David,

1. After re-reading the Permaculture Design Manual, Mollison made the "less
wasted space" claim from comparisons of a traditional rectangular bed garden
vs. the keyhole (or a group of keyholes fitted into a mandala) based solely
on the geometry of the two.

2. I use mostly soaker hoses buried under a layer of mulch in my gardens, so
the ease of using a sprinkler is a non-issue for me.

It's just that it seems that maintaining such beds looks like a lot of extra
work to go through for questionable productivity boost. I'm inclined to
favor a boring old rectangular double-dug raised bed and was trying to see
if someone actually had done the keyhole beds and what, if any, experiences
they'd had.

It appears that no one posting here in the last few days has actually used
them...

M. Davis

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...

"Mike Davis" wrote in message
news:lp35b.93931$xf.47119@lakeread04...
Hi Pat,

Two of Mollison's reasons for suggesting them that come to mind
include:
1. Much smaller surface area used for paths than a traditional row
garden.


This sounds good but I am yet to see any justification for it in
Mollison's books or elsewhere. Many of his ideas on geometry are fine
bt some like this one seem to have no proof. If I have missed this
somewhere please advise where to look.

2. Easier and less wasteful to water with circular pattern sprinkler.


Which may be so but if you want efficient watering you don't use
sprinklers but soakers or droppers instead.

I don't recall him mentioning aesthetics, but that could be a definite
"selling point" for some folks.

Mike D.