months of tent camping in CA, only saw several ticks and no bites. Land and house prices in California are for millionaires now, so there's little consolation in lack of ticks in CA for me. I won't be back there.

This high water table case is not a wetland...it's super dry on the surface but apparently water can be not too far under, and I think water table gets high during wetter season, after rains or snow melt. I'd avoid high water table areas in the future, sounds like headache. Digging a cellar will be complicated  too.

Del Norte County where I am has some of the cheapest land in California, or anywhere in the PNW as far as I can tell. We got our 25acres with a pretty nice house for 268k in 2019. If you don't mind very rainy winters, its a pretty nice climate as well (choose your own weather in summer within 20mi). This plug for Del Norte goes for any permie looking for land...non-permies can disregard this endorsement.

Ben Zumeta wrote:Del Norte County where I am has some of the cheapest land in California, or anywhere in the PNW as far as I can tell. We got our 25acres with a pretty nice house for 268k in 2019. If you don't mind very rainy winters, its a pretty nice climate as well (choose your own weather in summer within 20mi). This plug for Del Norte goes for any permie looking for land...non-permies can disregard this endorsement.

I'm familiar with Del Norte county and real estate market all over the West. 2019 prices are gone, that boat had sailed and prices are up twice. Also, Del Norte county is outside my budget, I've been checking real estate listings there for years. Even fixers in-town without land were expensive there and over 100K, before 2020.
As to the cheapest land in PNW it's in central Oregon, in a desert (anyway, I'd never want to live in OR)
California is very, very expensive place and I'm not going to be back there. I'm not a cash-loaded California person, I'll be moving to an affordable place even if this means leaving this country. (prices are way up in the Eastern states too, went up 2X-3X within 2 years because of actions by the criminals in DC, but in the East one can still buy a house with acreage for 100K, while most 2019 50K homes are now selling for 150K). I'm not going to spend more than 130K on a house in the US, it's not worth it, and the prices are being jacked up by airbnbs, "investors", rich city expats buying online sight-unseen, 2nd home buyers and intentionally devalued dollar.  Plus now a horrendous property tax is attached in America, based on jacked up purchase prices. I rather not further discuss this topic as it'll be getting political. I can have 10K house with free public pasture in my home country and I'll leave it at that.

And since I can't edit my message above: in CA many rural homes, if not most, are already uninsurable with normal home insurance and require insanely expensive FAIR plan because of fires - the rest will be dropped from normal plans soon, likely. They just dropped entire zip code in NorCal again. Paying thousands to insure a home isn't my definition of frugal living.

Good luck…I think prices will drop everywhere without water and with persistent industrial pollution fairly soon.

Alice Fast wrote:- in CA many rural homes, if not most, are already uninsurable with normal home insurance and require insanely expensive FAIR plan because of fires - the rest will be dropped from normal plans soon, likely. They just dropped entire zip code in NorCal again. Paying thousands to insure a home isn't my definition of frugal living.

This is an issue which will be happening all over North America if storms continue to grow in intensity and people keep building using building techniques which aren't adapted to local dangers.

It is totally possible to build homes which are far more resistant to fire. There are designs out there for building where flooding is a risk. There is plenty of technology about earthquake resistance - but local codes are frequently based on "national" codes, and there are plenty of countries around the world where there are widely different risks within single counties, let alone province/state, let alone from the Kyushu, Japan to Hokkaido!

So much is about identifying the likeliest risks on a specific piece of land and building accordingly. I'd rather have a truly earthquake proof small home where I live, than the 4000sq foot or larger that people are building. It's hard if you're trying to find land and housing within a budget, but if you can research traditional buildings in the region you considering, you can learn a lot. Houses that used to be built to last...

Long story short I got into contract on a different parcel with the house in the same Southern state.
This time I found good productive acreage that can be classified as farmland plus the pond on the property, while soil is still kind of shallow it's not as shallow and not everywhere and no high water table, with the house, for still under 100K. I like having the pond option.

I think that super-shallow soil with high water table I asked about is just not worth it - why jump through the hoops over hard, unproductive land, with uncertain outcome, while one can wait and find better situation. This kind of land just isn't meant for cultivation, this type of parcel is for someone who's not interested in self-sufficiency gardening, there're plenty of people who are like that.  I don't even know how many years I'd get to live on the property.

Del Norte county in California now has median home price of 399K, by the way... -!!  (and I think huge wildfire danger anywhere away from ocean, means home insurance for a new contract will be $$$, not to mention high wildfire smoke in summers, would kill my lungs, I can't even camp in NorCal anymore because of that)
If I had a budget over 150K I could get a dream property in the Eastern states....but I'm not that rich

It's important to note that local climatic conditions, soil variations, and specific plant requirements can significantly impact success. Consulting with local horticulture experts, extension services, or experienced fruit growers in your region can provide valuable insights and tailored advice for growing fruit trees and berries in shallow, high water table soils.