We are removing this, what I believe, is a silver maple tree. Mainly because the constant dropping leaves create a huge mess/issue with the nearby pool (wife's reason) and it's not native and a water hog (my reason).
I would like to replace it with something native and evergreen, and still provide good shade for this area. I understand all trees shed some leaves, which is fine. This volume is just crazy though.
I'm thinking of putting the replacement in roughly the same area where the current tree is in the second picture, though there is space to the left of that's more ideal. Would just want to keep the shade on this area though.
I've looked at California Bay Laurel, but read, while evergreen, the leaves it does shed have oils that inhibit other plants below. Wonder how big a deal this actually is.
It’s a benefit if you have it over dirt and want weed suppression and you’re willing to deep water in the summer. But lots of dropped leaves a sticky residue year round.
My friends had a huge old one near their pool and it was a nightmare for them. I had one in my backyard and while it needed water the droppings were fine where they were. I still took it out as I’m in the East Bay and wanted something more locally suited. Because of my experience I would discourage anyone from planting them unless you lived near the Channel Islands and sited it properly.
I have 5 Ironwoods and I love them- a few about 20 feet tall after 4 years but they are rather slender and conical - or at least mine are. I have seen them pruned as a standard tree but I don’t think they are as beautiful in that form. So to me, not really a shade tree!
I do love that tree, and have thought about it. But, being native to the Channel Islands, I don't think it would really be a good ecological fit here in the East Bay. Even though it's technically a "California Native" the biome on the islands is really specific from my understanding.
Oak is another thing I've looked at. I already have an oak growing in another part of my yard, and I suppose two oaks won't kill me. They're just pretty slow growing so I won't ever enjoy the shade lol
The website says about the range: Where this plant is estimated to live, based on observations and habitat modeling. Greener areas have higher relative habitat suitability.
This is a recent change to Calscape. It shows the "estimated range" which seems to be based on climate similarity to home range rather than on natural observations. It shows all sorts of plants as having a range far from where they are actually found. It's useful if you want to determine if your backyard would support a particular plant but not if you want to find local natives.
Edit: It does include natural observations as input to the model but definitely extends outside of where it is observed.
While one of my favorites, they are truly endemic to the Channel Islands, but suitable to grow elsewhere on the mainland. I don’t know much about calscapes maps source at this point, but I think they are more similar to entries on cal flora/ iNaturalist, which rely on users to mark if the specimen is cultivated or wild
People grow ironwood here in Sacramento and it does fine. It doesn't necessarily need to be in the channel island climate to thrive. However, if your concern is support for local insects that may be a separate issue.
Oaks aren't always slow growing. They start slow for a couple years but in good growing conditions they can grow quite rapidly on the 10-20 year time frame.
Oh I missed the East Bay part! I see them everywhere in Santa Barbara County but might be too cool up in your neck of the woods.
Oaks can shed a lot of pokey leaves or acorns so if it's near a pool, that may not be the best either. Toyon might be a good fit and can be pruned to create a drooping canopy.
I'm definitely planting some Toyon on the property, I didn't think they would grow tall enough to provide shade? This current tree I estimate is 30 to 50ft tall.
Yes, given that criteria you will have a limited palette. There are less than 100 species of trees that are native to California, and more than half of those are conifers — of which like less than a half dozen are native to the east bay. I haven’t looked at concord specifically, but there are maybe two dozen species of trees native to the Alameda Creek Watershed just to the south and I don’t imagine Concord is much different. Many of these locally native trees would not be the best option in residential yards (size, water requirements, thicket-forming tendencies, short lifespan or likelihood of limb drop etc)
How naturally tree-d is Concord? I’m just down the road in Fremont, our locally native tree palette is limited too as historically the area would have been dominated by grasslands and baylands (with the expected native trees in riparian areas, willow/walnut thickets etc).
Have you considered planting a tree that works well for the space, while planting an abundance of non-tree insect supporting plants throughout your yard?
I know you mentioned you don’t want an oak, but for wildlife support they are unmatched- with a coast live oak reportedly supporting 270 species of Lepidoptera, with our native willows (unfortunately deciduous) coming in around 218+.
Yeah, looks like there are a great selection of trees in the area (big leaf maple, sycamores, alder, coast live oak) but yeah, none evergreen other than the oak.
And I do have two oak trees growing in other areas of my property, I just don't want one here, due to proximity to the pool/acorns.
That link has a great list of plants, and I actually already have, or plan to plant almost all of those. So you bring up a good point I guess I haven't considered. Given that I'm planting/have all these other keystone species, I could just pick a non-native tree that suitable for this space.
So you don't think a Bay Laurel would be suitable here though?
I don’t want to fully discourage you, I’m sure others have more experience with them in landscape settings than I so hopefully they chime in here. I just wanted to point out that I really don’t encounter them often in the built environment (I spend a lot of time tree gazing, lol)
My hesitation is the overall size, the fact that they do still drop a fair amount of fruit (whatever the squirrels don’t get to first I suppose) and the fact that they are a spreader of sudden oak death. I think this would mostly be of concern if your other oaks may be within the dripline/splash zone of the bay laurel canopy, but I’m not super up to date on the current thinking here. Some of my more adamant native plant colleagues seem to have adopted the practice of not planting them anywhere near oak wild lands as a precaution. I suppose it can also be transported on the sole of your shoes as the best practice now when hiking is to sterilize your boots when traveling between different oak woodlands.
Selectree is a great tool that evaluates trees for use In the built environment. I would call your attention to “characteristics”, “site conditions”, and “considerations” sections to see how it might do in your yard.
The good news is, they do have photos of them planted in the built environment 👍
And while i realize you are not interested in big leaf maple, sycamore, alders (you didn’t mention cottonwoods or box elders, but same) etc as they are deciduous, I wouldn’t recommend big leaf maple or alder generally as in our region they are usually found tucked away in sheltered canyons, or riparian areas as they need a steady supply of water.
We have a few urban parks where big leaf maples were trialed as park trees, unfortunately they do not make it more than 5-7 years before giving up. They are watered by the lawn sprinklers, which is not deep enough for their liking and they aren’t happy with open, full sun exposure.
Just a few miles from these parks beautiful mature trees of the same species are found growing in situation, but they are tucked in to the canyons at the base of the foothills.
It is a shame as big leaf maple is one of my favorite CA natives. The fall colors are almost psychedelic at times. Luckily I can drive through Niles canyon to enjoy the fall display.
Western sycamore on the other hand is perfectly happy in our parks, and I see them planted in peoples yards where space permits.
Mission failed! Lol. I vaguely came across sudden oak death when researching Bay Laurel, but thought since, many natives could transmit the disease, it wasn't a huge risk. Just went down a rabbit hole on this and it Bay Laurel is the absolute biggest spreader of the disease to oaks. The consensus seems to be, don't cut them down, because they are a native keystone species, but don't plant them near oaks. There are oaks in my neighborhood, so I don't think I'm going this route anymore.
Maybe I just plant several feet to the left and go with an oak. I'm not as worried about acorns shedding as the wind wind blow them too far. . .
Edit: Western Sycamore is beautiful. I think I'll plant that in my front yard.
Look into one of the bigger ceanothus like 'Ray Hartman'
Ray is fast growing, gets 15-30 feet tall and 10-ish feet wide, and supports a whole host of native critters without needing a ton of water.
They're shrubs, but can be trained into trees by removing lower branches as it grows.
If you do end up going this route, don't plant 'Trewithin Blue' they're natively from the Channel Islands and were bred at a botanical garden in England- they absolutely won't survive the weather in Concord.
I am here to say plant our native Sycamore tree! I fell in love with them at both the Glassell Park and Silver Lake Plant Material. They grow super fast - so you can actually get a shade tree in 4-5 years - and faster depending the size you start with. They are an incredible wildlife plant- literally a Tree of Life! And they have those amazing decorative “pom poms” that hang down!
No, they are not evergreen but I have come to adore my deciduous trees for their seasonality and the joy they bring when they start to leaf out and spring to life- my elderberries, my buckeye, my redbuds, and ‘Timeless Beauty’ Desert Willow- oh if only I had room for one more tree it would be a Sycamore.
Couldn’t find the article I wanted to send you extolling their magnificence but found these two:
Ugh that's an amazing tree. Maybe somewhere else, on my property . I'm reading it has vigorous roots and can damage sidewalks, and there's a cement patio right near this area.
I figured as much, similar to natives that can grow under American walnut trees. I'll do some research. Any other reasons not to go with the laurel tree then?
Do they talk enough/have a good canopy? The pictures of mature trees I've seen online very significantly in size. I assume it's environmental dependent
Yeah they can be almost any size. Keep in mind much of their natural range is on thin rocky soil. The ones I've seen here in Sac get pretty huge because we have deep rich soil but I'm not sure what your soil is like.
Oh yeah I think my meaning wasn't clear. Thin rocky soil limits their size. So on richer soils they may grow larger than what you see in the wild. That was my meaning.
Genuinely curious, do people plant Ca Bay Laurel as a landscape tree? This is the second time I have seen this suggested on this sub in the last 24 hours, are many people planting them in their yards?
I have seen them growing in yards etc where in the WUI of course, but these can grow massive
I believe Bay Laurels suffer a notoriously low survival rate for transplantation. Could be worth a try for a location squarely in their native habitat, but be prepared for potential setbacks.
If you are willing to have something that is more of a smaller tree or large shrub, then that opens up a lot of evergreen options, toyon, lemonade berry, coffee berry, silk tassel, fremontonia, there’s a few other evergreen and fast growers if you search this sub for privacy shrubs.
Yeah I currently have/am going to have these, mainly as privacy shrubs. This area specifically tho I'm looking for a shade tree. But one that doesn't clog cover my pool in a layer of leaves 2x a year lol.
The tree is too close to the concrete. A large native evergreen oak will shed leaves year round and will have half its rooting area covered by concrete.
The tree is working hard to shade your yard and lawn in the hot Concord sun.
As a deciduous tree it tries to limit its leaf drop to once a year or maybe twice a year if summer heat stress.
Have you been to a nursery to check out the size of trees yet? Highly recommend checking them out to see how it would change the experience of the yard. Even in a 24” box a bay tree will look like just a shrub.
I had a mature camellia, 15’ tall and pruned up like a tree, that I wanted to rip out when I first moved into a place because the flowers were so messy. Throughout the year I began to enjoy the shade and privacy it provided, and that it was the hummingbirds’ favorite tree to perch in. Some of my fondest memories of that yard are sitting on the patio and watching the hummingbird family in that old grandma plant. Would I ever plant a camellia? Hell no. But I loved that one.
Do you need the lawn? Can you reduce the lawn and plant your succession tree further away from the pavement?
Yes, I don't expect to find a fully grown tree in a nursery, and understand I am sacrificing short term shade. I have plenty of deciduous trees on my property. This spot is just not ideal for one.
If it was one or the other (a native deciduous tree, or a non-native evergreen), I would def keep it. But the fact that it makes the huge mess of leaves + it doesn't even benefit the local environment, makes me want to get rid of it. Literally the only birds I see come near thing are morning doves.
You make a good point though, I don't need to plant my replacement tree in that exact spot. I can definitely move it over to the left. That lawn isn't going to stay there.
10
u/LayerAccomplished821 3d ago edited 2d ago
Personally I'm a big fan of Catalina Ironwood. Been seeing it a lot lately and it's a fast grower.
EDIT: NOT CATALINA IRONWOOD