dave weil writes:

It's just a guess, but I would think that this type of "clay" would be
vulnerable to being returned back to a more "swampy" type soil over
time and through "amending". By amending, I mean having the topsoil
start to infiltrate the substrata. I would think that by having a
rich, earthworm-heavy sort of topsoil, the earthworms themselves (and
perhaps the chemical reactions of the composty topsoil) would start to
reduce the clay back to its original form, although I don't know how
deep the earthworms tend to burrow, or how far this sort of change
would occur.

There are earthworms aplenty in the top 12" or so, I don't recall seeing them
any deeper than that. If you go much deeper it's very wet, at 4' you hit
water. Fortunately the lot slopes toward the canal so the top layer drains
well.


Sand is trickier. However, you certainly don't have drainage problems
with the sand. Perhaps there might be a salt problem that could
negatively impact the general pH and balance of the topsoil. I dunno.

Did you find any significant cultural differences between the beds?


There's no drainage problem that's for sure! But we are close enough to the
water the sand stays moist, but never soggy wet. We had 30 days without rain
in the month of January and yet I didn't water. I did check the sandy area and
found it still felt moist to the touch. I was surprised, I expected it to be
dry. Maybe there are enough other particles in there to hold the moisture even
though the color and feel is still that of yellow sand.
I had the pH checked and although I don't recall the exact number, it fell well
within the normal range.
Things grow well in both areas. I don't have exactly the same of anything
planted both front and back, except grass, and the grass does well in both
locations. Although the grass areas in the front that haven't been distrubed
and are still mostly muck grow the best. (I don't water the grass, and expect
it is due to the moisture retention in this area.) I "think" that roses
wouldn't do as well in this area (without amendments), because I expect the
muck to be too wet for their roots. The grass roots stay near the top and IMO
the excess water isn't damaging to them.
The roses in the sand areas do not seem as vigorous as those in the front yard,
but part of this may be due to the different cultivars. The muck is very
nutrient rich, somthing the sand lacks, which I'm sure is a contributing
factor. To really test the differences I would need to plant two of the same
rose, front and back. Perhaps I will try that with the new cuttings I've got
started. They would have come from the same plant and be the same age to
eliminate those differences in performance.

I sorta like this discussion since it reinforces my false pride in my
own soil. False because I had absolutely nothing to do with the luck
of buying a lot that happens to have almost perfect soil for roses (at
least in the front yard). I try not to gloat, but it's difficult
chuckle.


I'm happy with my soil also. It's about the best you can get in Florida. I
pity the poor souls that must try to garden in solid sand!