"wait, wait...are you saying I can put six HUNDRED plants in a 10x10 plot???" Those yields are based upon a degree of soil conditioning that is very labor-intensive... and while I have read of such recommendations, I have yet to see photos, or hear first-hand observations, proving that they would work for most gardeners. All of the digging aside, in my area, I'd be flirting with disaster if I crowded my beans that closely. Personally, I wouldn't recommend it. Most bush beans - when healthy & mature - have a footprint of 1/2 - 1 sq. ft. or larger. 100 plants (1 per sq. ft.) should be a safe bet; I've successfully used 6" between plants w/ 2-foot spacing between rows, which is close to the same thing. You might be able to get away with 2-3 plants per sq. ft. for the more compact varieties. Crowding more closely than that may work in the warm dry climate of California; but in the cooler, wetter Northern climes, it could lead to severe disease problems. I'm not saying that it wouldn't work... just that I wouldn't put all my eggs in that one basket, unless/until small-scale trials proved it to be successful. In a post above, I had mentioned "seed efficiency". To put that in perspective, large kidney beans are somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-60 seeds per ounce. If planted at the recommended bio-intensive density of 600+ for a 10' X 10' plot, you would need between 10-16 ounces of seed to plant... so you would need to buy (or save from the previous season) a pound of seed. Assuming you harvest 24 pounds of dry seed (which is, keep in mind, the best case scenario), it would represent a return of between 24/1 & 38/1, depending upon seed size. Most gardeners would get much less than that, since the maximum is for experienced gardeners, on well amended soil. In contrast, my observations are that large-seeded bush beans, given the 6" plant/2' row spacing I mentioned above, are easily capable of a seed increase of between 50/1 - 100/1. Small-seeded types will tend to yield about the same weight/plant, but at an even higher ratio of increase, well over 100/1... so in terms of cost effectiveness (if purchasing seed) small is often better. Pole beans can do better still; the "Striped Cornfield" I grew this year (@45 seeds/oz.) produced a return of over 500/1! My results were obtained by mechanical tilling, with leaves & mulch turned under each season. Using these numbers, the same kidney beans - if grown in 5 rows in the same 10' X 10' plot - would be 100 plants. This would produce between 5 & 10 pounds of seed minimum... with only 2 ounces of seed required for planting, the average in a packet of beans. Also, at this spacing, the plants have sufficient air flow through the foliage to minimize the chances of disease during prolonged periods of rainfall. Having tested that theory in some very bad years recently (such as in 2008) I consider these yields to be realistically attainable, year after year. I don't doubt that my spacings could be improved upon; it is something that I often experiment with. Most likely, there is a happy medium somewhere between row spacing & high-density plantings which will produce the best yield, for a given area, with the littlest possible seed. That "happy medium" should take into account the expected annual variations in climate, since what works well one year, might not work the next. With soybeans, I have had some success with closely-spaced double rows, with standard row spacing between the pairs... so that may work for bush beans as well. Given the observations I have made on over 100 bean varieties over the years, I expect the optimal spacing will vary widely, depending upon variety, climate, and soil fertility. So there is really no "one correct answer" for bean spacing... just starting points for personal experimentation. Keep in mind, John Jeavons' bio-intensive recommendations mentioned above pertain to bush beans only. Pole beans are not suitable for wide bed planting, due to shading. However, you can have the best of both worlds using pole beans. Planted in a single row on the North side of the bed (where they would not shade shorter crops), they take up a relatively small footprint. A high-yielding pole variety could give you 3-4 pounds of dry seed from one row in that same 10' X 10' bed. You could use the majority of the bed(s) for other things, and still get a good crop of beans. My apologies for all of the long (and probably dry) posts, but as an amateur researcher, I just wanted to share some "bean science". Just wish this was on the Bean Forum.

Whether to only use one type or the other is a completely personal choice. Each has its benefits and its downsides. Whatever works best with your ethics and aesthetics, as well as the types you grow, where you grow them, is appropriate. What I deal with, where I deal with them, a combination of both works very well and satisfies all involved. There are situations in which I simply can't use organics. Many clients have dogs (as do I) and they LOVE organic fertilizers. Most organic fertilizers are stuff dogs eat and they love rolling in all of it to mask their scents, a holdover from ancient times when they were actual "predators". Most organics also attract all manner of "wild life", including skunks, raccoons, opossums, rats, squirrels, rabbits and coyotes. Organics also increase the earthworm population greatly. If you have significant mole issues (I DO!), then more earth worms means more moles, which loosen the soil around the plants tremendously. You know how undesirable loosening the soil around your plants is. Organics don't work as well, as efficiently, in colder soils. Most of the proper bacteria work best in soil temps of at least 70 degrees, in the presence of oxygen, moisture and available nitrogen. If there is insufficient nitrogen available when the bacteria require it, they can and will rob it from the plants until they generate more than they require, when they release the excess to the soil for the plants to use. If it's too cold, too dry or the soil too compacted, organics aren't going to digest efficiently and can even "sour", rot instead of composting. "Souring" releases methane and hydrogen sulfide, both of which are toxic to oxygen "breathing" life, including plants and you. If your conditions aren't right for organics, they can simply be expensive and ineffective, or less efficiently effective than inorganics. Not that they are "bad", but why spend money on things which won't do what you want them to, when and where you want them to? Again, personal choice, dependent upon location, conditions and expectations and budget. Inorganic types are all salt, hence, they can burn if not used properly. They can also wash into waterways causing pollution as well as build up in soil which doesn't drain well. But, they also work at lower temperatures more efficiently than organics and can deliver much higher doses of the nutrients than many organics can. Often, they are also less expensive. Organics can help build soil. Inorganics usually can't, unless they contain Humic Acid, which can help condition soil. So, which is best? It all depends upon all the factors involved. It doesn't matter that you feel organics are best if your hundred pound Great Pyrenees is going to roll in them, crushing the plants and requiring daily baths. Like anything else, you have to weigh the costs versus the benefits and decide what you can live with best. Check the label on your Bayer for instructions about mixing it with fertilizers. Most will tell you how, if they suggest doing it. If it isn't mentioned, you can always call or email them to ask. If they say not to, you'll have to figure something else out. Perhaps foliar feeding early in the day you intend to spray? Let the foliar feed dry then spray the Bayer. Even if the Bayer leaves a residue on the foliage, limiting the leaves' ability to absorb the salts, it's almost all going to drip into the soil and root zones anyway, so what isn't absorbed through the leaves will be by the roots. Very little in gardening is exact. Much has to be done the best it can be accomplished. Nature frequently seems just fine with that. Kim

Is the batch a bust? Well, partly. Based on the info you supplied they are a little underprocessed (the proper cool down procedure is part of the processing time and you skipped part of that). And they are discolored and lots of liquid was lost from the jar so their shelf life will be very limited - both of those problems caused by improper processing. Personally, if it has been less than 24 hours I would open them, dump them into freezer containers and freeze them. If more than 24 hours then I would toss them out. Then before you try to do any more you need to learn how to properly use a pressure canner. And unfortunately the canner manual is a poor place to learn that. Fine for pressure cooking but not for canning. Far too outdated and incomplete. Pressure canning has a pretty high learning curve. It isn't something you can just jump into. It takes practice runs using only water so you aren't wasting food to learn all the proper steps to using the canner and your stove together, how to prevent siphoning and discoloration, and how to properly cool down. And in part it all depends on the brand, size, and type of canner (gauge or weight) you have so please tell us that info. The step-by-step guide linked below is a good place to start. Some mistakes you already mentioned: no pre-venting far too much adjusting of the heat levels moved it only 30 mins. cool down (called forced cool-down) no 10 min wait between full cool down, weight removal, and lid removal etc. Did you use fresh boiling water or the cooking water? Did you over-pack the jars? Did you remove all the air from the jars before capping? Did you leave the proper headspace? Did you use hot pack or raw pack? Properly processed green beans when done will be bright green in color and fully suspended in a full jar of basically clear water (some very mild color change may happen depending on the variety). Dave. Here is a link that might be useful: NCHFP - How to use a pressure canner

Thanks drloyd. I do have a 4' long 2' wide stock tank with a trellis now that is growing pole beans. It might not be totally easy.......but I do think the double trellis might be do-able. I can easily reach in from both ends to pick, and I might even be able to just reach through from each outside to grab the beans, since the cement reinforcing mesh has large openings (with the help of a ladder for the tall stuff). This is all sort of an experiment for me this year. I've had a "regular" garden........planted in the ground for about 40 years, but I just can't deal with all the weeds and bending over anymore. So except for the cucumbers and snow peas, I'll be using stock tanks for everything else. I have used a couple stock tanks for 2 years now, and everything has grown great in them. I just need to figure out the beans. It may take a couple years to tweak it all, but it should be interesting. Thanks again for your input.