Over the past year I cut down some old trees in my garden who had died due to old age and drought. I am talking about 11 trees, 8 of which were cherry trees, 2 apricot trees and a plum tree. I want to plant new cherry trees this spring in the same spots, but I do not know if it will be good for the young trees to grow next to the old roots. I used a chainsaw to cut the old trees from the ground level, so the stumps and old roots are only 5-10 cm below the ground. Online some people say this will be good for the new tree, because it will use the old root system to grow, but others say the decaying roots will suck up all the nitrogen from the ground. I asked some landscapping companies who do stump grinding and they asked for 70 euros for each stump, so I do not know if this expense is justified.
Some of the old trees were 50-70 years old and had a diameter of 50 cm. The other trees were not older than 30 years, and had a diameter of around 30 cm.
So what should I do? If I can plant the new trees next to the old stumps, what is the minimum distance?
Absolutely go for it. Mother nature does this herself all the time, just look at your nearest forest. I've done this several times with fruit trees, with no issues. I would recommend one or two feet distance and then put down a good thick layer of wood chips. Any nutrient loss from old roots decomposing will be recouped by the new wood chips as they break down. Nutrient loss from decomposition is more of an issue with annuals.
One good practice by some farmers is to plant another genus, like apple after the plums or cherries, in an orchard, to avoid diseases and to use different nutrients.
E Sager wrote:Absolutely go for it. Mother nature does this herself all the time, just look at your nearest forest. I've done this several times with fruit trees, with no issues. I would recommend one or two feet distance and then put down a good thick layer of wood chips. Any nutrient loss from old roots decomposing will be recouped by the new wood chips as they break down. Nutrient loss from decomposition is more of an issue with annuals.
I see, thank you very much! Isn't it better to use some fertiliser or compost instead of wood chips though?
hans muster wrote:One good practice by some farmers is to plant another genus, like apple after the plums or cherries, in an orchard, to avoid diseases and to use different nutrients.
Unfortunately I can not do that right now, as I want to plant cherry trees, but I will keep this in mind in the future. Thank you!
Winston White wrote:Isn't it better to use some fertiliser or compost instead of wood chips though?
I'm not the one you're responding to, but -- I don't fertilize my young trees because I don't want them to grow as if they're going to be fertilized every year. I'm pretty dubious that the roots are going to create a large nitrogen sink. Maybe a little one, only at the surface of the root-mass, but it'll also be fueling the microbiome for the long term. And wood chips are just future compost. I don't waste finished compost on trees because I never have enough and want it for annual crops. But I can always drop a scoop of chips or just broken up sticks, at the base of each tree and let nature take it from there.
Winston White wrote:I see, thank you very much! Isn't it better to use some fertiliser or compost instead of wood chips though?
Mr. Weeks is correct, it's not a great idea to get trees used to fertilizer. Wood chips are more than adequate food for fruit trees until you harvest the fruit. Then you will have to address the loss of potassium. This is easily done by putting a bale of non-sprayed hay to rot in the drip line. Take a look at how a forest feeds itself. Trees fall and decompose releasing the nutrients captured from the generation before. Wood chips does the same thing, only faster because the surface area is increased. Think fungal food, not bacteria for trees. Good luck with your cherries!