The reason(s) amending of soils in small areas is counterproductive do not vary with the type of soil. Sandy, silty or clay-like, it makes no difference. You do not want to install plants in pockets, strips or zones of one soil texture surrounded by soil of a different texture, as this sets them up for likely problems with how water moves into and out of the soil around their roots. In the case of plants to be left in place for many years (or indefinitely) without lifting and re-planting there is no point in incorporating organic soil texture modification materials (bark, compost, peat...) even if the bed is large enough to minimize or eliminate water movement problems for most of the plants - once the amendments decompose the effects they produce will be lost. Inorganic amendments like perlite and sand do not decompose but enormous amounts of these have to be added to change a heavy soil into a light one. And if too much is added then a droughty and infertile (leaching) situation may be produced, that may be more limiting than a heavy clay-like soil. The most straightforward approach is to choose plants adapted to the existing soil type and plant these in wide, shallow holes dug out of that, loosening it over a wide area beforehand and mulching well afterward. The most satisfactory mulch for woody plants appears to be clean wood chips. If arborist wood chips available nearby tend to have bramble stem sections or other undesirable material mixed in then play chips from a local dealer may be the best bet. Ones we obtain here as cedar play chips are very nice but have become quite pricey, as far as it goes.

Griffen, you might have better luck if the beds are of variable size - then people who have limited time can choose a smaller piece to be responsible for. Or have some way to match people who want to split a plot? Another way to divide up duties is to have one person (or a team) meta each kind of plant. That can be nice because some plants are early-season or late season; a person who was responsible for potatos would be able to plan around one big dig early in the season and then just light weeding and watering until harvest time, where a person in charge of tomatos or kale would have ongoing investment in staking, insect control, and more intensive weeding. Plus, someone who wants to grow something but doesn't feel confident of their ability would be able to team with a more experienced person and learn about that plant while being responsible for something else they do know more about already. It's not so much how big a space you can take care of as how much skill, time, and attention you'll put in - I once failed utterly to stay on top of a 3 meter by 8 meter plot, but I know a woman who singlehandedly grew all the food for a 40-person commune.

PT, just for the record, I, for one, don't think you went too far in your first post, so there's nothing to feel apologetic about, at all. Forums, like this one, exist so that people can share ideas and opinions about all aspects of gardening. Although I have a different point of view, I respect your comments and the way you expressed them. You're right when you say that all events can be improved upon--why not make your views known to the CHS? As I mentioned, they used to have a category for Professionally Landscaped gardens, and maybe they should reinstate it. (Personal confession: I usually didn't bother going to the professionally developed gardens. Over the years, I only remember visiting two gardens that won in that category. Since I'm not interested in hiring a landscape company, those gardens hold little appeal or relevance to me. In one garden I saw, I was aghast to discover that Purple Loosestrife had been planted (the property was adjacent to a Glenmore Park, no less). This was five or six years ago--Loosestrife was no longer being sold in garden centres. The rules of the CHS should have disqualified that garden, but the plant may not have been blooming at the time of judging, or the judges didn't recognize it.) Your top 2 favourite gardens were mine, as well. The Boyko garden was the first that I saw, and it ended up getting my vote for the "People's Choice Award". (I was doubly amazed at how beautiful the garden is when I discovered that three dogs--two huge and one, small but rambunctious--also live in the house!) While some gardens gained some of their appeal due to the location of the property (gorgeous neighborhoods, borrowed views), this yard created beauty and serenity despite its relatively small size and its surroundings. The MacLean garden reflected my own lust for plant collecting, only hers is much better designed. (What an understatement!) My third choice was the curb appeal winner in Deer Run. Although her back yard was destroyed by hail (I found out), her front yard was spared, and it was an inviting, exhuberant mass of colour. The one thing I hate about garden tours...they make me want to rip out my entire yard and start all over!! Thankfully, that feeling only lasts a day or two, and then I start enjoying my garden, again, faults and all. Marcia, I'd also like to know which one was your friend. I seem to recall someone in a cast, but I saw so many gardens over the weekend that I can't place her! PT, I hope you continue to voice your very passionate opinions. And I hope that the Far North Forum continues to be a place where posters can feel free to respectfully disagree with each other in a safe, caring environment. Just an idea that popped into my head...since there are so many Calgarians on this forum (and others that live close by), maybe one day we can organize a garden tour of our own??? That is, after I've ripped out my yard and started over... ;-) Doris

I think that doing the math gives you the base of what your price needs to be. There are markets where you can make premium dollars selling but these markets can be harder to break into and it takes years to build up a reliable customer base. The worst thing you can do is give your product away (unless donating to charity). It is very hard to start selling something you were recently giving away for free. You're dealing with two distinct types of customers, you have to handle things differently. On one hand - any type of competition is good for business. What we all want is for MORE people to shop at open air markets (either farmers market, fruit stands or flea markets). The only way to get more people into the markets is to teach them about it and that means getting out there and mingling with the masses. So even if you're selling extra tomatoes at a friends garage sale and even if you later do the math and realize you didn't make much money from it - you taught some people that vegetables can be bought somewhere other than the grocery store and that tomatoes don't have to be trucked from across the country to be edible. It is so easy to think that if you are the only person selling product X at the local farmers market that it will be easy to sell lots of it. The truth is that the only way to sell a lot of product X is to find lots of customers that want product X. If no one has ever offered product X locally then none of the customers going to that market know anything about it and only so many customers will pay good money for something they know nothing about. Imagine going to your local farmers market and seeing some strange tropical fruit that you've never tasted or even heard of. How many pounds of that fruit are you going buy. Some people are adventurist but most people aren't - they buy the classics, the maintstream, the usual stuff. The best thing is to sell at a market where a few other vendors are selling the same type of product - that way more customers will be shopping there becaue they've learned that they can depend on your market to provide them what they want. If you completely stand out, offering something unusual and foreign, you'll impress a few people but not enough to make big money.