@dleverette When making 5:1:1 mix, I break-up the compressed chunks of peat so they pass through a 1/2" screen. I toss any sticks and such on top of the raised beds where they break down with time. Here's a tip you'll find very helpful. For large batches of 5:1:1, pour the bark onto a tarp laid on a flat surface, then wet the bark a bit. Then, add the screened peat and spread it over the bark. Add your lime on top of the peat, then put down the perlite and wet that. The trick is to use just enough water to make the mix damp when it's thoroughly mixed. Both peat and pine bark are hydrophobic (water repellent) when allowed to dry below about 20% of their water holding ability. This makes a dry 5:1:1 mix extremely difficult to rewet if you don't moisten it when you make it. The moisture in the mix diffuses, moistening the bark/ peat and "breaking" its tendency to repel water. Within 15-30 minutes of making the mix you can pot plants and water them in thoroughly w/o the frustration associated with trying to rehydrate a dry soil. FWIW, I don't use coir. As many times as I've tried it and cone comparative experiments, I've always had problems or been dissatisfied with the results. You might be interested in a comparison between peat and coir I wrote several years back: Peat vs. Coir Sphagnum peat and coir have nearly identical water retention curves. They both retain about 90-95% of their volume in water at saturation and release it over approximately the same curve until they both lock water up so tightly it's unavailable for plant uptake at about 30-33% saturation. Coir actually has less loft than sphagnum peat, and therefore, less aeration. Because of this propensity, coir should be used in mixes at lower %s than peat. Because of the tendency to compact, in the greenhouse industry coir is primarily used in containers in sub-irrigation (bottom-watering) situations. Many sources produce coir that is high in soluble salts, so this can also be an issue. Using coir as the primary component of container media virtually eliminates lime or dolomitic lime as a possible Ca source because of coir's high pH (6+). Gypsum should be used as a Ca source, which eliminates coir's low S content. All coir products are very high in K, very low in Ca, and have a potentially high Mn content, which can interfere with the uptake of Fe. Several studies have also shown that the significant presence of phenolic allelochemicals in fresh coir can be very problematic for a high % of plants, causing poor growth and reduced yields. I haven't tested coir thoroughly, but I have done some testing of CHCs (coconut husk chips) with some loose controls in place. After very thoroughly leaching and rinsing the chips, I made a 5:1:1 soil of pine bark:peat:perlite (which I know to be very productive) and a 5:1:1 mix of CHCs:peat:perlite. I planted 6 cuttings of snapdragon and 6 cuttings of Coleus (each from the same plant to help reduce genetic influences) in containers (same size/shape) of the different soils. I added dolomitic lime to the bark soil and gypsum to the CHC soil. After the cuttings struck, I eliminated all but the three strongest in each of the 4 containers. I watered each container with a weak solution of MG 12-4-8 with STEM added at each watering, and watered on an 'as needed basis', not on a schedule. The only difference in the fertilizer regimen was the fact that I included a small amount of MgSO4 (Epsom salts) to provide MG (the dolomitic lime in the bark soil contained the MG, while the gypsum (CaSO4) in the CHC soil did not. This difference was necessary because or the high pH of CHCs and coir.) for the CHC soil. The results were startling. In both cases, the cuttings grown in the CHC's exhibited < 1/2 the biomass at summers end as the plants in the bark mix. I just find it very difficult for a solid case to be made (besides "It works for me") for the use of coir or CHC's. They're more expensive and more difficult to use effectively. The fact that some believe peat is in short supply (no where near true, btw) is easily offset by the effect of the carbon footprint of coir in its trek to the US from Sri Lanka or other exotic locales. That's the view from here. YMMV Coir Study: https://sites.google.com/site/plantandsoildigest/usu-crop-physiology-laboratory/coconut-coir-studies Al

Nevermind I figured it out... This thread can be deleted if a Mod reads this. (I don't see any way for me to delete it myself)

Same to you, Xuan! ;) And thanks, Al, for the great soil mix! This morning, the overnight freeze had the fronds looking limp, but they sprang back by midday. Eventually, all of these fronds will yellow and die-back...just in time for next year's growth. I'm in the process of putting together one of these "barrels" with a Chainfern for my brother. Josh

Remember that I use the gritty mix and not the 5:1:1 mix for my houseplants. Also, I water almost everything on a 3 day rotation because I CAN, not necessarily because I have to. I'll explain. I have a few plants in containers so small they require watering every other day. Many of my plants can go much longer than 3 days between waterings, but to make things easier on me and to ensure nothing slips through the cracks, I water the rest on a 3 day rotation, whether the plants need it or not. THAT, is one of the benefits of using the gritty mix - it's so forgiving that you would really have to work at it to over-water. It's open poor structure due to large particle size ensures no, or VERY little, perched water ..... which is WHY it's so hard to over-water. FYI - in order to maximize water retention w/o a significant PWT, and in a perfect world, you would want porous and durable particles concentrated in the size range from slightly smaller than 1/8" to slightly larger than 1/4" or up to 3/8", with a small fraction of small particles to increase water retention additionally w/o adding any significant amount of perched water. A large disparity in particle size works against you. I compromise in this area all the time, using bark with the fines included and many chunky pieces larger than 3/8, but I keep a supply of bark that closest fits the profile I prefer on hand, and I'm always looking for 'the right stuff' when my supply starts to get low. I've found several brands and locations I can usually depend on to provide what I prefer, so keep your eyes peeled. I mentioned that because I think if you'd been lucky enough to find a bark product not so chunky, that there wouldn't be as much of an issue with toppling. Many of my plants are temporarily and mechanically secured to the pot by various methods. One reason is to prevent toppling because all of my plants are repotted in the summer when they're outdoors and in the wind. The other reason is plants secured against movement in relation to the pot establish anchorage in a fraction of the time required by unsecured plants. Bumping or jostling them, even turning them to water, can break large numbers of hair roots the plant needs for anchorage as well as taking up water and nutrients. In the end, I'd much rather see people approach the whole soil thing in a leisurely way instead of feeling pressured because of poor plants or new found information. There is no question in my mind that the more open soils offer plants MUCH greater opportunity to grow to their potential, but like you, we have to decide if they fit into our view of what's expected in terms of convenience. Keep fussing with your soils. I think you understand the concept, which is the important thing; if not, you're getting there fast, and it will always be a point of reference to help you diagnose any future problems you relate to your soils. I'll be glad to help whenever I can and as needed. Al