Thanks guys. The Wall Background Not quite sure where I got the idea of the wall. It sort of popped into my head as a way to breakdown the scale of the front yard. I've always liked landscapes that offered bit of mystery to them. Things that were concealed and hinted at that would pique my curiosity. This is more common in the city where people have garden screens or trellises set back from the front edge of the yard. There's some landscaping on display for the public but the front of the house is somewhat concealed from direct view and/or there's a front court / patio area that's somewhat hidden. Perhaps not as friendly or neighborly but interesting. The general concept for the front yard was to have this public / semi-private progression up to the front door of our house. The wall seemed like a good way to go. It'd have a mass and presence and delineate a clear boundary between the public area of the front yard and the more semi-public/private area near the front door. But it wouldn't completely block the views and close off the front yard. The public area of the yard (outside the wall) would have low-growing vinca (so I wouldn't have to mow that area) and have a more spartan, zen-like quality. The wall was purposely placed so that it broke on either side of the path and the path then went through an opening in the wall. This creates a threshold to mark progression into the semi-private precinct of the inner garden. Inside the wall I wanted an overgrowth of plants and an explosion of color. A visual treat for anyone walking through the wall toward the front door. I also liked the idea of having some over head cover and trees to provide a sense of being in the woods. It's not quite there yet but to this end I transplanted a number of vine maples from my aunt's woods. They are planted along the wall and give some verticle height tot he front yard. There are also about 10-12 rhododenderons (of various projected sizes and heights) planted throughout the yard with most within the wall. I also used some sword ferns as green in-fill plants. My aunt has thousands of them in the 11 acres of forest hill side she has. So those were free filler plants. As for the material cost, the wall was almost free: it's built of broken concrete that I found around the area. Most of the time stacked concrete rubble is used in retaining walls. But I wanted to have this wall free standing since the yard was flat. The construction is based on millennia-old rubble wall construction techniques dating back to Roman times and beyond. The outer courses are of course the big chunks of concrete. But the interior core (space between the outer pieces) is packed tight with smaller chunks of concrete and 5/8"- crushed rock. The angular facets of the crushed rock lock in and compact in a very stable manner. As you can see, the top of each course is pretty smooth and flat and ready for the next layer. When I finished, the wall was strong enough that I can run and jump on the top. I can pound and stomp my feet and jump up and down as much as I want but it's doesn't move. Eco-Lawn As for the "eco-lawn". Growing up as a young boy it was my task to mow our lawns at home. I got paid for it but it was still a chore. As I got older I still had to mow our lawns but then I started doing the grounds upkeep at my dad's warehouse which also included mowing. Suffice to say, I got pretty tired of mowing. Its mind numbing. I'm much more interested in lushly planted gardens and such. Not to mention the water resources that lawns drinkup. Wow. Oh, and around the Seattle area they do brown out a lot in the summer if not watered. When I stumbled across the idea of an eco-lawn it caught my eye (I think a news paper article). The idea is this: An eco-lawn is a mix of slow growing grasses and broadleaf plants like clover, yarrow, english daisies and some other stuff. There are a number of environmental benefits such as 1/3 to 1/4 the watering requirements. And with the clover which produces nitrogen the "lawn" is self-fertilizing. But the BIG winner for me was the 1/3 to 1/4 mowing requirements. Since the eco-lawn grows so slowly you don't need to mow as much. And in spring time all those other plants produce flowers so the lawn looks like a big meadow. Very pretty. But it's a lot of effort to install one. You need to first kill your existing lawn. Then roto-till it up, rake up and remove the sod clumps, then you can spread the eco-lawn seed mix. Then make sure it stays moist until established. The seed is a bit pricey at about $30 / 1000 sf of lawn. Then there is the rototiller rental and old sod disposal fees. I bit off a bit more than I was expecting. I though I'd be able to just till the old sod into the ground. Nope, too lumpy. With the ideal sowing time fast approaching I ended up just piling up the sod in my driveway for later disposal. In the end that 7000 sf of lawn area yielded about 20 cubic yards of piled up sod (about two dump trucks worth). It took me a few months and about 15+ trips with my little utility trailer to drop it off in my aunt's pastures. It cut the disposal costs to just gas money instead of dump or landfill/recycling fees, or about 1/3 the cost of normal disposal. Sorry to high-jack this thread but here are some photos of the ecolawn. The flowers have stopped coming up the end of summer but the lawn has filled out more. I expect this spring will be amazing. For what it's worth, I haven't mowed my yard since October as the eco-lawn has gone a bit dormant. I'd do it again but would be more prepared for a lot of effort. Click the link below for more eco-lawn photos as it progressed over the last year+. This is in April of '08. The lawn was planted in mid-to-late September of '07. So this is about 7 months after planting. The lawn is still somewhat sparse but all the ground is mostly covered and the flowers are coming up. . . . . . Same time of year, April '08. Zoe is playing with her toy in the eco-lawn. . . . . . . This is almost exactly a year after planting, October '08. This photo shows a more mature eco-lawn with a mowed area and an un-mowed area. The un-mowed area represents about 4 weeks without mowing. Note the lush green and chartruse colors. I like the mottled look. Surprisingly, this lawn hasn't been watered since August at the height of summer. . . . . . Front yard with some eco-lawn. About 4 weeks since last mowing. . . . . . . . And some of the work it took to get the new eco-lawn in. This yard project really kicked my behind. And it all started with wrestling with a 9hp rototiller, then the raking (seen above), then the stock piling to the driveway, then hand loading / unloading 20 cy of sod to my aunts house. . . . . . . For what it's worth I went with the Fleur-de-lawn seed mix. It was designed for the NW. One of the guys who came up with this concept was a research professor at the Oregon State University I believe. There's also some info on the Washington State University website. WSU Eco-lawn info Here is a link that might be useful: My Eco-lawn page showing a DIY progress shots

Let's not forget that I AM a commercial grower, at least a small one, whereas you are blowing bubbles in a bucket of water with a $6 air pump. First, I don't believe that you grow anything commercially, simply because you haven't learned the differences between the 6 types of systems yet. Second, you have no idea what plants I have grown, or even how I build the systems I grow them in, or even why I make the design choices I do. Again that type of stuff you only learn by doing, and I have done plenty. That's why I'm building my greenhouse to grow commercially for our local community. And I have never bought, or ever will buy a commercial hydroponic system, I know how they work, and how to construct them for the plants needs. I do however enjoy looking at commercial systems, but I have never seen one yet worth the money. The Aeroflow (which I was buying, disassembling, and re-building into a better machine ten years ago) does not use misters. Well the new ones I have read about do use misters. The aeroflow isn't exactly nft. It does represent the manner in which system designs tend to overlap. I never said it was a strict NFT design, but it's a NFT with modifications. But the modifications don't change the fact that it's classified as a NFT system, and not even close to the water culture sub-category of DWC (recirculating or not). I would give you NFT/recirculating water culture if the roots were at least half way submerged, and the pump runs 24/7. The roots would need to be at least 75% submerged 24/7 before it could be considers any type of water culture system. Including a stagnant water culture system (no pump at all), or a water pump only recirculating water culture like you recomend. Roots grow in the thin layer of "nutrient film" as the very shallow layer of nutrient water cascade down back into the reservoir. This design takes advantage of what I keep telling you, which is that almost all of the oxygen in any body of water will be at the very top, thus the importance of maximizing surface area. It has nothing to do whatsoever with your false statements about how much dissolved oxygen is at the top of the waters surface verses farther down. Furthermore, no mater what you do it's imposable to raise dissolved oxygen levels above the waters dissolved oxygen saturation point. The plants in a NFT system get water and nutrients from the flow of water, they get very little oxygen form the water. They get 90% plus of their oxygen from the roots that are hanging in AIR above the water line. Hopefully you can see that the "types" of systems are not very well-defined. The most popular machines combine properties of the different classifications. The six types of hydroponic systems are clearly defined for those of us that that know what they are, how their different, and what makes them work. That's how you learn to identify the systems, know their pro's and cons, and the very first thing anyone getting into hydroponics should learn (something you clearly have trouble with). As I already mentioned that doesn't mean that you cant combine aspects of more than one type in the same system. But only by knowing what makes them different, how and why they work can you identify the primary system type of any system (again something you clearly have trouble with). But combining different aspects into the same system doesn't create a new type of system. It creates a sub-category/classification under one of the six primary system types. The waterfarm is really just nft over rocks. These types of statements are exactly how I know you haven't learned how to identify the six types of hydroponic systems yet, and why I posted the definitions for you in the first place. High-pressure aeroponics, when built over a table or tube, actually becomes an nft system as soon as the pump cycles off and the misted water flows back into the reservoir. First there can be more than one sub-classification. Aeroponic/NFT would only be the case if the roots were long enough to reach the bottom of the root chamber, and if the water level was shallow. Second, It could just as easily be a aeroponic/water culture system or even a aeroponic/flood and drain system. That's where knowing what makes all six types different, as well as what makes them work. Without knowing those fundamentals you don't know how to classify it, or even how the modifications affect your plants for the desired effect. You simply use livestock watering troughs that you can reach across. Or build your own out of a wood frame lined with a pond liner. Being able to get to the plant to harvest is a challenge with any growing method. I have also seen some cement troughs as well. But any way you build it, it will cost ten times as much to build/construct verses using a drip system instead. Real commercial growers have done their homework and know that drip systems are much more cost effective because they did. Not if you buy the nylon stuff, kiddo. Look up the "Florida weave." It's standard commercial practice for tomatoes, inside or out. First that isn't twine old man. Twine is a organic product, that is a synthetic product. That's why referring to things in the proper context is important if you want people to know what you are saying. But regardless that doesn't change the fact that you would need to use more than three times as much of it to support tomato plants in a water culture system verses the same crop grown in a drip system. Again there is just no need to make things harder or more complicated than they need to be. A RDWC system lid does not "float," You can use lids and baskets to support the plants, if you design it well enough to be able to support all that weight, again much more costly on a large scale for commercial growers, and for absolutely no benefit over using a drip system either. a simple post in the ground on either end anchors the twine to hold up the plants. I can also attach to the greenhouse hoops overhead, another very standard commercial practice. You must be thinking of growing in really short rows if you think two stakes (one on each end) will support all the tall tomato plants with no root support. Commercial growers grow them in long rows to make the most of space. And I know very well that the poly string used in commercial tomato production is usually attached to the greenhouse structure. But that has nothing to do with my point about needing to use a much, much more extensive support structure to support the weight of hundreds and hundreds of large tomato plants that have no root support verses the support structure needed for the same crop that has root support. Support that not only helps the plants stand up without falling/tipping over easily, but also supports much of the overall weight of plants foliage and fruit as well (needing much less artificial support). Again more work and expense for absolutely no benefit over using a drip system. Run to waste drip into perlite is the current standard for hydro tomatoes. It does waste water and nutrients, as well as typically just dump the runoff back into the ground, another environmentally damaging practice. Your using the wrong places to use as your role models if you feel that way. Today's commercial non recirculating drip systems are fine tuned to keep the roots moist, yet have very little run off. And coco coir, and pine shavings will hold moisture much better than perlite will. However I do agree that some commercial run to waste systems do just run off into near by soil. However even so that's far less of an environmental concern than how traditional agricultural floods their large fields with thousands of pounds of chemicals every year. But again, newer well planed run to waste systems run the run off into aqueducts that only water the field grown crops. If they don't have any close by, it's run back into the sewer system where sewage treatment plants process the water. If they don't have a city sewer system, or near by field grown crops, the run off is typically just ran back into the soil. Environmental concerns do not factor into commercial standards, at least until the government passes relevant regulating laws. Yes, but the government has been doing just that for over 100 years. Ever since the big dust bowl (I forget what year) that was caused by soil erosion from farming practices. You simply wont get any city to grant a business license for a commercial agriculture business without the city granting you the yearly water rights for the amount of water you expect to use. And in the event that the figures in your business plan were wrong, your not likely to be allowed more water. At least not without heavy fines anyway. The biggest benefit of DWC over any other method is that the large body of water regulates root temps. Not exactly, a water culture system with a depth of over ten inches doesn't necessarily constitute a large body of water. Ten inches deep and ten inches wide is less than 7 gallons. One cubic foot of water is 7.48 gallons, I don't call that a large body of water. Though it is true that the larger the amount of water there is, the slower it will be to change (raise or lower) temperature. But in my experience and weather conditions, relying on water volume to keep water temps down in our summers require 100's of gallons, as well as a in ground reservoir as a minimum. That's why my 3 greenhouse reservoirs are 300 gallons, and 4 feet deep in the ground, as well as insulated from above ground heat. Because ground moisture is a big factor in how well geothermal energy works, I will be installing soaker hose around the reservoirs, and set on a timer to keep up good ground moisture as well. That's what you are seeing when your bubbler bucket seems to work so well. It's not the magic bubbles that make the bucket work, so much as it is the temperature regulation of the roots. But if you would set up those buckets as RDWC, you'd have several times better results That's such a a bunch of BS. You have no idea how I built my water culture systems, or seen them working. You have no idea what the water temps were, how the temps affected the plants, or any of the observations that you would need to see to come to any conclusions. But rest assured if I took out the air pump and only used a water pump instead like you recommend to people, the plants would have just wilted and been extremely sad looking. The water pump would be better than using nothing at all because the falling water would help aerate it, but the roots themselves are helped ten fold by the direct contact with the air bubbles themselves. That's a well known concept that completely goes over your head, and you just are not able to understand that simple concept of how much that helps. I have nothing against using falling water to help aerate the water. But it's simply a mistake to solely rely on that alone in a water culture system if you want healthy plants.

Sorry I have not read all the posts so forgive me if I duplicate. My ds is 9 in 3rd grade, another late birthday. He has always been at the top of his class and loves school. He loves to read. He gets off track easily. When they come back from recess all the kids know to get out the item they need. He has to be reminded. But his teachers are so supportive of him. But it has not always been this way. He started K being the last to finish lunch and spent many lunch recesses sitting outside finishing. He was always the first to raise his hand and had a hard time waiting to be called on. The other kids would sit back and let him give all the answers. But I was fortunate enough in first grade to have a friend teach him. She said he is just fine. He needs help staying on task but is nowhere near needing "help". Second grade teacher really worked on keeping him on task. We didnt care about the behavior daily charts. It did not work. He would never stay perfect so we never made it an issue. As long as he was not a problem in class we just focused on his learning to concentrate. Now in third grade he has really improved. He waits to be called on, but still needs reminders to stay on task. He takes 10min to pick out a book so I told the teacher to give him 15seconds or they will choose. He now knows he has a choice and is doing much better. Again, teachers think he will just slowly outgrow this. One thing that really helped was something in K. The teacher made a special desk. He was told that if he had a hard time staying on task he would have to use that desk to have less distraction. Eventually he began to recognize when he was distracted and would ask to use the desk. The teacher found this to be a great tool rather than a punishment. My ds is always slow in the morning. We set up a chart of the order to do things and he has to follow it. If he is all ready to go with bookbag and coat ready at the door, he can play with the cat. If he does not follow the chart and we are rushing out the door he does not get freetime when he gets home from school. He is learning that he is responsible for his behavior and he can choose to follow it and have fun or not follow it and have no fun. I wonder if punishing your son at this age is productive. He really isn't being naughty, he is a little boy who needs help focusing. Teaching him how to manage his situation, learning control over what he can do will give him lots of confidence and he may surprise everyone in a few years. Good luck.

Oh Katieob, One door closes another door opens. I believe your next kitchen is going to be more stunning. Right now it is hard to imagine but it will happen. With your taste, talent, vision and creativity, your next kitchen will be a dream come true. I have been in a similar situation. Not the kitchen but the home. I left a fantastic neighborhood, a dream home, and great schools because of my DH's promotion. It was a hard to say good-bye. And I missed all the little details of my old place. I missed my friends, my garden, my cute little office, my fireplace in the master bed room, tiled patio, pool, living just 20 miles from DC... But, DH and I made the right choice for our family. We moved into a new adventure that got our minds excited. This new place you move to will give you a challenge and ignite your brain. You will make the next kitchen as magnificent (probably more so) then the one you are saying good-bye too. And you are doing this for your family. I think what helped me the most was reminding myself that my family came first. My family and what makes us work as a family was priority. You are doing this for your husband and your children. This will get you through the rough patch. And your sweet new baby will get to part of the transformation of a new place into a stunning kitchen. You can do this. Say good-bye and then say BRING IT ON. Bring on the new possibilities, the new ideas, and the new options and let the joy unfold. ~boxer