What did you do in the garden today?

Copper2, I find it interesting that Ruth Stout never bothered about crop rotation and yet had a productive, large garden.


Neither does the guy that promotes the Back to Eden gardening and his gardens are MONDO productive. I guess there is no excessive nutrient and mineral depletion when there is constant decomposition to replace all that and no bug problem when the plants are so strong and healthy as they grow. Weak or sickly plants send out a chemical signal that attract pest insects and I got to see that first hand this year, so I'm a believer. Strong, thriving plants...little to no bug problem.
Re: crop rotation. That's a topic that continues to come up in home gardening. IMO, while it may be beneficial in a large commercial operation, the benefits in the home garden are negligible. If you have a system that works for you, with your crops divided according to "family" and are able to rotate them through the garden in a bed or row system, that's good. But, most gardens are so small that the benefits regarding disease, insects, and nutrient depletion (IMO) are not going to show up in crop rotation, b/c the crops/families are already so close to each other, while in a commercial rotation, you have acres planted in a single mono crop which will be followed the next season by a different crop. As long as the garden soil is being fed every year, rotation (IMO) is not necessary. Now, the thing that I often see is gardens that fail to thrive. They all have one thing in common. The soil level of the garden will actually be BELOW the level of the lawn that surrounds it. These are the gardens that are typically cleaned of all vegetative matter every fall. (the gardener doesn't want to leave any plant debris behind that will harbor pest insects, or any diseases like blight) One family I knew carefully spent a day bagging all of the plant matter when they cleaned their garden in the fall. This was hauled to the dump to get rid of insect pest and disease issues. Then, in the spring, the garden would be thoroughly tilled, fertilized, and the process would begin anew. Productivity was not the greatest, pests rampant, and these folks complained that the plants must be using up all of the soil, b/c after a few years, they needed to have soil hauled in. Their gardening practices over time left them with bony sub soil, while the good top soil with all the "life" in it had been removed. A good healthy garden will actually have a soil level that is ABOVE the lawn that surrounds it, b/c it's constantly being fed. If you put MORE into the soil than you take out every year, no single nutrient will be depleted. That's not to say that you will NEVER need to add amendments, but... I'm just saying that the soil will be healthier and better able to feed the crops.
 
Re: crop rotation.  That's a topic that continues to come up in home gardening.  IMO, while it may be beneficial in a large commercial operation, the benefits in the home garden are negligible.  If you have a system that works for you, with your crops divided according to "family" and are able to rotate them through the garden in a bed or row system, that's good.  But, most gardens are so small that the benefits regarding disease, insects, and nutrient depletion (IMO) are not going to show up in crop rotation, b/c the crops/families are already so close to each other, while in a commercial rotation, you have acres planted in a single mono crop which will be followed the next season by a different crop.  As long as the garden soil is being fed every year, rotation (IMO) is not necessary.  Now, the thing that I often see is gardens that fail to thrive.  They all have one thing in common.  The soil level of the garden will actually be BELOW the level of the lawn that surrounds it.  These are the gardens that are typically cleaned of all vegetative matter every fall.  (the gardener doesn't want to leave any plant debris behind that will harbor pest insects, or any diseases like blight)  One family I knew carefully spent a day bagging all of the plant matter when they cleaned their garden in the fall.  This was hauled to the dump to get rid of insect pest and disease issues.  Then, in the spring, the garden would be thoroughly tilled, fertilized, and the process would begin anew.  Productivity was not the greatest, pests rampant, and these folks complained that the plants must be using up all of the soil, b/c after a few years, they needed to have soil hauled in.  Their gardening practices over time left them with bony sub soil, while the good top soil with all the "life" in it had been removed.  A good healthy garden will actually have a soil level that is ABOVE the lawn that surrounds it, b/c it's constantly being fed.  If you put MORE into the soil than you take out every year, no single nutrient will be depleted.  That's not to say that you will NEVER need to add amendments, but... I'm just saying that the soil will be healthier and better able to feed the crops.
Great post! I have raised beds... More like a 4' by 8' pot 1' deep, and looks like a raised bed just not touching the ground( there set on sawhorses)
 
We went on a trip a couple weeks ago, and had our friends water it. We were gone for 4 days. It got to 112, so they went up to northern Az. And they left my garden to deal with heat. I have to water 3 times a day, it is so hot here, the soil drinks it up! I trusted her to water it, as she has done some gardening in the past. But everything died. Everything. Now the soil is as hard as a rock. I've watered but the soil underneath doesn't get any water. Any one have this problem with soil and know how to fix it?
hmm.png
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom