Serious question about those tree growth regulators

I was super skeptical about using growth regulators on mature oaks for the longest time. Figured it was just a gimmick to sell more chemicals. But after trying Cambistat on a row of red oaks in a tight parking lot in Raleigh last spring, I gotta admit the results were legit. The trees are way more compact and I haven't had to prune near as much. Has anyone else seen real results with these or am I just getting lucky?

2 comments

2 Comments

riverf3411d ago

Ngl I had the same doubts for a long time too. I tested Cambistat on three live oaks in a tight median strip down in Wilmington about two years ago, and the results were honestly boring in the exact same way @oscarwright described. The growth slowed down enough that I haven't had to touch them since, and the canopy filled out denser instead of getting all leggy and awkward. I was worried about stressing them out since they were already dealing with compacted soil and road salt, but they actually looked healthier by the second season. So yeah, I think we're both seeing real effects, not just luck.

oscarwright12d ago

Guess I should admit right off the bat that I'm the guy who bought a bottle and then spent the whole summer second-guessing myself every time I sprayed a tree. (My wife says I have commitment issues with chemicals, which is probably fair.) But your experience matches mine - I tried Cambistat on some stressed maples in a cramped downtown strip and the difference was honestly pretty boring to look at in the best way possible. (Like watching paint dry, but in a good way if that makes sense.) The growth just slowed down enough that I'm not out there with a pole saw every other month, and the trees look healthier overall. I think we're both just lucky that the science actually works the way they said it would.