VARIETY TRIALS

he southern Rocky Moun- of New Mexico, 1995). The economy Nursery and tain region has experienced of these rural regions remains largely Landscape T significant population growth based in agricultural enterprises, pri- since the mid 1970s. Most growth has marily ranching and small agricultural Performance of been in the foothill and lower slope production systems. The marginal prof- portions of the region in an elevation itability of these enterprises has con- Ornamental range of 1,650 to 2450 m (5400 to tributed to the overall downturn in 8000 ft). In New Mexico, much of this these rural economies and the efflux of in the growth has occurred in Rio Arriba, their residents. San Miguel, Santa Fe, and Taos coun- The Mora Valley, in north central Southern Rocky ties of north central New Mexico. New Mexico, is typical of many of Mountains Population increases in these four coun- these rural agricultural communities ties from 1980 to 1990 ranged from in the southern Rocky Mountains. 13.2% in San Miguel County to 31.3% Traditionally an agricultural valley, the 1 in Santa Fe County (University of New Mora Valley is currently characterized John T. Harrington and Mexico, 1995). Urban and suburban by small family owned farms. One James T. Fisher2 centers in this region accounted for opportunity to offset the overall eco- most of this growth (University of nomic downturn characteristic of small New Mexico, 1994, 1995). The agricultural enterprises throughout the growth trend is expected to continue country is to change from traditional ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS. xeriscape, Juniperus, landscaping in these counties over the next several crops such as alfalfa to high value hor- decades with a projected population ticultural crops. However, the short, ≈ SUMMARY. Supplying landscape increase from 183,000 to >284,000 105-d growing season, the cool night for expanding urban centers in the in 2020 (University of New Mexico, temperatures, a limited water supply, southern Rocky Mountains provides a 1994). and the distance from large commer- solution to limited-resource producers These municipalities have ex- cial markets combine to exclude most wishing to convert from traditional panded into semiarid regions with lim- alternative horticultural crops that can agricultural crops to higher value ited supplies of underground and sur- be produced economically in these horticultural crops in this region. face water. To satisfy the increasing areas. One solution is to produce Thirty-five of ornamental demands on these water supplies, most Christmas trees, which for decades have junipers (Juniperus sp.) were planted in an abandoned agricultural field in municipalities have employed various been harvested from native forests and Mora, N.M., to evaluate their suitabil- water conservation measures, includ- have provided a significant and ongo- ity for nursery production in this ing the required use of xeriscape de- ing economic enterprise in the Mora region. The plantings were measured signs for new residential and commer- Valley (Harrington, 1994). after 4 years, and cultivars were cial developments. Enforcement of A transition from traditional land ranked for nursery suitability. The these xeriscape ordinances has chal- uses to Christmas tree production planting was then grown for an lenged landscapers and homeowners would create a more sustainable and additional 16 years to examine to design and establish -diverse profitable enterprise than is attainable landscape performance. Nineteen landscapes. Many native plants from with trees harvested from the forest, cultivars were considered suitable for the lower elevation Chihuahuan and but such a transition faces many ob- nursery production with five cultivars being highly recommended based on Sonoran Deserts used in xeriscapes stacles. A primary difficulty with con- survival and growth. Twenty-five of elsewhere in the southwest United version to Christmas tree production the cultivars were considered suitable States are not suited to the colder is its slow return on investment for landscape use in the foothill climates found at these higher eleva- (Gorman et al., 1989). Production of region of the southern Rocky Moun- tions. marketable Christmas trees in this val- tains based on the 20-year measure- has been characterized as ley requires 6 to 9 years, depending on ments. Nine cultivars were classified one of the toughest groups of ever- the species and management (Gorman as highly recommended. Production green landscape plants (Dirr, 1983). et al., 1989; Harrington, 1994). A of ornamental junipers provides an Juniper species are ideally suited for potential solution is to produce an economical alternative to traditional landscaping in the foothill region of interim high value crop, such as orna- agricultural production systems. the southern Rocky Mountains be- mental junipers, marketable in the ex- cause of their ability to tolerate pro- panding urban and suburban centers longed drought and wide temperature of the region. The junipers could be Mora Research Center, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, extremes. Junipers, with a wide range interplanted with the Christmas trees, NM 88003. of growth forms, can be used in nu- providing an interim return on invest- This research was funded, in part, through grant from merous ways in a landscape, from a ment in 3 to 4 years. Investment in McIntire-Stennis and the New Mexico Agricultural ground cover to a solitary tree. land would remain unchanged, how- Experiment Station. The cost of publishing this paper was defrayed, in part, by the payment of page charges. In contrast to population growth ever, material costs would be Under postal regulations, this paper must therefore be in urban areas, rural populations of increased. Irrigation costs would re- hereby marked advertisement solely to indicate this these and adjacent counties have stag- main similar, as most of this area is fact. nated, and in some cases decreased, flood irrigated from surface water 1Assistant professor. over the past three decades (University sources. 2Professor.

40 ● January–March 1999 9(1) The objectives of this study were growing season (August 1976) into ter, is located at ≈2,200 m (7200 ft) to 1) examine the feasibility (based on 3.8-L (1-gal) pots containing a (by and has an average frost-free period of survival and growth) of commercial volume) mixture of 1 composted saw- 105 d. The soils of the planting site are production of junipers in north central dust (mixed fir and pine) : 1 soil : 1 a Brycan loam (fine, loamy, mixed New Mexico for landscape applica- sand. Plants were grown and overwin- cumulic haploboroll). Following plant- tions and 2) evaluate the performance tered in a lath house through the spring ing, plants were irrigated once every of these juniper cultivars over 20 years and transplanted into the field in June month for the first three growing sea- in the landscape. 1977. Plants were fertilized weekly sons. To examine landscape perfor- through the end of the growing sea- mance (survival and growth), no fur- Materials and methods sons with liquid fertilizer (75N–21P– ther irrigation was provided from the Thirty-five cultivars of junipers, 29K). At the end of September, plants 4th through 18th growing seasons. representing seven species, were evalu- were fertilized with one application of The experimental design was a ated (Table 1). Plants, originally rooted 10N–12P–15K. randomized complete block design into 6.25-cm3 (0.4-inch3) rose pots, The planting site, New Mexico with six blocks. Each was rep- were transplanted at the end of the State University’s Mora Research Cen- resented by 13 plants per block. Tree Table 1. Survival, mean height and mean spread of field grown ornamental juniper cultivars after three growing seasons at Mora, N.M., from 1977 through Spring 1980 (±standard error). Mean Mean ht spread Survival (cm) (cm) Species Cultivar (%) (LSDz) ±SE ±SE Spreading J. chinensis ‘Armstrong’ 45 d–g 33 ± 2.8 18 ± 1.0 ‘Mint Julep’ 83 a–c 30 ± 1.0 15 ± 1.9 ‘Pfitzeriana Glauca’ 58 b–g 35 ± 4.8 19 ± 3.8 var sargentii ‘Glauca’ 73 a–f 18 ± 1.9 16 ± 0.2 J. horizontalis ‘Bar Harbor’ 60 a–g 18 ± 2.6 16 ± 3.4 ‘Emerald Spreader’ 77 a–d 15 ± 1.3 19 ± 1.6 ‘Turquoise Spreader’ 40 g 20 ± 1.5 18 ± 3.7 ‘Emerson’s Creeper’ 83 a–c 18 ± 0.3 14 ± 2.6 ‘Hughes’ 90 a–b 13 ± 2.1 11 ± 0.6 J. procumbens ‘Nana’ 77 a–d 23 ± 1.1 15 ± 4.7 J. sabina ‘Arcadia’ 78 a–c 40 ± 1.5 18 ± 5.7 ‘Broadmoor’ 75 a–e 15 ± 2.1 17 ± 0.6 ‘Buffalo’ 85 a–c 20 ± 2.0 19 ± 2.7 ‘Skandia’ 60 a–g 20 ± 1.5 20 ± 1.0 var tamariscifolia 82 a–c 20 ± 2.5 18 ± 0.7 J. scopulorum ‘Tabletop Blue’ 92 a 30 ± 1.1 13 ± 1.3 J. davurica ‘Expansa’ 92 a 20 ± 0.9 10 ± 1.1 J. virginiana var prostrata ’Silver Spreader’ 42 f–g 20 ± 1.7 19 ± 0.2 Semiprostrate/Semierect J. chinensis ‘Fruitlandii’ 73 a–f 33 ± 0.7 18 ± 3.9 ‘Hetzi Glauca’ 63 b–f 30 ± 1.0 12 ± 1.9 ‘Pfitzeriana’ 68 a–g 30 ± 1.7 18 ± 1.0 ‘Pfitzeriana Aurea’ 75 a–e 23 ± 1.7 15 ± 0.9 var sargentii ‘Viridis’ 82 a–c 18 ± 2.1 17 ± 1.4 J. sabina ‘Blue Danube’ 68 a–g 33 ± 1.4 21 ± 0.4 Pyramidal/Upright J. chinensis ‘Gold Coast’ 58 b–g 23 ± 1.6 14 ± 2.7 ‘Blaauw’ 55 c–g 40 ± 2.5 8 ± 6.2 ‘Blue Point’ 88 a–b 38 ± 1.6 14 ± 3.3 ‘Spartan’ 43 e–f 70 ± 1.3 15 ± 4.2 ‘Keteleeri’ 77 a–e 68 ± 1.8 16 ± 3.4 J. scopulorum ‘Moffetii’ 70 a–c 55 ± 1.2 18 ± 5.3 ‘Pathfinder’ 80 a–c 83 ± 0.9 15 ± 2.7 J. virginiana ‘Manhattan Blue’ 42 f–g 53 ± 1.4 15 ± 4.8 Columnar J. virginiana ‘Sky Rocket’ 65 a–g 53 ± 2.8 16 ± 5.6 Globe J. scopulorum ‘Lakewood Globe’ 60 a–g 33 ± 1.6 17 ± 4.6 zLSD refers to pairwise comparisons of survival with cultivars having the same letter not being significantly different.

● January–March 1999 9(1) 41 VARIETY TRIALS spacing was 1 m (3 ft) within rows and ‘Hughes’, all having survival in excess Again, block variability limited the 1.2 m (4 ft) between rows. Survival, of 90% (Table 1). Four of the remain- utility of the means comparison proce- height, and crown spread were mea- ing spreading cultivars evaluated had dure used. For example, a cultivar with sured in the field in the spring of the extremely poor survival, with the worst 51% survival was considered no differ- fourth growing season (May 1980). survival being 40% for J. horizontalis ent than a cultivar with 74% survival The plants were kept in the origi- ‘Turquoise Spreader.’ (Table 2). Twenty year cultivar sur- nal planting for the next 16 years, to Crown width of spreading culti- vival ranged from 14% for J. chinensis examine suitability for use in the land- vars after three growing seasons ranged ‘Gold Coast’ to 74% for J. sabina scape. During this time, no supple- from 10 to 20 cm (4 to 8 inches) and ‘Arcadia’ (Table 2). Nine cultivars had mental water or fertilizers were ap- was not related to survival (Table 1). survival rates of greater than 60%, in- plied. Twice each year, weeds growing (L.) ‘Skandia’ had cluding 7 cultivars with spreading within plot borders were mowed. Three the greatest crown growth, but poor crown forms, one with a semiprostrate times during the 16 years, pocket go- survival. In contrast, the three spread- form, and one with an upright crown phers had to be removed to prevent ing cultivars with the highest survival form (Table 2). Eleven cultivars in damage to the junipers. Pocket go- had the smallest crown width after 3 three of the four crown categories had phers were removed before any visible years in the field. Overall, all spreading between 50% and 59% survival. Spe- aboveground effects. cultivars of J. chinensis, J. procumbens cies survival differences exhibited no After 16 years, survival, height [(Endl.) Sieb. et Zucc.], J. sabina, and pattern. and crown spread were measured. J. virginiana (L.) had good lateral As would be expected, 20-year Crown spread measurements were crown growth after three growing sea- height growth and lateral growth var- taken perpendicular to the planting sons in the field. ied widely (Table 2). Overall height row. For spreading varieties with ir- Survival for the semiprostrate and growth ranged from <20 cm (8 inches) regular crown perimeters, crown spread semierect cultivars ranged from 58% for J. horizontalis ‘Emerson’s Spreader’ was measured to outermost line paral- for J. chinensis ‘Hetzi Glauca’ to 82% to near 3.25 m (10.6 ft) for J. lel to the row of plants where a con- for J. chinensis var. sargentii (Henry) scopulorum ‘Moffetii’ and J. virginiana tinuous canopy existed. ‘Viridis’ (Table 1). Crown height var- ‘Manhattan Blue.’ Of the seven pyra- Survival data were analyzed using ied from 18 to 33 cm (7 to 13 inches) mid forms evaluated, J. chinensis analysis of variance followed by a means after three growing seasons in the field. ‘Keteleeri,’ J. scopulorum ‘Moffetii’ and separation procedure (PROC GLM Juniperus sabina ‘Blue Danube’ ‘Pathfinder,’ and J. virginiana ‘Man- (LSD) of SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, achieved the greatest crown size at the hattan Blue’ all were ≈3.0 m (9.8 ft) in N.C.). All analyses were conducted at end of the nursery trial. Juniperus chin- height after 20 years in the field. Juni- the 5% significance level. The large ensis ‘Fruitlandii’ and ‘Pfitzeriana’ perus chinensis ‘Blue Point’ and ‘Spar- variability in crown form of the culti- achieved the greatest crown size of the tan’ were ≈2.5 m (8.2 ft) tall and vars negated the utility of traditional five J. chinensis cultivars evaluated in cultivar ‘Gold Coast’ was slightly >60 statistical analysis. Therefore, height this crown form category. cm (24 inches) tall at the end of the and crown spread are reported as mean Survival varied considerably for study. Twenty-year height for the values with an associated standard er- the pyramidal and upright cultivars, semierect juniper cultivars ranged from ror. ranging from 42% for J. virginiana 1.2 m (3.9 ft) (J. sabina ‘Blue Danube’) ‘Manhattan Blue’ to 88% for J. chinen- to 1.8 m (5.9 ft) (J. chinensis ‘Hetzi Results sis ‘Blue Point’ (Table 1). Five of the Glauca’) with J. chinensis ‘Pfitzeriana NURSERY SUITABILITY. Overall, early nine cultivars in this category had <60% Aurea’ falling between. Final height (4-year) study-wide survival was vari- survival, including four of the six cul- also varied considerably for the able both within and between species tivars of J. chinensis and the J. semiprostrate cultivars evaluated, rang- (Table 1). The large variability associ- virginiana cultivar that was evaluated. ing from 60 cm (24 inches) for J. ated with blocking restricted the util- Final crown heights were acceptable in chinensis var. sargentii ‘Viridis’ to 1.3 ity of the mean comparison procedure all but two of the six J. chinensis culti- m (4.3 ft) for ‘Pfitzeriana’ (Table 2). used. Early survival ranged from 40% vars in this category. Juniperus Spreading cultivar height growth for J. horizontalis (Moench.) ‘Tur- scopulorum ‘Pathfinder’ and J. chinen- ranged from <20 cm (8 inches) for J. quoise Spreader’ to 92% for J. davurica sis ‘Spartan’ and ‘Keteleeri’ had the horizontalis ‘Emerald Spreader’ to >2.3 (Parl.) ‘Expansa’ (note this cultivar is greatest growth, achieving final mean m (7.5 ft) for J. scopulorum ‘Table Top also referred to as J. squamata (Lamb.) heights of 83, 70, and 68 cm (33, 28, Blue’ (Table 2). All J. horizontalis cul- ‘Parsoni’ Whitcomb, 1983) and J. 27 inches), respectively (Table 1). tivars and J. procumbens ‘Nana’ re- scopulorum (Sarg.) ‘Table Top Blue’ The columnar cultivar J. mained <40 cm (16 inches) tall after (Table 1). The J. chinensis (L.) culti- virginiana ‘Sky Rocket’ and the globe 20 years in the field. The spreading vars had the greatest range of survival cultivar J. scopulorum ‘Lakewood cultivars of J. sabina, J. davurica, and of any species tested, with survival Globe’ had poor survival after three J. virginiana had 20-year heights rang- ranging from 43% for the ‘Spartan’ growing seasons in the field. Survivors ing from 45 to 100 cm (18 to 39 cultivar to 88% for the ‘Blue Point’ of these two cultivars did achieve mar- inches) (Table 2). cultivar. ketable size at the end of the nursery Crown spread for spreading culti- Five spreading cultivars evaluated portion of this study. vars ranged from 1.4 to nearly 3.7 m had high (>85%) survival, including J. LANDSCAPE SUITABILITY. Survival (4.6 to 12.1 ft) (Table 2). Crown scopulorum ‘Table Top Blue’, J. varied tremendously between cultivars spread for the four spreading cultivars davurica ‘Expansa’, and J. horizontalis and blocks in this portion of the study. of J. chinensis ranged from 1.7 m (5.6

42 ● January–March 1999 9(1) Table 2. Survival, mean height and mean crown spread after 20 years for cultivars of , J. horizontalis, J. procumbens, J. sabina, J. scopulorum, J. squamata, and J. virginiana examined in this study (±standard error). Mean Mean No. ht spread of Survival (cm) (cm) Species Cultivar plants (%) (LSDz) ±SE ±SE Spreading J. chinensis ‘Armstrong’ 19 28 j–l 121.2 ± 5.6 170.0 ± 12.6 ‘Mint Julep’ 28 53 a–i 193.6 ± 2.7 391.2 ± 13.1 ‘Pfitzeriana Glauca’ 25 50 b–j 189.7 ± 9.5 364.1 ± 32.0 var sargentii ‘Glauca’ 28 55 a–g 85.0 ± 7.5 180.1 ± 18.3 J. horizontalis ‘Bar Harbor’ 23 37 f–l 21.4 ± 1.9 153.7 ± 11.6 ‘Emerald Spreader’ 29 64 a–e 18.8 ± 1.6 181.1 ± 11.4 ‘Turquoise Spreader’ 23 36 f–l 26.4 ± 6.7 146.3 ± 7.3 ‘Emerson’s Creeper’ 30 54 a–h 24.3 ± 4.8 138.1 ± 8.2 ‘Hughes’ 30 72 a–b 37.7 ± 3.3 215.3 ± 7.0 J. procumbens ‘Nana’ 20 37 f–l 22.8 ± 1.8 115.4 ± 11.0 J. sabina ‘Arcadia’ 30 74 a 87.3 ± 2.9 223.7 ± 15.4 ‘Broadmoor’ 30 68 a–c 46.9 ± 4.1 204.3 ± 11.2 ‘Buffalo’ 30 71 a–b 47.3 ± 2.3 213.7 ± 9.9 ‘Skandia’ 25 58 a–g 79.2 ± 3.0 247.2 ± 13.4 var tamariscifolia 30 64 a–e 65.1 ± 2.8 143.5 ± 9.8 J. scopulorum ‘Tabletop Blue’ 30 67 a–d 237.5 ± 13.2 240.3 ± 12.9 J. davurica ‘Expansa’ 22 44 d–k 59.5 ± 2.4 172.0 ± 8.6 J. virginiana var prostrata ’Silver Spreader’ 22 29 i–l 99.3 ± 9.1 198.7 ± 22.4 Semiprostrate/Semierect J. chinensis ‘Fruitlandii’ 25 41 e–k 106.5 ± 5.6 267.1 ± 9.0 ‘Hetzi Glauca’ 29 59 a–f 186.7 ± 4.0 432.2 ± 17.6 ‘Pfitzeriana’ 28 55 a–g 126.3 ± 3.9 301.6 ± 22.5 ‘Pfitzeriana Aurea’ 21 46 c–k 135.7 ± 3.4 285.0 ± 14.0 var sargentii ‘Viridis’ 27 62 a–e 62.4 ± 2.2 211.5 ± 9.6 J. sabina ‘Blue Danube’ 26 54 a–h 117.2 ± 3.3 276.6 ± 9.5 Pyramidal/Upright J. chinensis ‘Gold Coast’ 11 14 l 63.6 ± 5.4 91.8 ± 11.8 ‘Blaauw’ 12 15 l 85.5 ± 5.3 62.7 ± 5.0 ‘Blue Point’ 26 56 a–g 234.8 ± 10.6 171.9 ± 9.7 ‘Spartan’ 23 31 h–l 269.8 ± 12.3 224.4 ± 10.9 ‘Keteleeri’ 28 51 a–j 299.2 ± 4.8 275.2 ± 9.5 J. scopulorum ‘Moffetii’ 27 53 a–i 324.9 ± 10.3 195.4 ± 6.9 ‘Pathfinder’ 25 71 a–b 291.8 ± 8.6 229.8 ± 7.1 J. virginiana ‘Manhattan Blue’ 16 23 k–l 324.6 ± 14.2 328.8 ± 12.1 Columnar J. virginiana ‘Sky Rocket’ 25 55 a–g 376.6 ± 4.8 267.2 ± 7.4 Globe J. scopulorum ‘Lakewood Globe’ 20 35 g–l 271.6 ± 5.6 237.8 ± 6.8 zLSD refers to pairwise comparisons of survival with cultivars having the same letter not being significantly different. ft) for ‘Armstrong’ to 3.6 m (11.8 ft) ft) for J. virginiana ‘Manhattan Blue.’ cultivars evaluated. The 19 cultivars for ‘Pfitzeriana Glauca.’ Juniperus The semiprostrate forms of J. chinensis with adequate survival (>70%) and horizontalis cultivars were less variable (‘Fruitlandii,’ Pfitzeriana,’ and var. growth for nursery production in this in crown spread, ranging from 1.4 m sargentii ‘Viridis’) ranged in crown region include 11 cultivars with spread- to nearly 2.3 m (4.6 ft to nearly 7.5 ft). spread from 2.0 to 3.0 m (6.6 to 9.8 ing growth forms, four cultivars with This range in crown spread is compa- ft). The semierect cultivars evaluated, pyramidal growth forms, three culti- rable to the spreading forms of J. sabina, J. chinensis ‘Hetzi Glauca,’ ‘Pfitzeriana vars with semiprostrate growth forms, J. davurica, and J. virginiana. Aurea,’ and J. sabina ‘Blue Danube’ and one cultivar with a semierect crown Among erect forms evaluated, had crown spread ranging from 2.7 m form. These ornamental juniper culti- crown spread ranged from <60 cm (24 to nearly 4.0 m (8.9 ft to nearly 13.1 ft) vars could provide a basis for a 3-year inches) (J. chinensis ‘Blaauw’ to >4.0 (Table 2). nursery crop grown exclusively or, m (13.1 ft) for J. chinensis ‘Torulosa’ possibly as interim crops for Christmas (Table 2). Crown spread for pyramidal Discussion tree producers in this region. If a Christ- forms ranged from <1.0 m (3.3 ft) (J. Overall, 4-year survival and mas tree producer planted trees in chinensis ‘Gold Coast’) to >3.2 m (10.5 growth were favorable for many of the rows with a 2 m (6.6 ft) spacing, and

● January–March 1999 9(1) 43 VARIETY TRIALS interplanted juniper with a 1 m (3.3 ft) through the 20-year life of the study. within row spacing, the grower could The research plot from growing sea- Literature cited produce ≈5,000 junipers/ha (2,049 sons four through 20 had no supple- Dirr, M.A. 1983. Manual of woody land- junipers/acre). Given a 70% to 90% mental water or fertilizer applied. In scape plants. Their identification, orna- survival rate, the producer could har- addition, many cultivars were planted at mental characteristics, culture, propaga- vest between 3,500 and 4,500 juni- densities much higher than appropriate. tion and uses . Stipes Publ., Champaign, pers after three growing seasons in the These factors provide an evaluation of Ill. field. While not as rapid as container- the cultivars’ performance in a poorly ized production, the proposed pro- managed landscape, common in many Gorman, W.D., R.E. Grassberger, J.T. duction system does provide a poten- urban and suburban areas. This tight Fisher, J.G. Mexal, G.A. Welsh, T. tial for increasing the short-term re- spacing resulted in many cultivars with Cleavenger, and R.R. Lansford 1989. Eco- nomic assessment of growing 6–7 year turn on investment for a limited re- pyramidal, upright, and semierect scots pine and white fir plantation Christ- source Christmas tree producer typical growth forms failing to achieve normal mas trees in New Mexico. N.M. State of the Mora Valley area. This partial crown spread. Height growth was as Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 745, Las Cruces. return on investment may provide a expected in most cultivars. The failure sufficient cash flow to allow a grower of a given cultivar to achieve design Harrington, J.T. 1994. Growing Christ- to convert from a marginally profitable height is likely due to the intense com- mas trees in New Mexico. N.M. J. Sci. agriculture system to higher value hor- petition for water and nutrients gener- 34:80–88. Lacebark Pub., Stillwater, Okla. ticultural crops such as Christmas trees. ated by the dense planting. University of New Mexico 1994. Popula- For example, using a budget schedule Twenty-one cultivars had ad- tion projection for the state of New Mexico proposed by Gorman and others equate survival (>50%) and growth, by age and sex 1990–2020. Bur. Bus. (1989) for Christmas tree producers under admittedly neglected circum- Econ. Res., Univ. N.M., Albuquerque. in this region, use of intercropping stances, for landscape use in the re- junipers will provide revenue 2 to 3 gion. These 21 cultivars represent a University of New Mexico. 1995. The years before the first Christmas tree wide range of crown forms, size, foli- census in New Mexico. Vol IV: Social and economic characteristics for the state and harvest. Revenue generated by the ju- age color, and foliage density. This counties from the 1980 and 1990 census. niper sales, could be used to offset a broad spectrum of suitable juniper Bur. Bus. Econ. Res., Univ. N.M., Albu- portion of the initial costs of establish- cultivars allows landscapers and home- querque. ing the plantation. owners to develop landscapes that are The suitability of junipers for mini- acceptable to landowners and consis- Whitcomb, C.E. 1983. Know it and grow mal input landscapes is demonstrated tent with most xeriscape requirements. it ‘II’. Lacebark Publ., Stillwater, Okla.

44 ● January–March 1999 9(1)