saki wrote:


There are a lot of theories about this, as you point out; I could refer
you to a bibliography of sources that would curl your hair (mine too!).

Thank you for not! They may be the same ones posted regularly in
Gardenweb. I have read, I have read. I have spent a good amount of my life
surrounded by academics. Theories, I know. Reading, I do.



I took soil science a long time ago when I was a horticulture major.
One
of our experiments involved tracking soil porosity where aggregate and
organic matter were not well integrated. We examined different strata of
materials as well as surrounding clay states (similar to the model of
rose holes that you describe). In situations where clay and organic
matter are not well distributed, water drainage can be impeded, but it
depends on the ratio of clay to organic matter as well as the type of
organic matter used.

Yes. My first point is that I am not gardening in heavy clay. Rich brown
and black loam or silt or whatever you want to call good, friable garden
soil goes about 6-8inches down. It has been created by many years
of "natural compost--" oak leaves, dead grass, animal droppings, who
knows. However, my rose holes and beds go down 1.5 to 2 feet. So--I am
actually just replacing the lower levels. There are still some large
lumps, and certainly small particles of clay in the top soil that gets
added back.

Second, I did not really explain why I think the stupid clay theory is
stupid, aside from my own insufficient five years of gardening. Here is
why. I have observed that there are groups of people so lacking in
perspective that they attribute to human beings far greater power over the
earth and its ecosphere than said human beings could ever wield. I think
these people feel this way because they NEED to. Why? Because they do not
want to accept our overall smallness in the scheme of things. I know we
can and do have an effect--albeit temporary in terms of geologic time--on
the earth and its ecosphere. But, essentially--we are ants. Numerous, very
small, terribly temporary, and, in the end, not really very smart, and not
very effective. In a way, this is a good thing. If we were terribly
effective our overall selfishness and lack of perspective would already
have ruined the earth for all life including human life. If it could. And
it can't.

This is the best case scenario. The worst is that we really ARE the latest
dinosaurs, and the earth has some fabulous Premier Event that will wipe us
off its face. Out of its air and water. Off its clay dirt, where we dig
our pathetic holes and plant roses that will probably die long before we
do and will certainly die after we do. WHAM. All over, all gone. Then some
new classes of creatures will come, or maybe this will be a dead planet.
If so, stuff will be happening on other planets. Eventually. :-) Maybe in
a few billion years. Maybe it is happening now.

Now really--how does the stupid clay theory look in this context? Hmmm?

I think the warnings on soda and champagne bottles make more sense. You
know, "don't point at face when opening." Ants with thumbs. Not too
terribly bright.