An experiment in Hugelkulture in containers

[davidinsydney]

Herbie,

This all started when a poster asked if he could save soil costs by adding wood to the bottom of his container. One person answered that it wouldn't work because of drainage problems. I disagreed being familiar with the centuries old technique of Hugelkulture.

This is a test for me to determine the feasibility of using Hugelkulture in a container. The Hugelkulture technique saves a considerable amount of garden soil...as Chuck said about 66% less soil...while repurposing readily available materials.

I chose the control deliberately. I wanted to see first that it was or was not feasible and second compare it to a known entity...my garden soil. I have no interest at this time in other container methods, but you or anyone else is free to pursue those evaluations.

My criterion for success is at least 50% of the production in my garden and manageable other problems including drainage which I have already seen is a non problem.

It sounds like at the end of the day, when you strip away all the jargon and scientific methods, this is the primary purpose of your experiment, in which i am interested in.

I started my gardening journey through container gardening, and the biggest expense starting from scratch was potting mix and store bought compost. Sure, I have learnt how to make my own compost, but that is not readily and immediately available. Whereas access to large wooden branches are always available in my area. So I would definitely like see if i can save costs by putting branches in the bottom of containers.

To simplify things, if you yielded what you consider a good crop for your own personal standards, I would consider your experiment a success. At the end of the day, gardening is very personal journey, i’m sure the majority of us aren’t striving to have journal articles published!

Best of luck!

 

[Meadowlark]

It sounds like at the end of the day, when you strip away all the jargon and scientific methods, this is the primary purpose of your experiment, in which i am interested in.

I started my gardening journey through container gardening, and the biggest expense starting from scratch was potting mix and store bought compost. Sure, I have learnt how to make my own compost, but that is not readily and immediately available. Whereas access to large wooden branches are always available in my area. So I would definitely like see if i can save costs by putting branches in the bottom of containers.

To simplify things, if you yielded what you consider a good crop for your own personal standards, I would consider your experiment a success. At the end of the day, gardening is very personal journey, i’m sure the majority of us aren’t striving to have journal articles published!

Best of luck!

Well said, well said indeed. Thank you for your comments.

 

[Chuck]

I am interested in this experiment because I am getting old (74+). I had to give up my big garden so I appropriated my wife's flower garden which is much smaller. Now I am finding even this small garden is beginning to be difficult so I have started to garden in large containers. As anyone knows who actually gardens, a 10 gallon container of soil is heavy so I would like to find out about something not quite so strenuous and using 2/3 less of heavy soil might be the answer, especially when I have to move these containers around. I have zero, zip, nada interest in finding out about the growth of plants in a container full of heavy soil nor how much they would or would not produce. If I did I would just keep gardening as long as I could in the ground and then either fall over dead or just quit gardening. All I or @Meadowlark want to find out is if it is possible or feasible to use a technique that uses less heavy soil and still maintain a modicum of production that our inground plants produced. This Hugelkulture technique is interesting because of the slight weight of rotten wood. This rotten wood will soon turn into compost. So, in effect, this will in time lead to planting in just about pure compost mixed with a little soil. And this is all good for an old man with bad knees and back. Perhaps it is not so good for academics who seem to require documentation and reams of data to know if something works or not.

 

[Meadowlark]

The containers I'm using are old, discarded cattle protein tubs (I have 30 to 40 of them).

When filled with dirt or cattle protein, they weigh well in excess of 200 hundred pounds.... young or old not something you want to pick up and carry.

Note in the pictures, my tubs were moved fully configured into the garden by me carrying them without assistance when configured per Hugelkulture.

 

[skinyea]

approximately how much did the container weigh and how big is it?

some do this in the ground also correct?

 

[Meadowlark]

Good questions.

1) Weight originally just over 200 pounds when filled with cattle protein.

2) Estimated weight configured Hugelkulture style app 55 pounds. I left the top 7 inches or so of the tub unfilled to provide some wind protection for my very young plants.

3) Estimated volume app 20 gallons.

Yes, this has been done successfully for centuries in the ground largely in Europe, I'm told. Some historians speculated that early people recognized plants growing faster and larger on decaying wood that had soil on it... but I make no claims about being a historian...just a very curious engineer .

The way I was first exposed to the technique was on one of those TV reality shows about homesteading. It was incredibly successful or so they claimed and demonstrated...but reality shows can be very misleading, LOL.

Again, good questions.

 

[skinyea]

Good questions.

1) Weight originally just over 200 pounds when filled with cattle protein.

2) Estimated weight configured Hugelkulture style app 55 pounds. I left the top 7 inches or so of the tub unfilled to provide some wind protection for my very young plants.

3) Estimated volume app 20 gallons.

Yes, this has been done successfully for centuries in the ground largely in Europe, I'm told. Some historians speculated that early people recognized plants growing faster and larger on decaying wood that had soil on it... but I make no claims about being a historian...just a very curious engineer .

The way I was first exposed to the technique was on one of those TV reality shows about homesteading. It was incredibly successful or so they claimed and demonstrated...but reality shows can be very misleading, LOL.

Again, good questions.

my neighbor who is from Scotland did this in containers and in 3 raised beds. he is older than me (77) and swears by it. his containers are for Tomato, Peppers and Okra. is garden is sweet corn, potato's and tomato.

he did say beets, carrots and parsnips dont do as well with this method. but potatoes do? kinda strange

he basically said stack the wood and woodchips like you would a basic camp fire, throw soil down and then cheap top soil.

he has had his raised beds for over 20 years and has added soil 3 times.

I will try this in 3 of my raised beds.

thank you for sharing this

 

[Meadowlark]

Your neighbor is my age, and it sounds like he is an excellent gardener. I found that information about what plants work well and what doesn't very useful...in fact I have been wondering about that very thing and thinking about what plants to try next.

Thanks for that much appreciated info and I'm more encouraged now than when I started this experiment.

 

[Marck]

To simplify things, if you yielded what you consider a good crop for your own personal standards, I would consider your experiment a success. At the end of the day, gardening is very personal journey, i’m sure the majority of us aren’t striving to have journal articles published!

I have to be careful I don't hurt myself face-palming when I read this thread.

This is not about publishing a scientific paper, but it is about exercising rational thought.

At the end of this, nobody will not know whether the treatment had any effect and whether the effect was beneficial or not.

Comparing an in-ground planting to a container planting is already apples and oranges. There is a large number of variables there involving aspects of soil chemistry, drainage, water retention, root volume, etc. How will know what caused any potential difference in yield? You won't but you can magically say that you do.

Even if we just look at the the containers with pieces of wood in it... Lets say 30 tomatoes are harvested. How many tomatoes would have been harvested without those much-hyped pieces of wood 20?, 30?, 40? Don't know. Won't know.
...but will the posters on this thread be satisfied saying that they don't have any data about the effects of 'hugelkultur pieces of wood in containers' ...one can only hope.

...and that is totally separate about how one feels about getting 30 tomatoes or whether you "consider (it) a good crop for your own personal standards".

I'm not even talking about factors like randomization and sample size because I do know this a small, informal 'experiment', but in truth, those things are important if one want to have any confidence in results.

Never mind publishing, just focus on reading about scientific claims in the popular press (or these Forums).
To od so with comprehension, it is still invaluable to understand something about experimental design and statistics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_experiments

 

[skinyea]

Your neighbor is my age, and it sounds like he is an excellent gardener. I found that information about what plants work well and what doesn't very useful...in fact I have been wondering about that very thing and thinking about what plants to try next.

Thanks for that much appreciated info and I'm more encouraged now than when I started this experiment.

actually thank you. you have taught me more about growing veggies than anyone else.

Because of your knowledge and Chucks, I have been able to basically not buy veggies from a store in 4 years. (other than onions)

 

[skinyea]

I have to be careful I don't hurt myself face-palming when I read this thread.

This is not about publishing a scientific paper, but it is about exercising rational thought.

At the end of this, nobody will not know whether the treatment had any effect and whether the effect wegarding growing.as beneficial or not.

Comparing an in-ground planting to a container planting is already apples and oranges. There is a large number of variables there involving aspects of soil chemistry, drainage, water retention, root volume, etc. How will know what caused any potential difference in yield? You won't but you can magically say that you do.

Even if we just look at the the containers with pieces of wood in it... Lets say 30 tomatoes are harvested. How many tomatoes would have been harvested without those much-hyped pieces of wood 20?, 30?, 40? Don't know. Won't know.
...but will the posters on this thread be satisfied saying that they don't have any data about the effects of 'hugelkultur pieces of wood in containers' ...one can only hope.

...and that is totally separate about how one feels about getting 30 tomatoes or whether you "consider (it) a good crop for your own personal standards".

I'm not even talking about factors like randomization and sample size because I do know this a small, informal 'experiment', but in truth, those things are important if one want to have any confidence in results.

Never mind publishing, just focus on reading about scientific claims in the popular press (or these Forums).
To od so with comprehension, it is still invaluable to understand something about experimental design and statistics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_experiments

you seem extremely knowledgeable regarding growing.

what do you say regarding people that have done this for 20-30 years that are successful at it?

 

[Marck]

Whatever successes or failures occur with gardening, or anything else, try to understand for yourself why they occurred.
Don't just take somebody's word for it.

 

[skinyea]

Whatever successes or failures occur with gardening, or anything else, try to understand for yourself why they occurred.
Don't just take somebody's word for it.

agree 100%. what do you say for people that have been successful at this for decades?

 

[Marck]

Success is relative. By any measurable criterion one can be considered more or less successful than someone else.
...but there is always rom for improvement.

Learning from failures can lead to success, but conditions can change and former successes can lead to failure.

Even more fundamentally, Success is subjective. Success is an opinion, not a fact.
...and regardless of whether you or anyone consider someone successful, that person can still be objectively wrong about something.

 

[skinyea]

Success is relative. By any measurable criterion one can be considered more or less successful than someone else.
...but there is always rom for improvement.

Learning from failures can lead to success, but conditions can change and former successes can lead to failure.

Even more fundamentally, Success is subjective. Success is an opinion, not a fact.
...and regardless of whether you or anyone consider someone successful, that person can still be objectively wrong about something.

Man that is rather deep.

I am going to try it