Actually this property has been in my family for 35years or more I inherited back in 2001 when my dad died. I would never be able to purchase a piece of land like that at the price it would sell for. The house I grew up in which my little brother has is across the street from it. I am only 28 an currently have a house 4 miles away that I own. So there is no set plans on the house this is just my property. Years and years away if any. There are only 13 other houses and it is a private neighborhood. All the houses are built on stilts around the natural florida habitat or wetlands. This would be a requirement if I ever do get to put a house on it. But in the mean time if you have seen the blog then you can see I am a man that fears no seed or plant challenge. So I am doing my homework, reading up on orchids and growing new babies, talking to neighbors and I really want to try to repopulate the neighborhood. I took a little stroll through the neighborhood today and spotted at least 5 other trees from the street that had colonies growing on them. So I am very excited about doing this I love challenges so stay tuned and I will keep you all updated on my future endeavors. Here is a partial shot of the property The Live Oaks must be over 100 years old or more. These trees are all over the neighborhood so there is lots of good spots for the orchids to grow. And the other shot is one of the other colonies I saw today. It has almost wrapped around the trees limb completely. Sorry for the long post but it is my first on your board so just trying to fill yall in. Check back on the blog to watch my plants grow. Always posting new pictures. Here is a link that might be useful: My Yard in Fort Pierce FL

There are a lot of half-truths in this thread, and some plain misinformation sprinkled in. First, the idea that certain fertilizer types promote root growth is a fallacy. If anything, fertilizing a new transplant, or one that has been in its permanent home for just a year or two or three, will actually retard root system expansion. One way to think of this is that the roots are "looking" for nutrients, so a heavy-handed approach where too much of these nutrients are placed in the root zone actually causes less growth, not more. Then, there's the staking of young plants: Tree saplings develop something called reaction wood in response to being buffeted by the wind. Stake it tightly to some rod or stick and you've eliminated the opportunity for this to happen. Doesn't mean no stakes ever, but especially any items tied tightly so the trunk can't move around are to be avoided...and anything used must come off after the first year. Then there's the idea that somehow by pruning, we can mold the plant into a shape it's not otherwise genetically programmed to adopt. While there's a dab of truth in this one, it is the wrong road to take. Somebody up above at least stated the obvious-that young plants need all the foliage they can have to produce their food via photosynthesis. And that same process causes chemicals called auxins, developed in growing shoot tips, to send signals to the roots to grow. Constantly messing with this process just confuses things. Very basically stated, if you want a tree that produces mostly an upright growth habit, select a species or cultivar of a species which is genetically programmed to grow in that fashion. Trying to beat a horse into an elephant is bound to cause frustration, and the same applies here in the plant world. Now this is not at all to say one should never prune their trees. I myself have pruned perhaps a half-million plants in my time! But there are proper techniques here, just as one wouldn't try to carve a turkey without a clue what they are doing. Very generally, a moderate program of "raising up", which simply means removing lower branches can be done, but gradually please. If one is impatient and tries to do this all at once, the very likely response by that plant is to sucker like mad. Basically, when plant parts are removed, the plant responds by trying to reestablish those plant parts. So go ahead and take all kinds of branches off your tree....and the tree will simply start a bunch of new branches. We call those new branches suckers, and many of them will grow right straight up through the tree canopy, rubbing against other more well-placed branches, or throwing the crown balance off, or competing with the main leader. These are all undesirable outcomes. Pruning trees is not simpleton stuff. Why anyone would undertake it without knowing what they're doing is beyond me, except for the monkey see-monkey do factor. Let's not do our gardening by that method! +oM

Xtal, I really don't know about that. They are in separate corners of the yard. They are both in full sun so I don't think that the lack of sun would be a factor in one not blooming. The one that does bloom is not consistent each year. Some years it will have lots of blooms and then other times, none at all. It like a lottery for us, lol. We're thrilled when it does bloom. Joey, thanks for the ID. We never knew the name so we're happy about that. Roselee, We do protect the base... somewhat. We have four pecan trees so we have tons of leaves each fall. We pile the leaves high around the root area. On really frigid nights we'll throw old blankets and a layer of plastic around the base. Since it is right next to my Gardenia, it gets covered anyway because I protect that, too. We remove the blankets when the temps rise above freezing. I suspect that some winter, we could lose it entirely. During the Spring, it always a guessing game to see if it comes back. The other tree is right next to our shed so it is somewhat protected but it gets the leaf mulch, too.

I think the height of the red shade is better, but still doesn't have the angle. In the sketch, the shade is 1/3 the height of the visible lamp base, up to the bottom of the shade - and 1/4 of the total height of the lamp, not counting the finial. I find that to be a very good proportion for a tall, skinny buffet lamp. Likewise, the diameter of the top of the shade is just about 1/4 the diameter of the bottom, and the shade is 2/3 as high as it is wide, which I think is a very pleasing proportion for the coolie style. You get a lot of angle and spread, but it's not too extreme for a more traditional style. Perhaps that will help you work out your dimensions. I'm sorry if I'm driving you to distraction! Once you find something that looks right to you, I think you should choose that.