scott wrote:
"P.S. reiner you should think about the thing you say to people if we
all took you stance there would be no one on this site as they would all
give up. get of your high horse and be constructive not deconstructive."
Sorry, I guess I could have been more explicit. ;-) My comment was not
directed at the quality of this particular walnut as bonsai, as you seem to assume (at its
present state of development, it's much too early to pass judgment on
that, although it's never too early to improve the roots), but rather,
as Matt correctly surmised, at the choice of material.
Walnut has rather large compound leaves. So, what appears like a bunch
of branches with little leaves in the picture above is really leaves
with leaflets. A trunk with, if I counted correctly, five leaves.
Depending on the species of walnut this is, the leaves (on the natural
tree), might be anywhere from 8" to 20". No doubt they'll reduce when
grown in a pot, but it will be a long time before the trunk will be a
match for even the reduced leaves.
Trees with compound leaves rarely make good subjects for bonsai culture,
the Brazilian rain tree being one exception that comes to mind.
I don't really see the point in encouraging people to grow dead-end
material. Much better to spend the time and energy on something
promising, such as the Japanese maple. So, until someone shows me a
walnut bonsai worth the name, I stand by what I said initially: I would
chuck the walnut. I bet you dollars to walnuts that our friend will
agree with me in five years. Or sooner. ;-)
Also please note that I merely stated what _I would_ do, whereas you thought nothing of suggesting what _I should_ do. I wonder whose horse is higher. ;-)
Reiner
