The selling point for rocks as groundcover, I imagine, is that it is a one-time application. If not, at least they are accessible to remove. When weeds grow in mulch, they are just more plant material growing in the mulch and may be a welcome addition. Mulch lowers soil temperatures, and as for leaves falling on mulch- that is just more mulch! Leaves are nature's mulch and increase soil fertility, feeding the plants around them as they decompose. Rock garden plants are known as those that are able to tolerate high soil temperatures and low soil fertility, and this illustrates the point that rocks are a stressor for most plants. In each case above, including the example showing good design, a more pleasing, natural, horticulturally sound and maintenance-free choice would have been mulch (wood chips, shredded wood or simply leaves). When weeds grow between them, they must be laboriously removed. When leaves fall on them, they have to be removed somehow. ![]() ![]() Rocks are inorganic, they raise soil temperature instead of lower it, they look desert-like and uninviting, they are hard to walk on, look unnatural as a groundcover, and are not at all free of maintenance, as claimed by the individuals who sell them at considerable cost. Of all the clients I have seen who already had such installations, not a single one has liked the look or function of it once they had it. Here are some examples of rocks being used as groundcover, and it's not good.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |