RE: "low maintenance?"

I fear our garden has been a good test case for low-maintenance over 
the past year; I'm happy to report that a number of plants do very 
well with no or almost no supplemental water and very, very little care---
these include:

Lavendula "Goodwin Creek"
Salvia chaemydriodes
Salvia "Cienega de Oro"
Salvia "Sierra San Antonio"
Salvia gregii
Helichrysum petioralum (both the species and "Limelight")
Eryngium tripartitum
Vitex agnus casta
Cercis occidentaliis and cercis candadensis
Teucrium fruticans
Heuchera Bressington hybrid
Pelargonium sidoides
Santolina neopolitana? "Lemon Queen"
Cotinus coggyria
Rosa mutabilis
Cistus "Annie Palmer"

(sorry about the misspellings; I'm at my non-hort related job without 
access to reference books).

Basically, these plants have been totally neglected for the past year 
and they all look quite good (though not as good as they did when I 
took care of them)--they're rangie and less exuberant than in years 
past. Unfortuntaley (in my opinion) the volunteering Calendula does very well 
indeed on its own as well.

Rachel B
Berkeley, Ca.



> Paul,
> You have a very good point. I installed a "low water"
> garden for some clients, the obvious objective was to
> have a lot of blooming plants comingling with natives
> that would eventually require no water. What I should 
> have stated along with the low water goal was that
> the garden should require a minimum amount of upkeep as
> well, but the owners are very fastidious and spend an
> inordinant amount of time (I think) cleaning it up each year.
> Also, in the Pacific Northwest our summers are very dry,
> no rain (of any consequence) from Mid-june to sometimes
> Halloween.  For instance last year we went 60 days without
> precipitation (in a row).  The sad thing is that gardeners
> here have been brainwashed into thinking that they
> should plant water-loving plants, because it
> rains here often, during the winter, but, of our 38" of
> rain a year only 10" falls between April and October, our
> growing season. The result is many drought stressed gardens,
> sunburned rhododendrons, pitiful viburnum davidii and such.
> Meanwhile, Cistus, Ceanothus,Lavender, and Rosmary look great.
> Paul
> Portland
> zn8b 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-medit-plants@ucdavis.edu
> [o*@ucdavis.edu]On Behalf Of paul@nevco.k12.ca.us
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 10:52 AM
> To: medit-plants@ucdavis.edu
> Subject: What is "low maintenance?"
> 
> 
> The fall edition of "Pacific Horticulture" contains an intriguing
> article by a licensed landscape architect titled "The Low Maintenance
> Garden: Fact or Fiction?" He and his client individually and mutually
> thought they had come to an understanding about the maintenance needs
> the 1-acre garden the author installed in Saratoga, California. This
> garden was designed to be "low maintenance," with a lot of ornamental
> grasses and dry "creekbed" areas, plus some perennial plant areas.
> Unfortunately, after a few years, it was evident that the garden needed
> more maintenance than expected, which caused the author/landscaper to
> question and re-examine the meaning of "low maintenance."
> 
> I had to laugh when the article mentioned that the client from the start
> hired outside labor to maintain his garden. This averaged 20-25 person
> hours of labor per month, plus an extra 50 hours in the spring and fall.
> Hiring out the maintenance work caused a lot of problems because the
> laborers couldn't identify garden plants from weeds and didn't
> understand the maintenance program. What was the owner thinking? Isn't
> maintenance one of the joys of gardening?
> 
> I think this is an intriguing topic for the group to discuss. [Medit
> gardeners typically have lower irrigation goals; this is one of the
> author's 7 principles/guidelines that define "low maintenance."] Is
> there such thing as a "low maintenance" garden? Is it "low maintenance"
> achieved when only weeding, light annual pruning and minimal
> supplemental irrigation are needed to keep the plant community going?
> Does the size of the garden factor in? How much space can one gardener
> "minimally" maintain? If you have to use herbicides, fungicides or a lot
> of fertilizer, is it high maintenance?
> 
> Given the scarcity of water and rapid destruction of native vegetation
> and soil in many parts of the world, I think there are some ethical
> issues involved here. As gardeners, we take on certain responsibilities
> to care for the land and its ecology. I supposed you could argue that,
> prior to their conquest by outsiders, various indiginous people have
> achieved master gardener status for their ability to live in harmony
> (and maintain) a plant community for the benefit of both the plants and
> humans.
> 
> I curious what others think.
> 
> Paul Harrar
> Nevada City, Ca., USA
> Sunset Zone 7
> 2,700 ft.
> 
>
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index