stone said:We discussed the black walnut on the thread If you could permanently eradicate anything from your landscape
There are people here who don't have, or don't know how to use the find function on their browser, and aren't going to read through 453 posts to get to the 454th post where walnuts are first mentioned. I am really sorry for anyone who gave up trying to follow Stone's link, so I thought it would be courteous to mention it here. A pdf found through his link, albeit in a circuitous manner, is quite good and I provide the link it below.
stone said:Having killed the walnut, the juglone problem is going to be far worse than if you'd kept it.
I can only imagine the dismay that was caused by this statement. I'd like to see some evidence for this assertion before I acquiesce.
Is this what you are talking about? From "your" pdf found in google (a very good one I might add)
http://webcache.googleusercont... :
• Is removal a solution? No. Cutting down the tree will not solve the problem for a long time
because juglone can persist in the wood until the roots are decomposed, which can take five years
or more. Removing a walnut tree may not be practical when the tree is the focal point in a
landscape.
True, removal is not an immediate fix for the juglone toxicity, but no where does the pdf remark that toxicity gets worse, even in the short run. Am I missing something? If so, it would really help out
everyone to direct us to the correct source of information.
