"... it appears that the areas on each side of the brick could be wicking chambers if small enough, though aeration would still be an element to provide for." YES - exactly. Now I'm sure you understand. To further clarify. (using same soil with a 4" PWT) Imagine you've sealed/secured a fat drinking straw flush to the bottom of the pot below the drain hole so it extended below the container and the straw is filled with the same soil that is in the container. If the straw extends 1" below the container bottom, there will be 1" of PW in the straw and 3" in the container. If the straw extends 4" from the bottom, thee will be 4" of PW in the straw and NO PW in the container. If the straw extends 6" below the container, there will be 4" of PW at the bottom of the straw, 2" of soil at the top of the straw w/no PW, and the container soil will be devoid of any PW. Not to confuse you, but since the capillary pull of the material in the straw is a factor, using a material in the straw that has a larger particle size than the soil above will negate or partially negate the movement of water downward, which is why drainage layers don't work. When the particle size of the material in the straw is more than about 2x the size of the particles in the soil above, water 'perches' (just like a bird) ;o) in the soil above the coarser material. I'm having a very nice weekend. Getting lots done in preparation for the big move of plants indoors soon. Fertilized all my containerized plantings yesterday and treated them with neem oil and a fungicide. I'll do it again before I bring the tropicals/subtropicals in when the nights get consistently below 50*. Finally back to normal now after the lightning strike. All the major appliances were delivered Fri and all that's left to do is read the owner's manuals on all the new things because many of the appliances & electronic stuff has so many more features - just trying to guard against finding out 5 years from now that the microwave has more features than just a timer. ;o) Take good care. Al

"It IS evidence, but it's not proof." Pablo: Suspicion is not evidence. That is an absolute statement. rangier: I have seen evidence in my garden, and in others' that compost teas give disease resistance. I won't call it proof, but it makes me strongly suspect that it does. Note I didn't say only ACT, I said "compost teas." "I've not seen studies that say either way." Pablo: I have. rangier: OK. Then act accordingly. "You seem to be saying that nothing is true until it is proven to your high standard" Pablo: Nothing is proven until it is proven. There is a way to do that. rangier: That's not what I said, is it Pablo? Re-read it. Notice the word "true?" I am saying that something that is proven to be true, was true before it was proven, i.e. if spraying compost tea (any kind) on foliage helps with disease or pests, then it does so now, whether proven or not. Since I'm spraying it anyway, it *may* be a *possible* additional benefit. "It is reasonable to suspect that some of the tens of thousands of strains in a good ACT or maybe in non-ACT will do the same." Pablo:Common sense does not prove it either. People used to believe that stress CAUSED ulcers. They were wrong. Common sense. Theory guides and experiment decides- the experiments have shown no benefit over other methods. rangier: You continue to argue with things I didn't say. Did I say it proved it? I suspect it from my experience and others'. Pablo: There are common sense reasons that those bacteria will not survive being sprayed/dried etc. and having a rapid change of environment. I won't say that's evidence they don't work. rangier: I agree that it is not evidence either way. Dead or alive, they may trigger an immune response. Moisture is present on foliage from transpiration. Notice I didn't use the words "prove," or "proof." Pablo:Fact is- there's just no evidence that it does any more. That's not some extremely high standard to ask that there be some evidence that it does more before it's taken as the truth. It's not even a theory yet- it is only hypothesis. I'm probably being generous saying even that because of the studies that show no benefit over non ACT. rangier: I didn't say that it(ACT) does more(than non), did I Pablo. Pablo:Don't let your dogma get in front of your karma on this. rangier: Huh? You too. Pablo:I really don't know why people get so defensive when I say this. It's not proven to be more effective. That's a fact. Even when people agree with me they seem to get defensive about it here. rangier: I'm not being defensive, Pablo. I am puzzled at why you keep presenting arguments countering things I didn't say. rangier

I was going to give you the URL where I found a recipe but I don't seem to be able to find it. Off the top of my head, here goes: Place an unremembered quantity of worm compost/castings in a mesh bag. I am not the sort to weigh out the ingredients but I am generous as during the winter months I only have indoor plants to water with it. Pour warm water (anywhere between 50 degrees F and 110 degrees. Optimum around 75 degrees) into a five gallon buckets. Dip and squish the "tea-bag" into the warm water until you have all the water soluable muck in the water and not the mesh bag. You can leave the bag in the water or take it out at this point and return the fibrous, non-worm-digested stuff to your worm bin. To feed and assist the microorganisms to grow add some powdered kelp, add molasses or other sugar source ( I just use regular sugar) Then aerate the mixture for at least 24 hours using an aquarium pump ( approx $10) and an air-stone (also bought from the aquarium store for around $2). You can get fancy and add "T-junctions to your air line and have multiple air-stones. The more cool air you bubble through the mixture the cooler the mixture will get. It would be better if the mixture was kept at 75 degrees but mine cools down in my wintery garage so I add warm water occasionally so that I have, in the end, close to five gallons. Pour it into a watering can and use it. I would not put it on outside plants if it was close to or below freezing. Sorry I couldn't give you more exact quantities but you'll figure it out.

morpheouspa. Gloves down here for a moment. What claims are you referring to that I have made about mechanical aeration? Granted, I do claim that there are purposes for which the employment of mechanical aeration can be useful and it irritates me to no end that people peremptorily discount mechanical aeration as being without any use. (in the past couple of months, I've seen were you have suggested? that plug aeration might be an aid in pursuing some outcome.) Are you saying that I have advocated mechanical aeration as a necessary continued lawn care practice? (Do you advocate the application of a surfactant as a necessary continuing lawn care practice?) Is it necessary to spam this site with links to hundreds of university turf programs that recommend home owner lawn aeration not only as a continuing lawn care practice, but for the prevention of disease, thatch LDS etc.? For what purpose? They are just conclusory statements, No more valid than anything you or anyone else can produce. What you linked to, rather than belittle you, look at the facts: First some of what they call aeration is plowing (bad for me) but anyway I counted 13 studies and of those, the majority showed some improvement to crop yield, none showed a decline. They do,make a conclusory statement that aeration will cause increased weeds. OK fine. Based on what? No ancillary evidence even? Did they atleast credit dchall for the quote or maybe daniel? So even though your site actually supports that aeration results in slightly greater % crop production than non aeration, I say irrelevant and useless for any support for either of us. This argument has been going on forever, but if you take the time to understand and observe, there are logical conclusions you can come to and when applied either work or don't. If X then Y, put it to the test, and if it repeats, then continue, whether it is surfacants, aeration, corn meal or Bayer. So recommend on your experience and give your rational when challenged. Caveat emptor. My goal for my lawn, and for those I give advice to, is to obtain a turf that in the shortest time possible will only require mowing, watering and fertilization. I endeavor to employ the least expensive, least labor intensive, but most effective methods for a healthy turf AND soil and those are the ones I promote. My questions were for the reader and therefor need no response from you . I will no longer joust this windmill with you or anyone else, but I will call out anyone who "make [an unsupportable} claim... or [spew} any other blatant lie"