So another question is does peat free hold onto water as well, if not that could be bad for our water supply, especially in regions where drought restrictions mean less watering allowed.🤔 The pros and cons seem to indicate much more research needs to be done.
My point exactly . Those who , sometimes smugly , suggest that peat free is the way to go seem to conveniently the downsides of peat free compost.
But is any of that a reason NOT to make the switch? One course of action contributes to the destruction of something that cannot be restored. The other is surely a certain amount of trial and error but is at least not the first course of action that is at this point the certainty?
It's true I don't get quite the same sense of satisfaction putting something that looks a bit like coffee grounds and sawdust in my pots as something lovely and black and crumbly like Jacks Magic but is it not just about trying to pick the lesser evil at this point rather than doing nothing and finding reasons to justify it?
I would and will change if and when it's ability to support plants as well as the present 50/50 compost available today is possible. It also has to be cost worthy as suppliers as well as growers are reluctant to increase its cost. I myself could not afford the increase in costs to produce what I now do.
So another question is does peat free hold onto water as well, if not that could be bad for our water supply, especially in regions where drought restrictions mean less watering allowed.🤔 The pros and cons seem to indicate much more research needs to be done.
My point exactly . Those who , sometimes smugly , suggest that peat free is the way to go seem to conveniently the downsides of peat free compost.
The programme clearly explores the downsides - but it's being banned completely by 2030. So it's the way we are clearly going.
The same kind of arguments were levelled around phasing out DDT, leaded petrol, CFCs, smoking in public places; bringing in seatbelt use, renewable energy or labelled food packaging. It's the same manner of kick back as against reducing flying, meat consumption and reducing packaging. There were and are downsides to all these things but the price is usually judged to be worth paying. I don't the GW is standing on a soap box; this is a current and important issue for the sector. I don't think it's smug to commit to making changes. If we need to make changes then we make changes, so that the future can be safer for all.
There are several threads on a similar theme so it's good that we are debating it. Here's my two pennyworth. I am trying to go peat free but good products are not always easy to get. Even products that I have used before, seem to be much more coarse and fibrous this year. I suspect the suppliers are struggling to keep up. Peat bogs can be restored but it takes decades. There is a supply of peat which is filtered out from the water supply industry, but it is very limited and expensive. I think we have all been using these products too freely. When I think back my father almost always sowed direct in the ground or in a seed bed in a sheltered spot and transplanted. (I am talking about veg growing here). I am experimenting with re using compost from spent pots. Whatever we use we all need to be much more careful about how much we are using.
The use of peat in horticulture is a relatively recent phenomenon starting around the 1960's. All those historic names we know from the Victorian era managed perfectly well without it. We can do so again.
Globally there is no shortage of peat but it doesn't make any environmental sense to export it round the world. The UK has overused its peatbogs although horticultural use is a relatively minor part of the problem. But every step counts and we can all play a small part.
The use of peat in horticulture is a relatively recent phenomenon starting around the 1960's. All those historic names we know from the Victorian era managed perfectly well without it. We can do so again.
.
The reason we started using peat was due to the outcry about the depletion of the Surrey loam beds. Should we go back to depleting those, ? "All those historic names we know from the Victorian era" had huge gardening budgets and armies of staff.
It's not either / or! I think that Steephill's point is that just because we're used to something doesn't mean it's the only option, nor that it was ever thus. We can learn and develop, if we're so minded. Or we can be stuck in our ways whatever the evidence of harm.
'If you have a garden and a library, you have everything you need.'
I'm more than happy to change, but only for a product that is at least as good and at a similar price. What we have on offer now is overpriced rubbish. We're being taken as mugs, or used as guinea pigs until they get it right, or both.
I suspect the guinea pig option - but only because things can take time to get right and the need to stop using peat is so urgent as to mean there's a lag.
Of course, they *could* have put more effort in to development before now, but there wasn't the demand because of ignorance, government inaction and gardening programmes / organisations taking a softly-softly, 'we mustn't be seen as lecturing' stance - fat lot of good that did - and so suppliers could get away with lazy status quo-ing. Thank goodness it's finally up the agenda and they're being forced to pull their fingers out at last.
In the meantime, while variable, peat-free compost is generally fine in my experience and that of plenty of others, including respected nurseries and growers. So there's no need for too much angst while the big suppliers grow a backbone.
'If you have a garden and a library, you have everything you need.'
Posts
It's true I don't get quite the same sense of satisfaction putting something that looks a bit like coffee grounds and sawdust in my pots as something lovely and black and crumbly like Jacks Magic but is it not just about trying to pick the lesser evil at this point rather than doing nothing and finding reasons to justify it?
Here's my two pennyworth. I am trying to go peat free but good products are not always easy to get. Even products that I have used before, seem to be much more coarse and fibrous this year. I suspect the suppliers are struggling to keep up. Peat bogs can be restored but it takes decades. There is a supply of peat which is filtered out from the water supply industry, but it is very limited and expensive. I think we have all been using these products too freely. When I think back my father almost always sowed direct in the ground or in a seed bed in a sheltered spot and transplanted. (I am talking about veg growing here). I am experimenting with re using compost from spent pots. Whatever we use we all need to be much more careful about how much we are using.
Should we go back to depleting those, ?
"All those historic names we know from the Victorian era" had huge gardening budgets and armies of staff.
What we have on offer now is overpriced rubbish.
We're being taken as mugs, or used as guinea pigs until they get it right, or both.
Of course, they *could* have put more effort in to development before now, but there wasn't the demand because of ignorance, government inaction and gardening programmes / organisations taking a softly-softly, 'we mustn't be seen as lecturing' stance - fat lot of good that did - and so suppliers could get away with lazy status quo-ing. Thank goodness it's finally up the agenda and they're being forced to pull their fingers out at last.
In the meantime, while variable, peat-free compost is generally fine in my experience and that of plenty of others, including respected nurseries and growers. So there's no need for too much angst while the big suppliers grow a backbone.