There are lots of roses that by their nature will not need fertilizing. Species roses, and most once-bloomers, for instance. I tend to fertilize mine according to their bloom cycle. When I gardened in California this worked great - fertilize everything right after each bloom cycle. Worked out to roughly every 6 weeks for repeat blooming roses. Here in Washington I only get 2 or 3 bloom cycles and I find I have to anticipate each one with the fertilizer to get best results. works out to once in spring and once in summer for most of the modern repeat blooming roses. Large, well-established, shrubby roses don't need much fertilizer, even in gravelly soil that doesn't retain nutrients. Buff Beauty, for instance, gets fertilized once in spring, as she only blooms twice anyway, no matter how often I fertilize her. But, I'm using organics, which last a lot longer than synthetics. And all my roses get a top dressing of some kind of manure in late winter or early spring. I wouldn't fertilize rugosas or species roses. Most large climbers and ramblers seem to only need annual fertilizing like any other shrub. The modern hybrids get regular fertilizing as my soil does not retain nutrients, and they need the help if I want them to keep growing and producing over the year. As people have noticed in above posts, plants that aren't pushed with more water and nutrients than they really need are better able to handle adverse conditions and so long as they aren't positively struggling, they are less susceptible to diseases and insects and to drought stress. It's a myth that roses require lots of water and fertilizer. If you're going for Queen of the Show, yes, you will have to force excessive growth with excessive amounts of water and fertilizer. If you just want your rose to grow and produce nicely, then average water and fertilizer is plenty for most roses. What 'average' consists of will vary with your soil and climate. And constantly topdressing with organic material like pulled weeds or fallen leaves will reduce the need for adding fertilizers.

I think we all can agree that beating a dead horse is useless, but this one still has a little life in it! Bboy, I do know there are people that analyze their food intake for such parameters as calories, etc. yet in my 54 years of experience in eating, I have consistently been able to gauge proper amounts to eat using the "eyeball method". This really works! Now about these soil tests many are saying are necessary, the one key thing they will not tell you is the N status in the soil. And in nearly every case, whether in the managed landscape, or in a woods, the addition of N will yield a positive response. So, from that perspective, can we say the N was "needed"? Maybe, maybe not. Again, it depends on the goals for the given plant(s). And now, a little about tree roots. The fine absorptive roots are not permanent. They are used up, primarily during the summer, and new ones are regenerated, with the Fall season being one of the key times when this can happen. As such, Fall can indeed be a good time to add some N to the system to aid in this regeneration. The basic rule is that soil temps must be at or above around 50 degrees F for this growth to be taking place. Adequate soil moisture need be present as well. Thetman, your experience of applying hollytone to that one tree is interesting: This would seem to indicate there was either a nutrient deficiency in the soil, or a pH problem making one or more nutrients unavailable to the plant. However, as far as I know, the genus Thuja is not one having very narrow soil pH parameters, and in fact, our own T. occidentalis in my rgion has a strong affinity for higher pH soils, or at least, those soils having a good supply of calcium/magnesium, which goes a long way towards explaining why, of all parts of the state I live in, they are most numerous and vigorous here in the east, where we are underlain by dolomite, a form of limestone high in both of those minerals. And this makes me wonder if the GGs are that different that an acid-type fertilizer....Hollytone....would elicit such a strong response. But soil buffering capacity could account for this otherwise "wrong" fert. type still working! As you can see, there's quite a bit to this, and I could really bring in a lot more, but won't for now. That's one of the reasons why I say, if you want to fertilize, go ahead, but keep it on the mellow side. +oM

* Posted by kimmsr 4a/5b-MI (My Page) on Fri, Oct 22, 10 at 7:17 "Some organic "fertilizers" can have nutrients that are not easily soluble which is why things like compost usually test very low in nutrients. However, there are organic fertilizers with nutrients that are easily soluble, manures, blood meal, etc., and these can cause problems with pollution. Simply pouring on a lot of something because it is supposed to be an organic fertilizer is no more environmentally responsible then is pouring on a synthetic fertilizer with a 36-0-20 label. Your soil can also determine whether you could contribute to pollution because as a general rule of thumb the more organic matter in the soil, to a point, the more of these nutrients your soil can store. However, too much organic matter in soil can be a source of pollution, too." Given laws require ingredient content and solubility on the label it will not take a genius to figure out a suitable fall fert. Tell me what counties in the continental U.S. have O.M. greater than 3.0% and at what percentage of O.M. does "organic matter in soil" become a threat of leaching or pollution. Please cite sources.

I love beautiful clothing but I live in workout clothes and PJs! I workout in the morning and again in the evening so I sweat up the first set, shower, and just put on the next set for the evening. Then I get home, shower, and on goes the PJs. In the last two years, I've gone from wearing a 26-28 to a 14-16 and I'm slowly whittling that down. When I reach mini goals I reward myself with clothes so I have every size imaginable. The stuff that doesn't fit anymore goes into the guest room closest so my closet is only wearable stuff. Even so, I bet I only wear 10 - 15% of what's in my closet. I have this dress with a plunging neckline that goes down to an empire waist and is floor length - looks very bohemian. I had no occasion to wear it to, I bought it because it looks so fantastic on me. I think I'm going to have a casual dinner party just so I can wear this dress! It would look so cool with huge earrings and bare feet. Don't even get me started on shoes! I'm in love with funky, sexy heels but I rarely get a chance to wear them. . .