It's pine bark, but it's hard to say by the picture if the size of the bark is appropriate. It looks like it's quite large. If you read the link Jodi left for you upthread, you probably realize that particle size and distribution is very important to how a container soil performs. Here is something I wrote to illustrate the importance of particle size/distribution: Obviously, I think the grower's soil choice when establishing a planting for the long term is the most important decision he/she will make. There is no question that the roots are the heart of the plant, and plant vitality is inextricably linked in a hard lock-up with root vitality. In order to get the best from your plants, you absolutely must have happy roots. If you start with a water-retentive medium, you cannot improve it's aeration or drainage characteristics by adding larger particulates. Sand, perlite, Turface, calcined DE ...... none of them will work. To visualize why sand and perlite can't change drainage/aeration, think of how well a pot full of BBs would drain (perlite), then think of how poorly a pot full of pudding would drain (bagged soil). Even mixing the pudding and perlite/BBs together 1:1 in a third pot yields a mix that retains the drainage characteristics and PWT height of the pudding. It's only after the perlite become the largest fraction of the mix (60-75%) that drainage & PWT height begins to improve. At that point, you're growing in perlite amended with a little potting soil. You cannot add coarse material to fine material and improve drainage or the ht of the PWT. Use the same example as above & replace the pudding with play sand or peat moss - same results. The benefit in adding perlite to heavy soils doesn't come from the fact that they drain better. The fine peat or pudding particles simply 'fill in' around the perlite, so drainage & the ht of the PWT remains the same. All perlite does in heavy soils is occupy space that would otherwise be full of water. Perlite simply reduces the amount of water a soil is capable of holding because it is not internally porous. IOW - all it does is take up space. If you want to profit from a soil that offers superior drainage and aeration, you need to build it into the soil from the start, by ensuring that the soil is primarily comprised of particles much larger than those in peat/compost/coir, which is why the recipes I suggest as starting points all direct readers to START with the foremost fraction of the soil being large particles, to ensure excellent aeration. From there, if you choose, you can add an appropriate volume of finer particles to increase water retention. You do not have that option with a soil that is already extremely water-retentive right out of the bag. I fully understand that many are happy with the results they get when using commercially prepared soils, and I'm not trying to get anyone to change anything. My intent is to make sure that those who are having trouble with issues related to soil, understand why the issues occur, that there are options, and what they are. Many use their current potting soils (like MG or used soils as a smaller fraction of a new media they put together specifically to improve drainage & aeration, so yes - you CAN use some of the soil you have as a fraction of a new soil, but keep in mind that you aren't going to rid yourself of the drainage/aeration and high PWT issues problems unless your soil is weighted heavily toward larger particles than your current soil is currently comprised of. When you add a little extra perlite and/or pine bark to a peat-based soil, you don't change the drainage characteristics, the height of the PWT, or aeration. You DO decrease the total volume of water the soil CAN hold, and that IS a plus, but that's about all you really accomplish. Add a LOT of (appropriate size) bark and perlite = job done. The physics of how water behaves in container soils doesn't change because someone might assure you it does. As surely as the cow is barred from jumping over the moon by the law of gravity, soils are bound by physical laws to exhibit rather specific and predictable characteristics based on their particle size and distribution (enter the pudding analogy into evidence). If you choose not to go with a soil that has a considerable fraction of larger particles, there are ways to help you deal with excess water retention when it occurs. There is a lot of good information about dealing with water retention if you follow the embedded link. When you get to where you're deciding about how you want to proceed with your soil, we can talk more specifically about tailoring a plan that best supports your methodology. Take care. Al

newgen Here is answer to your question - Al (tapla) answering someone else on House Plants forum (thread: Watering issues): Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on Fri, Mar 22, 13 at 9:53 One of the most significant benefits of using soils that allow you to water copiously with no concern about potential root problems related to excessive sogginess is the fact that the ability to flush the soil at each watering prevents dissolved solids (salts) from building up in the soil. Ideally, when you water you would allow the effluent passing out of the drain hole to run down a drain or collect in a saucer. When it DOES collect in the saucer, the container should be lifted above the effluent, so after it exits the pot, there is no way the dissolved solids contained in the effluent have any chance of getting back into the soil. I set my pots up on little 1-1/4" blocks that rest in the saucer. I don't need to empty the collection saucer because the water that collects there can't get back into the pot. It evaporates and contributes to the area humidity, but you could empty the collection saucer if you like, or water over the sink. The higher the level of dissolved solids in the soil solution, the more difficult it is for the plant to take up water. So a soggy soil that impairs water uptake combined with a high level of salts in the soil solution is a double whammy for a large fraction of growers who use heavy soils that don't allow them to water so they're flushing the soil. This problem is always most prevalent in the spring, after a long winter of watering in sips, or in your case, of pouring residual salts back through the soil, which ensures a gradual but continual increase in the level of dissolved solids that affect water uptake AND nutrient uptake. If you're using a fertilizer that might not be a problem if you're watering properly, it can quickly become a serious problem if you're NOT watering properly. We know the impact of dissolved solids on the uptake of water also limits the ability to take up nutrients, but when dissolved solids accumulate the ratio of nutrients to each other in the soil can quickly become skewed, which has the effect of one nutrient present in excess making it difficult or impossible for the plant to take up another nutrient. This is very common when using fertilizers with too much phosphorous, and is quickly exacerbated when the soil isn't flushed regularly. Al Posted by tapla z5b-6a mid-MI (My Page) on Fri, Mar 22, 13 at 15:57 If you're using the gritty mix, there is very little possibility that you're over-watering, or that flushing the soil thoroughly would create a problem, so I would do that. If you didn't screen the mix carefully, and there are fines in the soil, then use a wick and tilt the pot after you flush - then water normally. I use a level 1/4 tsp/gal of FP 9-3-6 every time I water, and I've been well pleased with the results ever since I settled on that amount, so I'm thinking you could cut back on the amount of fertilizer you're providing. I'm pretty sure that with the 1/2 tsp/gal + the recycling of the effluent, that your plants are seeing some fertilizer burn. There are some advantages to fertilizing every time you water, and at 1/4 tsp/gal, you get about 800 gallons of fertilizer from a quart of fertilizer. @ $25/qt for the fertilizer, a gallon of solution costs about 3 cents per gallon. Most people would hardly think twice about buying and paying for the electricity augment light levels for their plants - and that's a much more significant outlay than the small amount of fertilizer that might get discarded after passing through the soil. If you want to, collect the effluent in a bucket & spread it on the lawn or your garden/beds. Plants that are fertilized at higher rates (luxury levels) often show symptoms of deficiencies when the concentration of nutrients in the soil returns to the adequacy range, so that's one + of fertigating @ each watering (it won't happen). Another is, even in nature, nutrient uptake is very closely linked (almost directly) to water uptake, the primary modifier being temperature, which isn't a particularly significant factor when houseplants are the topic. I said that so I can say there is some benefit in not having to keep track of what needs fertilizing when. I fertilize and water everything at nearly the same intervals, and at the same fertilizer rates, and for the last 15 years or so, my plants have all been practically free of blemished foliage. You're trying to do essentially what I (and many others) have been doing, so I expect that once you get the bugs worked out & get your dosages refined, you'll begin to see how easy it can be. I'm pulling for you! ;-)

Yes, it was water in the spray bottle. The plants with vegetables on them that were sprayed were banana peppers and tomatoes. Other plants that were sprayed were basil, kale, and cilantro, as well as cucumbers and squash that don't have any vegetables on them yet. I don't usually use a spray bottle to water my garden, my husband was just misting the vegetables we just bought before putting them in the ground as it was too hot and sunny to water the garden. We usually water the soil and roots well. I do really have all these concerns and it does drive my husband batty, hence why I am asking these questions on here so I don't bug him about this. I live in southern Virginia and my full grown banana peppers were bought that way at a garden center. I also have a green tomato. The plant I'm most worried about being exposed to the Mean Green is my basil as it's something that can be eaten whenever, but after reading these comments I'm pretty sure it will be ok. This post was edited by valialee on Thu, May 29, 14 at 18:10

mshepherd2, I did 'resurrect' an old well once; but I was given a usuable pump. I hooked up the priming port to my outdoor faucet because I was not sure if there was water in the well. I turned the faucet on and switched the pump on. I would turn the faucet off and listen carefully to the sound of the pump while keeping an eye on the discharge volume. I had to repeat this several times but was gratified when things picked up and funtioned. I then bought a new pump and hooked up things permanently.