Elisa, the premise of BTE is that tilling destroys the soil structure and bio life. Tilling removes the covering; the soil rapidly dries out and top soil erodes. The "magic" in the wood chips is it is a covering that first retains moisture, and secondly feeds the plants as they decompose. It's why a mulch of smaller nutrient rich branches with needles and leaves is necessary and not just chipped trunks or bark chips only. The fungi that develop in the wood chip mulch help feed the plants. The mulch develops a helper system of organisms and other plant life that assists your fruits and veggies. In turn, your plants feed them. If you till composted organic material into your main garden, I'd suggest another experiment. Set aside a small section of your MG (maybe as small as 5x10 feet) for no-till. Still don't use wood chips, but layer your organics on the top (composted manure, yard waste, etc). Paul is very specific that if you don't have wood chips, just use whatever organic materials you have. (You can even use rocks) The most important part is to create a covering and not mix it in. Layer on top. When I tilled, I had virtually no earthworm population. Now, by not tilling, I can't dig a 4 " planting hole anywhere without killing several earthworms. And my soil (mostly red clay) is always damp and soft I destroyed a small tiller in two seasons trying to break up the clay. I then rented bigger tillers that beat me up for 6-8 hours trying to a 12x40 garden in which one half barely produced b/c of the rock hard clay. And it was back just as hard in the fall as it was in the spring. So it wasn't getting easier with time. Now with the wood chips, that area stays moist and soft. Everything grows there and I save the expense of renting, tilling, and fighting the soil every season. The fact that you got 25% more production is huge. You can get that in your MG using BTE principles but without adding wood chips. Paul no longer adds wood chips to his main garden b/c of his difficulty in walking. He uses them everywhere else. But in his MG he uses compost from his chicken pen as the covering.

Frank, I've had the same questions. I have chipbudded to older wood with limited success. Budding to older wood is very touchy too, although on occasion it can work. Once a friend of mine bark grafted right to a six inch trunk in the middle of the tree successfully! As to thickness of the bud or chip I like a bud with a lot of bark but a minimum of wood underneath; some people remove the wood but I don't feel comfortable picking at it. My thought is that the wood is dead matter that has to be dealt with by the tree one way or another, so you don't want too much of it ... I guess the same has to be true of chips. Still, like you say, cambium contact is the big thing. Here's to good success grafting this year. In another week or two I'll nip a bud stick from a nearby apricot and try to bud my Marianna rootstocks. Wish me luck, ay ...? :-)M

Gardeningwithlcgrace, it depends. :) A layer of wood chips on top of a lasagna bed might help absorb nitrogen compounds outgassing from nitrogen sources below it. A top layer could also catch nitrogen in rainwater, and in wind-borne soil particles. Plus any bird or animal pee or manure which falls on it. (The last might not seem significant, but there are birds and squirrels in my garden every time I step out there in daylight hours; I assume they leave a few nitrogen-rich byproducts behind.) At the bottom of a lasagna heap, a layer of wood chips might help catch and trap any nitrogen leaching down from above. Where the soil touches the wood chips, they will absorb nitrogen from the soil and gradually decompose, creating a beneficial habitat for the microherd and eventually building humus. I guess it comes down to what you mean by "beneficial." If you are trying to quickly provide nutrients to your soil, low-carbon and high-nitrogen lasagna heaps will generally break down faster and release more nutrients. If you are trying to add more medium-term and long-term humus to your soil, high-carbon and lower-nitrogen lasagna heaps will generally decompose more gradually; nutrient release will generally happen over a longer time. Decomposition of organic materials isn't a real simple process. However, there is the comfort of knowing that eventually "It All Leads Back To Compost." (1) All the best, -Patrick (1) Prof. Dirt

I don't think a small reduction in the amount of available nitrogen in a woodland is a bad thing. Invasive plants tend to thrive in nutrient rich, disturbed areas. Adding a mulch to stabilize soils and reduce the available nitrogen might help slow the spread of invasive plants and help you get an upper hand. I have heard of people who are restoring natural environments using "reverse fertilization" by spreading sawdust on the soil to reduce the level of available nutrients and thus limit the spread of invasive plants. Most of our native plants are adapted to low levels of nutrients. The same is true of most native plants in other parts of the world - it is the few ruderal plant species, adapted to quick growth in disturbed, nutrient-rich soils that tend to become invasive species when they get to areas to which they are not native. Also, I'll add that I think brush piles are a great addition to any woodland, regardless of the surroundings. I have several small patches of woodland amid brushy fields, a powerline right of way that is thick with brush, and some weedy fields that are quite dense. Even with all of the brush around here, brush piles are heavily used and seem to attract more birds to my yard than I would have otherwise. They are particularly well used by birds that visit my feeders in the winter.