I have to agree with fruitgirl, but for reasons that most people seldom think about. No doubt about it, organic yields are comparable to conventional on a bushel-to-bushel basis. And I agree that organic methods do work. On certain plots, with certain techniques they may even out produce conventional several times over. However, what we seem to forget is that organic practices include longer rotation schedules than conventional. I live on a conventional farm in the upper Midwest and here the rotation is probably the same for most Midwest farm: corn, then soybeans, then corn again, then soybeans again, and so on, forever. An organic farmer would also plant corn, then soybeans. The third year is where the difference begins to show. The farmer is going to plant oats, buckwheat, or rye early in the spring, and then more than likely, it will get plowed under to break the weed cycle. After it gets plowed, the field will be seeded to alfalfa, or maybe timothy hay. If it is alfalfa, the field will remain in alfalfa for several years until the cycle begins again. THIS IS GREAT FOR THE SOIL!! But look what it does for the on-going, overall yield of corn and soybeans: over four years the organic farm has only produced one-fourth of the conventional yield of corn and soybeans. Of course, we can argue that is how farming should be done, however, our society and culture must undergo a tremendous culture shift in order for that to succeed. A whole lot less meat, and much more vegetables and grain. So fruitgirl rightly stated: "I'm not arguing that organic farms do not experience good yields. I'm saying that a large-scale organic farm doesn't get the same yield as a large-scale conventional farm because they have a harder time battling the effects of monoculture. And, as I stated above, the US (and most other developed countries) are not structured in such a way to allow for a multitude of small farms". In the end, it is this "really-good-for-soil" cycle that reduces overall yields, not the lack of chemicals applied to the soil. Small organic farms do out produce conventional farms. Small organic vegetable and fruit operations are better for our health, the environment, and our society as a whole. And despite the fact that I would wish the whole planet to go organic, I agree with fruitgirl, that our structure of food production is now geared towards feeding 6 billion people and difficult to change. Yes, we do add more organic acres every year, but China is adding them even faster than the US. The US hasnt met its need for organic production since 2000. Nearly 15% of all organic food sold in this country is now imported, and at the rate of production of organic food look-alike junk (Oreos, Cheetos, toaster pastries, etc.) the imports are only going to rise. Moreover, the rate of conversion of conventional to organic has slowed down. Unfortunately, I suspect suburbanites often fail to fully understand farming and fall victim to the shouts of the anti-agribiz types.

Droid - Nope, never checked the pH of the commercial MSU RO with local water, but I'm with NYC on this one: likely not a problem. As for orchids/supplies in eastern MA, Mahoney's Garden Centers occasionally have interesting plants (I picked up a Paph delenatii in bloom this spring for $20) but poor selection of supplies. Conversely, I've found Russell's to have poor orchid selection, but better in choices of bark/perlite/sphag, etc. Neither of these places is an orchid specialist, of course. If you haven't been, it's worth it to visit the Lyman Estate greenhouses in Waltham. Not the biggest or showiest place, but parts of the greenhouse complex are well over 100 years old, and when the citrus section is in bloom, it's heavenly. Orchid section is crowded, poorly organized, and simply a delight to nose through. There is a for-sale section too, prices a bit on the high side, IMO, but some neat species that you won't see at Home Depot. If you want to see and buy the terrestrials (and who doesn't?) get yourself out to Garden in the Woods in Framingham. Cypripedium parviflorum and pubescens are blooming now, C. kentuckiense in a week or two, and C. reginae later in June/early July. Grow these well in your backyard, and you can thumb your nose at our Floridian forum members who kick our butts on just about every other genus... :-)

Kelly's Korner can give you both. They have air cone pots and other plastic ones. If getting the air cone, and I love them, don't get the 2" pot but the 2 1/2. The 2" is only about an inch deep and I find it rather short even for an unflasked seedling with their thin, long roots. The 2 1/2" can have p'nuts in the bottom for the tinies and when you need to up pot, just remove the p'nuts for several more months of growing. I have the air cones in all sizes up to 6". Brooke

The planter box is 14 ft. long, about 2 ft wide and about 2 ft. deep. It has drain holes. I've never totally emptied it, but it's mostly potting soil. It's on the north side of the house. Being next to the house may have kept that spot warm, though. I'm also the world's worst person to fertilize, so it's probably not that. I don't plan on putting hosta back in that spot anyway. I'll go back to annuals there and keep my hosta in pots. Both begonias and impatients do well there and it looks nice. I thought something that came back would be nice in that spot, but obviously, hosta isn't the right choice. Leaflover, that's a lovely plant. Mine did not look anywhere near that nice. I usually have really nice plants in pots. Maybe these will work out, too. Thanks for the info. bkay