Oh hey, Jeri, just saw you posted after I replied. I was planning on ditching that weird thatch of growth on CI, so good to hear your thoughts are in this line----unfortunately- SBP, doesn't have much else going on, so I will leave it to do what it will this summer and let it die back in winter. Our climate is not really ideal for roses in--- 50 percent of our winter days are above freezing, and nearly every night is below. Some times we get to the high 40s for a while with sun, then head back below 20. Over and over. This excessive freeze thaw cycling doesn't seem to bother the Austins and old roses, but the HTs are harder to keep alive and growing larger than in zone 4 montana where it freezes and stays frozen. My mom grew an unprotected (no mulch no nothin) Double Delight with the graft a good 4 inches above ground for 20 years- blooming it's head off and growing a massive root system like driftwood before a very early freeze (went from 60s to 5 degrees in late October) took it and many old trees with it.

Hep! it is indeed mealybugs, I took a closer look and I certainly see little bugs, they are powdery white but has small legs, when I wipe with alcohol they become dirt yellow smudge... the hoya is hanging in a small closet with a northern window- my husband just peeked over my shoulder, not east as I said before.. I have other plants in there for winterstorage, my hibiscus looks like it has a bit of 'spiderweb on it- I know it is a pest but do not know what the name is. My irises that was delivered a bit too late to put in the ground last fall is in there too, One of them was filled with small lice. I sprayed it down with the chrystanmentum spray and it seemed like it did the job. I decided To make a fast sweep of the houseplants and realize that the grape ivy too has white clusters (stems , leaves, underleaves) I look at the passiflora and detect a bit of spiderwebbing. I move on to the bedroom and my hibiscus in there is too affected by webs I am afraing to take down my green hoya... ahmm. went and bought isoprpyl at the pharmacist, could only find 71% / 90% I got the lower number and diluted with water. now it's war! any takes on dealing with the buggers in the soil? should I start watering with soap? can I use dishdetergent water? which soaps to avoid??? thanks klk *I don't know what systemic is but do not like the name, sounds like something I do not want in the house...*

Unless you are emotionally attached to AR or the site absolutely mandates it, I personally haven't found one yet as all they traditionally do is recommend, you might want to rethink installing or updating to AR v9.0. Beginning with AR v6.0 the application has become more system intensive requiring more resources. I do not know about v9.0, but v7.0 and v8.0 are terribly difficult to remove from your system if you ever so decide to. The free application Foxit Reader has been the recent .pdf viewer being recommended here and at other forums. All you have to do is install it and configure it to be the default reader. It is low resource demanding and from my readings a snap to remove. DA

If your looking for the savings on your water bill you are looking in the wrong place, the real savings is on your tax bill. In the early 1900's toilets consumed 5gpf however in those days water was plentiful and the sewage was simply discharged into a local river or estuary. In the late 40's or early 50's they began mandating sewage treatment and as the population expanded there was a big concern that many of the sewage treatment plants could not keep pace with demand. On average every man, woman and child will flush a toilet 6 times a day. At 5gpf that equated to 30gal/day per person or on the big picture, 30,000gal of waste to the treatment plant per day for every 1,000 people in your community. With the rate of population increase by the mid 60's the local sewage treatment plants were being overwhelmed until someone came up with the idea that if they cut the flush rate from 5gpf to 3.5gpf they could reduce the waste load generated by toilets by approximately 30%. The alternative was to build additional treatment plants and replace miles of sewer pipes with larger lines at a substantial cost to the taxpayers. By the mid 80's the population had expanded to the point where not only were the sewage treatment plants overwhelmed, the municipal water supply and treatment facilities were also running at peak demand. In some areas such as where I live water is plentiful so we could build additional water & sewer treatment plants at a cost of millions of dollars to the taxpayers, while in some arid regions such as California or the Southwest, they simply do not have the water even if they were to build additional treatment plants. When we consider that toilets account for approximately 50 of the total water and sewer demand the quick solution was to reduce the toilet water and sewer consumption rate to 1.6gpf, thus reducing the load generated by toilets by approximately 50%. Now in regards to why you cannot see the savings on your water bill? As Kudzu pointed out, the national average cost for water is $6.50 per 1,000gal or $0.0065 per gallon, however, water supply is not measured in gallons but rather in cubic feet. One cubic foot of water is slightly less than 8 gallons (7.92gal/cu.ft) therefore on the national average water costs $0.051/gal, however for billing purposes most communities charge a flat monthly service rate that includes the first 5,000cu.ft, then they charge a surcharge for each additional 500cu.ft. Sewer tax is then computed at 2 or 3 times the water rate. On the individual household, in most cases changing from 3.5gpf to 1.6gpf will not change your consumption enough to show a substantial savings on your water bill, on the other hand, if the community as a whole does not make the change, they will have no alternative but to replace the sewer lines and build additional water and sewer treatment plants so in conclusion, if your looking for the savings on your water bill you looking in the wrong place. The real savings is on your tax bill.