Re: Companion Plants for Roses

Catherine,

Water that is high in dissolved salts is a significant problem and is
exacerbated by fertilizers. I even saw a Southern California garden book
suggest that in several years it might be necessary to remove excessively
saline soil and truck in new topsoil! (It would be much less expensive to
learn to ameliorate the problem; I don't think many people would attempt
that more than once!) Here, avocado orchards are leached periodically to
flush excess salt from the soil. Obviously that won't work as well in clay
so gypsum may  be of benefit to you.

Ryan Gyurkovitz
Oxnard Plain
Southern California



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Catherine Ratner" <catherineratner@earthlink.net>
To: "Joe Seals" <gardenguru@yahoo.com>
Cc: "medit-plants" <medit-plants@ucdavis.edu>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: Companion Plants for Roses


> Thank you for the information.  I am aware of the studies you mention,
> though I haven't read them and don't know what kind of soils or amendments
> were  used.  All I can say is that I have gardened on this site for over
> forty-five years and have tried it both ways many, many times, so I have
to
> rely on my own experience. The Salvia I mentioned does prefer more
> well-drained soil, but after becoming established it has thrived and given
> me many years of pleasure.  I do agree that it is important to dig a wide,
> not deep hole, and it is good to loosen the surrounding soil and not
present
> the plants' roots with a smooth container-like surface.
>
> As for the gypsum, I am not so sure. It's possible that it does not help
> much or at all. On the other hand, I may not have "typical" clay soil and
I
> have not had it tested, which would be interesting.  I do know that my
clay
> soil is different from that in Berkeley, where I previously gardened, just
> as the hard water here is very different from the soft water there. Do you
> think it might be possible that repeated watering during the long summer
> drought might affect the quality of the soil, at least until the rain
> leaches it?
>
> I have no interest in augmenting the profits of the soil amendment and
> gypsum purveyors, and would certainly prefer to accept scientific evidence
> rather than myth. However, I am tired of being instructed to use methods
> which haven't worked for me, and I have confined myself to relating my own
> experience.  Perhaps we can agree that it is helpful for gardeners to
> observe and experiment.
>
> >From one old-timer to another, Cathy
>
>
> > From: Joe Seals <gardenguru@yahoo.com>
> > Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:58:08 -0800 (PST)
> > To: Catherine Ratner <catherineratner@earthlink.net>,
medit-plants@ucdavis.edu
> > Subject: Re: Companion Plants for Roses
> >
> > Catherine, et al:
> >
> > This is not the latest "theory".  In the early 1970s, Dr. Carl Whitcomb,
a
> > researcher at Oklahoma State University, disproved the oft-repeated
advice of
> > amending planting holes. In controlled studies using percentages of
different
> > amendments (up to 40%), roots of ornamental trees and shrubs were
consistently
> > larger in unamended soils. The amendments seemed to encourage roots to
stay in
> > the vicinity of their planting holes and not grow out into the unamended
soil,
> > leading to stunted root systems. Whitcomb concluded that it's best to
let the
> > roots begin to grow in the nativ soil right away and to use organic
matter on
> > the surface as a mulch, rather than mixing it with the soil. If a tree
isn't
> > suited to native soil, you are better off growing it in a container than
> > trying to change the soil with amendments.
> >
> > The research was duplicated at the University of Georgia and various UC
> > colleges with the same findings.
> >
> > But, amending aside, you SHOULD dig a WIDE and shallow hole for
planting.  Not
> > the "2x wide and 2x deep" wisdom of nursery old-timers (of which I are
one).
> > The hole should be dug up to 3 times as wide and the native soil removed
and
> > broken up.  The bottom of the hole should be dug just deep enough to
allow one
> > to scratch up the hole bottom and give one room to adjust planting
height.
> >
> > Another myth is using gypsum to somehow break up clay soil.  Gypsum
works in a
> > chemical/ionic fashion to flocculate (I love that word) another kind of
"heavy
> > soil" -- sodic (or alkali) soils.  The calcium ions in the gypsum
replace the
> > sodium ions in the soil and allows water to wash the sodium away. It's
the
> > sodium ions that cause the soil particles to bind together, hence
creating
> > "heavy" soil.  Typical clay soils of California are not sodic/alkali and
> > gypsum does nothing to change their structure.
> >
> > I do not doubt, Catherine, that your experience has paid off.  I would
allow
> > that more personal attention to your planting technique (whatever it is)
has
> > given you better results.
> >
> > I also doubt that the pratice of soil amending and using gypsum will
subside
> > as long as sales of amendments and gypsum are encouraged.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > Catherine Ratner <catherineratner@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > I know that the latest theory does not favor amending soil in the
planting
> > holes, but this theory does not accord with my experience. I have tried
> > many native plants on my north-facing slope which is in full sun at high
> > summer, full sodden shade in winter. If I try to plop a gallon plant,
which
> > has been grown in a mix of sand and shavings, into a hole in my
exceedingly
> > tight black adobe, the hole tends to fill with water and the
discouraged,
> > pampered roots are not able to make their way into the soil. If I dig a
> > wide hole, amend the soil with gypsum and the light mix I shake off the
> > roots of the plants, they can often make it. This is the only way I have
> > been able to establish Salvia 'Winifred Gilman', for example. The plants
> > are not totally inappropriate for the site; they just need a little help
at
> > first. If they become chlorotic as adults, I jerk them out.
> >
> > Cathy, Sunset zone 23, US zone 10.
> >
> >> From: Joe Seals
> >> Reply-To: gardenguru@yahoo.com
> >> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:58:39 -0800 (PST)
> >> To: gardenwithkitties@hotmail.com, medit-plants@ucdavis.edu
> >> Subject: Re: Companion Plants for Roses
> >>
> >> Robin:
> >>
> >> No debate. I'm with you almost across the board.
> >
> >
> >> The one minor area where I disagree is where you suggest amending soils
to
> >> better grow roses (and other plants?). I believe, first, that we should
all
> >> plant the right plant in the right place. That includes selecting
plants for
> >> your native soil and climate. Roses aren't meant for light, dry soils.
> >> Second, I believe that amending planting holes is a short term answer
that
> >> research has shown to be the wrong way to plant. So much for this
universal
> >> practice. These are the bigger principles of "natural gardening".
> >>
> >> Joe
> >
> >
> > Joe Seals
> > Santa Maria, California --
> > where the weather is always perfect
> > and my NEW garden will soon be blooming and full of birds and
butterflies
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
>
>
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index