Hi, I am a new gardener still learning my ways to successful harvest. Herbs: A great cost effective crop. I agree with most here that herbs like basil, parsley, sage, rosemary are cost effective. Veggies: Category 1: It really comes down to what one eats. Like for me with an asian background, I like a lot of Asian vegetables that are very very expensive even if I am able to find them in the market and so most of the time, I don't even buy them. Growing them at home(for eg: ridge gourd, bottle gourd, bitter gourd, some asian greens) gives me the opportunity to savor them all to my hearts content. Category 2: What is most perishable: These varieties in the market tend to be more expensive as the cost of transporting and selling them in time leaves the seller and grower with lot of wasted harvest. I can think of berries, esp raspberries that come under this category. Okra, Thai eggplants, bottle gourd, greens(salad greens, spinach etc) are some vegetables that do not have a longer shelf life. So I find growing these very cost effective. So vegetables you would otherwise eat except for the cost at the supermarket are worth considering. Category 3: Long term storage: I find the best price for tomatoes in summer to be 59 cents a pound and bell peppers some $3 for 5 or 6. Come october, these are no longer valid prices. The prices go up. So, if I can make my harvest last thru Jan, I am saving on these staples. Well, again, for these veggies and others mentioned in the other points, one should base their judgement of what to grow on the space vs cost based on space constraints. I do not know how cost effective it is to grow onions, but am trying them this year for the companion planting benefits it gives. Green onions, They store very well in the fridge for me and are reasonably costeffective, so I would be growing these. I don't have a large yard, probably a few hundred sq ft. But with the vertical growth advantage some of the veggies present and the succession planting, I hope to last my growing season long to gain the most of what I put in. It appears to me that some investment is needed, like good compost( I cannot make compost due to my association rules, I am thankful that they did not object my veggie gardening yet), mulch, irrigation system. But like with any project or hobby, we build slowly, starting small and growing as our resources permit and our energies permit. More conveniences, the more our time is spent on growing more and tending to everything that we grow. Like for eg, if I have irrigation system, every evening I can find time to plant more companion plants and reduce the pest problem to grow organic. I can find time to prune my tomatoes. I can find time to harvest the produce right on time, thereby increasing my harvest. Also, my occasional vacation plans do not need to suffer my plants. My mulch should help reduce some weeds. Getting a wheelbarrow helps get the mulch task and several lugging around tasks much easier. Oh, I forgot to mention that I recently asked my community landscaper to give me the empty flats after he planted pansies. He was happy to deliver them which he would have thrown into garbage. So, this solved my problem of finding transplanting containers for my growing seedlings. I am sure craigslist and few other sources are available for the resourceful hobbyists which should help save on some of the investment. For bell peppers etc try roasting them on grill after smearing them with oil and take the skins off and you can store them either in glass jars or freeze them. When thawed they can be used in soups, sandwiches, spreads etc..

Regarding tebuconazole/water contamination, the EPA is investigating: "SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is publishing the third Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 3) since the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) amendments of 1996. The CCL 3 is a list of contaminants that are currently not subject to any proposed or promulgated national primary drinking water regulations, that are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems, and which may require regulation under SDWA. Today's final CCL 3 includes 104 chemicals or chemical groups and 12 microbiological contaminants." http://www.fralerts.com/2009/10/8/E9-24287.asp It is my impression that our federal government moves slowly. ------------------------------------------- This what the EPA stated in a December 13, 2007 report: ( http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemical/foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/128997/128997-2007-12-13a.pdf First in the summary: "A screening-level (Level I) risk assessment, based on proposed new uses, suggests that levels of tebuconazole (parent compound only) in the environment are likely to result in direct chronic risk to freshwater and estuarine/marine fish, acute risk estuarine/marine crustaceans, chronic risk to mammals, a& risk to listed terrestrial dicot plants. Based on the potential for direct effects to these tqa, there may be potential indirect effects to species of concern that depend on these taxa as a source of food, habitat, pollination, etc. Specific risk conclusions for each crop can be found in the assessment." Please look at Table 1. Concerning water contamination, the following 2 sections appear to apply: "Ground Water Advisory ) Tebuconazole is known to leach through soil into ground water under certain conditions as a result of label use. Use of this chemical in areas where soils are permeable, particularly where the water table is shallow, may result in ground-water contamination. Surface Water Label Advisories This product may contaminate water through drift of spray in wind. This product has a high potential for runoff for several months or more after application. Poorly draining soils and soils with shallow water tables are more prone to produce runoff that contains this product. A level, well maintained vegetative buffer strip between areas to which this product is applied and surface water features such as ponds, streams, and springs will reduce the potential for contamination of water from rainfall-runoff. Runoff of this product will be reduced by avoiding applications when rainfall is forecasted to occur within 48 hours." ------------------------------ As previously pointed out the European Union has acted. It is my impression that Ontario has a ban for home use; I am not sure about the other Canadian provinces. Could any Canadian readers speak about this? ---------------------------------------- California in a July 16, 2009 report ( http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/risk/priot.pdf ) has placed tebuconazole in its "HIGH Priority" list to be studied for "TERATOLOGY". Teratology is defined at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratology

saccharum: No offense--I am a natural exaggerater, but do my best to restrain myself. As for the copper fungicide's toxicity. I have noted in these forums before my suspicion that it has some toxicity to sapwood if it soaks down inside a tree and gets at it from the inside. I have not reported all the things I have tried with this, but I did try applying this stuff to real extremes, and at what I would call almost ridiculous over applications I suspect some marginal toxicity. One pine tree that I poured this stuff on in amounts I cannot accurately document had a portion of the side of the trunk under the application zone die. But this was a tree that a storm broke half of off, the broken part being about 14 inches in diameter, and where it broke there was a sunken area where I could actually pool this stuff. But in my experience, the part of the trunk under this really huge broken area may have died anyway. In another instance where I applied it very, very liberally I noticed some bleeding beneath the cut, which was a cut to remove half of a forked tree and the cut was about 5 inches across. I did this experimental overapplication on this tree, a Norway spruce, because it was a weak tree growing in the shade of other spruces and a white pine. A stronger tree growing in full sun may not have shown the same symptom. The tree, however, is still alive and has not shown any loss of vigor. It is in substantial shade but is "plugging along" nicely considering that. Both of these instances were cases where the cut or the break was across the grain and the cut or break faced upwards and absorbed all the rain that fell also. I noticed no other instance of anything I would suspect was a toxic effect, and for a while--until I learned better, I applied more than needed. So I think it is in all probability safe. As for research--I have been talking to people for at least 20 years in several universities trying to get someone interested, but no luck so far. This liquid copper fungicide is the third thing I tried--it seemed obvious very soon that it was working, so I have tried nothing else since. But of course there are other things one could try. Part of my reason for trying this liquid copper fungicide is that it was my understanding that the copper itself was the active agent, and I thought that the copper would have some stability in the outdoor environment and would not break down so fast as other fungicidal compounds. Also, it is my understanding that the "liquid" copper fungicide is, in fact, a true liquid solution, and as such it would soak into the wood in a way that a wettable powder would not. A great many trees get fungal infections through injuries to the trunk or from pruning cuts made to remove very large limbs. It pains me to see this and I am convinced (I understand research needs to be done, if only to convince others) that it can be easily prevented. Many of the trees are trees loved by their owners, and in many cases these trees have a monetary value that would exceed several thousands of dollars. What a waste! Oh, I must note--even though I admit to a frequent tendency to exaggerate, I am not exaggerating about the ability of this liquid copper fungicide to stop fungal infections. Just to be clear--over the last 20 years, I have probably used this stuff on 200 trees. About 60 or 70 of these were spruce and pine trees (Norway spruce, white pine, red pine) that were forked. I cut half the fork off, leaving big ugly cuts, mostly sloping, but not always. Some of these cuts were at least 6" across. Many took 10 to 15 years to occlude, and some, after 20 years have not yet occluded. I have seen no evidence that I could recognize of any fungal infection whatsoever. And the wood at the surface of these cuts is as fresh and hard as a board in a lumber yard. I am not exaggerating this one tiny, tiny bit. I have also used this stuff on logging bumps and scrapes, some really huge, on various species of hardwood trees and hemlock, and as I reported above--no trace of fungal infection that I could detect. I have tried to renew this stuff every year--in some cases I missed a year or two, especially on the logging wounds which require a lot of walking to get to every year. One thing I would like research to show is how often it is necessary to reapply this stuff. I have wanted to be on the safe side, hence my reapplication every year, as far as I have had time and energy. Getting to all the treated trees over the 300 acres I have is a four day job, and an exhausting one at that. --Spruce

Thanks for the feedback. I don't believe your map, but I do believe you, so let's go with your description. With the winter chill you can grow the once-blooming old roses: Gallicas, Damasks, Centifolia, Albas; and most Moss roses fall in this class. You treat these like shrubs and plant them with plants that have different bloom seasons for an extended display. Lilacs, peonies, bulbs in the spring, for example, and clematis will probably overlap with the roses and continue on for the summer, along with any number of summer-flowering plants. If you want an old rose look and fragrance with repeat bloom, check out the Portlands and, for a more modern look (with definite China influence) look into the Bourbons, of which your 'Zephirine Drouhin' is one. The Portlands are double, fragrant, and reblooming, and have a considerable look of the once-blooming old roses to them. There are the Hybrid Perpetuals as well, but I don't know them and my few efforts to grow them have been unsuccessful. If you can protect your roses from the wind, so much the better. We get gale force winds through our valley, though, and it doesn't seem to do any particular harm to mine. I think it helps not to fertilize and water them into rapid lush growth. Your soil sounds excellent. I'm a great believer in mulch and organic methods. They work very well with my roses. The old roses are supposed to be thriftier--less demanding of nutrients and water--than Hybrid Teas, and I think this is true. I also don't spray my roses or do any treatment for disease. You'll get a good idea of what will grow for you by looking around at what's growing locally, in conditions similar to yours. And consult with California nurseries specializing in old roses. If winter temperatures rarely go below the teens you could consider Tea roses as well, as well as Chinas and Noisettes. Most are listed a hardy into zone 7; some into zone 6 (USDA). They need summer heat and sun and are somewhat tender. They're old roses (I'm talking about Teas, NOT Hybrid Teas), marvelous garden plants where they're suited, and many are fragrant, usually a Tea fragrance which not everyone's nose can pick up. Other possibilities that aren't old roses, but older classes and marvelous plants are the Hybrid Musks, fragrant, reblooming and glorious shrubs or small ramblers; and the Wichurana climbers, beautiful plants and flowers but generally once-blooming. If you can draw on some local knowledge it would be a great help to you. Mine is a rough outline from a person who doesn't know your area, and so I can only be of so much help. By the way, I forgot the early-blooming species yellows, like Rosa hugonis. They add variety and character to the garden. The species and species hybrids would be worth your while to look into. This isn't exactly a design book, but to my mind the best book on old and species and older roses is still The Graham Stuart Thomas Book of Roses (the title is something like that). With old roses I think what you need isn't really a book on designing with old roses, but just books on garden design, keeping in mind that roses are just another of the shrubs, like the lilac and the forsythia and the barberries. They are most glorious plants, but it helps to think of them that way. I think rose gardens are boring: roses become wonderful when they're integrated into the whole garden. I hope this helps. Good luck! Melissa