TOPIC: Planting Seed Observation

Hey, I made an observation this past weekend. I noticed the seed at the bottom 1/3 of a slope/hill germinates better and continues to grow better over the years than the seed planted up higher on the other 2/3 of the slope. I have seen this in many of my planting beds.

It is not a mild difference, it is a remarkable difference. I could be wrong but I think the planting at the lower 1/3 of the planting beds on the lower end of the slope gets more rain running down to it from the middle and the top of the hill. Thus a bit more moisture to help the seeds and plants grow. Secondly the lower 1/3 is closer to the ravines creek bed and a bit cooler.

Just a tip I though I might mention for anyone interested.
Latt

Lower slopes tend to retain moisture longer than mid and upper slopes. They also tend to stay shaded longer.

Sounds like you have figured out which areas to concentrate your planting on in the future!

I've noticed the same thing Latt. I think your reasoning is also very sound.

Latt...

Agree with your observations...

When hunting seng around here, on most hillsides the majority of the seng will be found on the lower 1/3 of the hillside. We often find it in the hollow bottom too, depending on the hollow and soil type.

That is also the part that seng hunters naturally focus on most.

BUT... it will grow up higher on the hill so when you do the extra effort to get up higher and hunt that Zone you often find some real nice ones up there because well.. just not a lot of hunters go up there and look.

The same is true as you go up a hollow at times. Myself I like to go way on up to the very head of the hollow if I find seng down lower, because you often find ole granddady up there.

Now I have seen hillsides (usually facing due north) that will have lots of seng growing up higher on the hill.
That is more important down here in the south than up more north.

TNhunter

I think all above comments are correct... and I'd like to add something.

I have done serial soil analyses on my mountain patch, and found some interesting collaberative results to the above statements.

I have found that soil in the middle of the slope of the hillsides is poorer in nutrients than the top and the bottom of the same slope. I've proved it without doubt by the serial analysis I've had done on my areas. For example, in my areas, I've found that key values such as pH -as well as Ca- and several other micronutrients have values that are numerically less ----in the middle of the slope.

I'm sending soil from Patch Two out today, and I expect the same results... with some mild varriances or course.

I'm guessing that bigtime gullywasher rains wash nutrients from the top, pick up the middle area nutrients on the way down; and come to rest on the bottom of the slopes. Now if you combine that with the observations of shade, and moisture... hmmm....

Just my 2 cents worth....

Latt

better quality soil also.

Guy