Hey Redsox: Not sure how pertinent this is but let me share a little. I grew some coneflowers last year and while they were fine the Monarda near two of my roses had a wicked case of PM. At first I did not pay that much attention until I noticed the otherwise completely disease free 'What a Peach' suddenly had mildew on its leaves. With 'Angel Face' right next door I cut the Monarda to the ground and trimmed off all the affected leaves on WAP. Problem solved. I read once here that Powdery Mildew spores can be spread by the wind even on a dry day without the presence of moisture. Just a wee breeze is all that is required. So I think if you have something that you know to suffer from disease it might be better located elsewhere unless you are prepared to cut the Echinacea down to the ground at the first sign of trouble. Hope this helps. Kate

Not good, Randy. Of the few Monarchs we may see this year, and I say "may", it still seems like it could take a few years to rebuild the population, and that is assuming no wet, freezing temps and no illegal logging. I was curious about the lowest population over the last several years and reviewed a graph from learners.org. This year's overwintering brood is the lowest in the graph for populations recorded since 1994-95. So, things are not looking up for us this year. A news article published in 2002 at Monarch Watch, addresses the affect of the big freeze that occurred then and which could also reflect the grim prospects for the population this year, too, states as follows: "The January freeze prompts the question: How important is catastrophic mortality to the overall dynamics of the monarch population? Historically, extremes in the weather are part of the environmental background in which monarchs evolved. In general, species which occasionally experience high death rates due to catastrophic mortality have high birth rates and therefore the capacity to recover their numbers when conditions return to normal. The monarch fits this pattern. Female monarchs have the ability to produce 400 or more eggs in their lifetime and when conditions are favorable a sufficient number of caterpillars survive to the adult stage to replace and even increase the population." What this article does not take into account is the already low populations due to forest degradation. "If this is the case, do we really need to worry about catastrophic mortality in monarchs? (Biologists call this "density independent mortality" since the mortality is due to extrinsic events that are unrelated to the density of the population.) In stable environments catastrophic mortality could depress a population for a short time, perhaps a few years, but we would expect the population to recover. ***However, habitat degradation which contributes to the mortality by increasing exposure to the weather extremes could have a longer lasting impact on the population.**** This is our concern with monarchs. If the forest in the overwintering areas is degraded and this degradation leads to higher than normal attrition of the overwintering monarchs and even higher mortality in snow, ice or freezing rain storms, then the time needed for the population to recover after catastrophic mortality will increase. Furthermore, if the number of overwintering colonies is reduced due to deforestation, the vulnerability of the population to catastrophic mortality is likely to increase. Biologically this will be the equivalent of putting all the eggs in one basket and sooner or later catastrophic mortality at the remaining colonies could result in a substantial reduction of the population. Measures of the mortality of monarchs in forests of differing qualities are needed to determine the relationship of mortality to the integrity of the forest and the most favorable conditions for overwintering monarchs. "The monarch mortality in this particular instance can not be directly attributed to the condition of the forests. The weather pattern from 11- 16 January was massive and it was the rainfall that wetted the butterflies combined with the extreme low temperatures that killed the monarchs. Conversion of landscapes over large areas, such as changing forests to agricultural lands, increases the albedo (reflection of incident radiation) which can result in lower rainfall and greater temperature extremes over broad regions. This may have been a factor. Clearly, the severity of this weather event was unusual and was more extreme than any winter weather recorded since the monarch overwintering sites became known to scientists." Now, this is the part that is frightening: "In retrospect, it appears to be fortunate that the January freeze occurred this year, a year in which the overwintering population was robust (about 100 million butterflies). Even though estimated mortality due to the January freeze is extremely high (>80%) the number of surviving butterflies may be sufficient to recolonize the breeding areas without a long-term depression of the population. ****Had this storm occurred last season when the overwintering population was at an all time low (28.3 million), it is likely that it would have taken the population many years to return to normal levels of 60-120 million overwintering butterflies."**** ......and since this year's population is at an all time low, there is no "robust population" this year, the Monarchs are experiencing a double whammy so to speak - the diminishing forests AND the weather. A really good spring in south Texas for the returning Monarchs would certainly help in regaining some ground. So, let's hope that happens. Susan Here is a link that might be useful: Population Graph

Yes, your plant appears to be infected with HVX. To Steve_Mass, I'm afraid that the flowering cycle has nothing to do with spreading HVX by the roots when you are digging plants. You will still get HVX on your tools/shovels and you can still move it to other plants so long as they are actively growing. It is best to wait until the fall when the plants are totally dormant. You will still get HVX on your shovel from any dormant plant that has HVX, but since the sap isn't flowing in the healthy plants they won't catch it as easily. Your confusion is from Dr. Lockhart's research that showed that if a hosta with HVX is done flowering and you are cutting SCAPES you won't move it from one scape to another scape. This has nothing to do with moving a plant or cutting roots, crowns, or leaves. So if you cut the scape of a plant that had HVX you will get HVX on your scissors/pruner but then you won't transfer it to a healthy scape that has already finished flowering as there isn't any sap flowing in a finished scape. I hope that helps to clarify things. Wait until the fall, after the plants have gone dormant, and dig it out then. I agree to use a spading fork as you will do a lot less damage, just in case, since Dr. Lockhart's research used too small of sample sizes to draw absolute conclusions.

"listen peeps ... the SEASON for hosta is late spring -- early summer ... ITS SEPTEMBER!!!!!! ... which is not early summer, nor late spring ... hosta do not look good this time of year.. if you cant handle that.. just get rid of all of them.. " This is why I'm trying to convince myself that nematodes don't bother me. If they showed their ugly little faces in June, I might think differently. Someone should make a list of hosta that actually still look good in late summer, if they haven't already. The Halcyon family would have to be on there. I have a lot of thicker leaves, and a lot of shade, and many of mine still look ok, minus the holes from slugs and hail. If it weren't for the hail, I would have kept up with the slug control, but I threw in the towel on that this year. Anything in more sun, or with thin leaves looks like complete hell.