Homestead mailing list

[Clansgian AT wmconnect.com]

The blocks give you something into which to anchor the trellises and hoops.  
There is also a psychological advantage to having sides to the beds as it 
sets 
a boundry with which to work.   Many years ago I had a garden (on a slight 
slope) of beds with wooden sides.  But many years of gardening since then has 
demonstrated that for practical purposes, sides are not necessary.   The dirt 
in 
a garden bed, especially if it is high in organic matter, does not in 
practice erode or scatter.  There are some beds in my garden 30" higher than 
the 
paths (potato beds) and even in the most ferocious rain and wind the dirt 
stays 
put.

Most of my garden beds are 4' wide with a 2' path between.  This is the 
general scheme but the beds and paths are alive and move about.  Some beds 
are now 
5' wide and some closer to 3'.  Paths ditto.  The paths serve as sort of in 
situ compost piles.  Weeds, trimmings, thinnings and all such go into the 
paths 
as does grass, hay, sawdust, and such.  After it has been trodden into the 
dirt for a year, it is finely rotted and black.  When beds are prepared, the 
paths are shoveled onto the beds so that while the beds are scarcely 8" to 
10" 
above the level of the ground, they are 15" to 20" above the level of the 
paths. 

Indeed there is a 'waste' area of slope between the path and useable bed 
surface, but it is no more than one has with an 8" wide block.  Small pants 
such 
as radishes and beets are planed on the slope (or bevel) all the way to the 
path.

I mention this only to bring up that there are many reasons to use sides for 
beds, not least among which is that the gardener just wants to.  But if the 
reason for going to the trouble and expense of sides is to prevent erosion 
and 
scatter, it is effort misdirected.  The beds won't erode at any rate.