In article ,
Kay Lancaster wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 12:46:20 -0700, Billy wrote:
In article ,
Kay Lancaster wrote:

I'm going to suggest this book for you, also:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rodales-Chem...cessful/dp/087
857
9516

Why? It's not because I'm an organic gardener (I'm not, I garden on the
LISA model, low input sustainable agriculture),

Maybe you could explain this, or recommend a site for a fuller
explanation. The best I've been able to find so far is
"the concepts of LISA range from organic farming at one end of the
spectrum to maximum economic returns on the other."
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/publications/Soilfacts/AG-439-07_Archived/

It's a squishy concept. When it started out, the idea was really low input,
meaning you used what you had locally available, supplementing only with
things
that were really needed that were produced elsewhere -- for instance, LISA
does not reject out of hand the use of a "chemical fertilizer" if that's the
best way to sustain yields in an area, and using an organic fertilizer might
mean trucking seaweed to the center of the continent. Nor are you
automaticallycondemned to perdition for using herbicides or other pesticides
thoughtfully
and selectively when that's about the only economically feasible solution.
But
you try to avoid using more than is needed (a painted application of
glyphosate,for instance, not a wholesale spraying) and only when it appears
to be the
best solution. LISA gardening can be very high return -- for instance,
look at the SVGs in Niger and Senegal, feeding a family of 10 from 60 square
meters: http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/home/su...ens-africa.htm
http://www.theworld.org/2012/06/eco-farming-senegal/

Like organic gardening, you need to really understand what's going on
in your own little artifical ecosystem, and the better you understand,
the less energy you have to put into the system to get rewards out.

You'll have to admit that's a fairly loose definition. Most of the older
definitions I found look a lot like "organic gardening".

I suppose you could be doing ornamental gardening, then you could
include, "Maximizing the use of locally available plants and tree
species".

It is comforting that even as you say you eschew organic gardening per
se, you recommend an organic gardening book for guidance.

I fear I'm becoming even more confused.

'sok, I am often a bit baffled myself. Basically, I don't find some
things that the organic purists bemoan to be intrinsically evil. On the
other hand, I think most people shouldn't be issued anything more lethal
than a fly swatter. I do think the organic contingent has some very valid
points about soil fertility, understanding soil/water/plant/environment
interactions, and trying to leave the place a little better than you found
it.

I happen to like that particular book because I think it does do a good
job of explaining soil structure, fertility, pH, etc, and water management,
and it's pretty hard to hurt yourself with organic gardening techniques
(unless you do the old triple-dig ;-) ) And then it relates the needs of
the plants it talks about back to what you've learned about soil structure,
soil fertility, water utilization, etc. And does so in pretty much plain
English (or plain American English!). It's a good foundation book for
new gardeners, imo.

I consider "high management", where you use lots of inputs to maintain
a crop that wouldn't grow well naturally in the area -- golf greens in
S. California, for instance, rather foolish. You can do high management
organic gardening and it's still high management, which ultimately is not
really sustainable.

So here I sit in the middle of the road urging folks to substitute
knowledge for complete kits of instructions, blessed by whatever group
is promulgating them.

The conditions I meet here in Oregon are far different from those in my
native Iowa, and equally different from the chapparal of S. California.
Prescriptive gardening is more likely to be unsuccessful when it's not
developed for the area and conditions and applied with knowledge. And
since I'm a lazy gardener who'd rather read a book or journal than run
out every day to chop back the new growth on some awful perennial weed,
I tend to use what I know to control a particular weed.


you've gotten rid of one plant and started 50 more growing.

The real secret to weed control is to keep the soil covered with plants
you do want -- "canopy closure" in farming terms. If there's bare soil,
light
and water, you're going to have weeds.
Seems this could be addressed by mulch as well in Tref's allotment
portion.

I think I did in #2, below.



So here are your choices that I see at this time:

1) Wait till the weeds are growing well and nuke them with a non-specific
herbicide like glyphosate (Roundup). Since you've got a mixed bunch of
species,you'll probably have to repeat it several times over the course of
months.

2) Use a light occlusive mulch to smother the weeds for several months.
The above is the method that I use for kitchen gardening, but I never
uncover the soil, unless I'm broadcasting seeds. Otherwise, I use a
dweeble to punch holes in the mulch to put my seedlings into.
^^^^^^^ dibble? Or something else?

dib·ble (dbl)
n.