Another conifer within a small group of ornamental trees.
No interactions present.
...as Fir have leaves arranged all along the shoots, not held in bunches.
This looks more like a larch, but presumably not a deciduous one!!
How to take close-ups with cheap phone and hand-lens:
Field Guides for Budding Botanists:
Could have sworn that there was one ornamental evergreen Larch, otherwise I would boldly make the statement "evergreen, therefore not Larch."
*gnashes teeth at having missed an "easy" one*
Not so long ago tree ID appeared quite straightforward however with the introduction of ornamentals into our gardens and parks it can be confusing. These three specimens were growing within 10m of each other. I feel an ID course would help or a knowledgeable gardener! Kind regards
...and am I the only one finding what I would call "ornamentals" out there in the wild?
Possibly the increase in local councils adding "interesting" trees to new planting and road edges might be contributing?
Hugh, as far as training goes, I'm getting a little jaded with so-called ID courses which don't really help (wasted two days last year on grasses, sedges and rushes course: badly put together, poorly run, utterly unstructured yet utterly rigid) and I'm finding that you can learn more with a couple of books, and a botany buddy.
Depends what you mean by ornamentals.
Rhododendron ponticum went wild a long time ago, and bird sown Cotoneaster are quite common. Berberis turn up occasionally, and I've found a cluster of sites for Sorbus croceocarpa and Sorbus latifolia - they fruited well in 2011 and I had a whitebeam hunt that autumn.
Lat/Lng: 53.3803, -2.8714
OS grid ref: SJ421874
Small 14 acre, Green Flag park in Conservation area on high sandstone ridge.