This species of Rhus remains unidentified.

Apologies for the delay of posting something for noon as I typically do.

These are just two pictures of two species that were not interesting enough for my Six on Saturday post this morning. Now that it is past one as I write this, it will be scheduled to post at two, hence Two at Two.

Most of what we propagate or recycle here has some potential to be used in the landscapes. Sometimes, we salvage something just because it it too appealing to waste, even if there is no plan for what will be done with it later. For example, we now have five nicely canned but otherwise useless Norway maples, just because they needed to be removed from a landscape.

I canned the four specimens of unidentified Rhus in the picture above because I thought I knew what they are, and that I wanted to plant them somewhere. Now that I realize that I have no idea what they are, and that the one thing I know about them is that they are invasive, I really do not know what to do with them. For now, they will stay canned right here where they are.

The buckeye in the picture below were grown just because the huge seed were too compelling to discard. Although I know what species they are, I also know that they are not very popular. Actually, because they defoliate and seem to be dead through summer, they are rather unpopular. They will likely just get planted in a bare spot on the bank of Zayante Creek right outside.

That is part of the problem of enjoying our work a bit too much. We take horticulture a bit too seriously, and feel compelled to find homes for all the unwanted flora that we can salvage.

Buckeye will not be easy to find a home for.

6 thoughts on “Two at Two

  1. I spent years only knowing buckeyes as a chocolate and peanut butter candy popular in the midwest. Imagine my surprise to find out there was a buckeye tree, and that my candies looked like its seeds!

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I think the trees might be common — so common, in fact, that the trees’ seeds gave rise to the candy. It was just that in those days I barely knew a maple from an elm, and mostly didn’t have a clue about buckeyes, ash, or catalpa. Now, candy? I knew candy!

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Oh, of course. When I was a kid, I could not understand why the redwoods lacked low limbs to climb, because, after all, that was what trees were for back then. It also seemed strange to me that they did not grow in grid patterns like the apricot trees of the orchards.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you. I do happen to like them, even though I really do not know what to do with the rhus. I might plant them outside here, where they would be surrounded by pavement. I do not know what species they are, but of the three likely candidates, all produce seed that has culinary applications.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s