Re: Fencing: alternatives to treated lumber(caution)

Mary C Kline (kline.oldhouse@worldnet.att.net)
Fri, 25 Jun 1999 22:18:14 -0400

Pat Elazar wrote:
> Maybe I mis-understood the thrust of the post cautioning against using
Locust
> (Gleditsia) as posts because of the thorns?
>
> Fence posts don't usually sucker (unless you use Willow!) at least in my
mud-
> perhaps your land is more bio-active than mine. If you were advising to
use LIVE
> Locust trees as fence posts, then be sure to get the variety Gleditsia
> Triacanthos Inerma- the 3rd name literally means unarmed or thornless.
>

Bill Evans is correct, the Black Locust used for fence posts is Robinia
pseudoacacia, not Honey Locust, Gleditsia triacanthos. I have not heard of
a thornless variety, although propagators have tried to breed one. I had
success controlling the suckers in my fence post lot by hand pruning them
once per year, and by mowing to cut the seedlings. I have observed them to
be less invasive in plant hardiness zone 5 and north. Has anyone in the
upper midwest had the same observation?

One comment on the use of Redwood in fencing - it is not sustainable.

Mary

To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail