Edzard, could we start with how the forum defines "maintenance"?

Then please post, "maintenance vs development", to draw in the continued garden and plant development.

Then, perhaps pose a question on the level of skill and research before making changes in style and/or direction of gardens "I can do routine maintenance on my garden, but what about long term training/development?

Just a suggestion, but I think it would initiate several directions of creative dialog with good direction, so desu ne?

:),...
sure.. I was trying not to put words in anyones mouth by leaving it as wide open as possible to any definitions.
How then, is maintenance defined?
edzard

At its base level 'maintenance' could be likened to janitorial work where the object is to keep things looking tidy; weeding, grass cutting and leaf clearing would be examples. The base level of this base level is 'mo, blo and go' which is the work of unskilled labour and works best where the plants are basic too. When the need for specialised pruning arises or some other complication that requires horticultural knowledge and skill these are not tasks that can be trusted to unskilled labour and the problem of who does this work comes up. These are not the same problems for someone who does the work themselves who will normally study the subject to get the job done right.
A garden that is designed for sustainabilty introduces another element of maintenance so that the two work together and plants are allowed to mature to their intended shape and size.
A Japanese garden has very specific maintenance needs, such as allowing moss to grow on rocks for instance which could be spoiled if tidyness was the gardeners aim. Tree shaping is another obvious difference and this would come under the heading of development as this shaping happens over time. On a philosophical level, at its best working in a Japanese garden can inspire a form of contemplation so that tasks are performed attentively.

if I then understand this correctly, maintenance of normal gardens is 'mo, blo and go' which does not include pruning.
--Development is anything that includes 'changes' to the garden??

However, in my recent experience, when a specialty garden is involved, the MBG maintenance person contracted only to 'cleanup' suddenly feels the need to leave a their spoor behind and pruning becomes a matter of that expression.

Whereas, you are suggesting that the MBG person should not be undertaking cleanup pruning.
Is there a middle ground of what is expected of the maintenance person that is contracted to 'maintain and cleanup'?

Does the crux perhaps lie here? "A garden that is designed for sustainabilty introduces another element of maintenance so that the two work together and plants are allowed to mature to their intended shape and size."
--that if the MBG person is a believer in sustainability, then all things should be maintained (enabled) to maximum growth?
(this directive of "sustainability = maintained to maximum growth" perhaps becomes a flaw, since sustainability, if understood correctly does not always mean 'maximum growth', ie: pollarding for charcoal is done for sustainability, yet given the circumstances may be part of maintenance.

Is maintaining also, 'doing what was done last year'? ie: being told to maintain the garden, would one take on the role of copying what was done last year? (which could annihilate a Japanese garden, as pine perhaps where the layers are being shifted in growth prominence from say apex to mesotonic section,.. if the same actions are followed as last year, then the untouched layer will develop so much more dominance, quite possibly setting back the pruned portions for 3 to 4 years)

--Jgarden.org has a heading for 'Maintainers', are these people MBG persons?

if you are a 'garden maintainer', what does the job specifications that are given to the client look like?
[I/we, will cleanup leaves, perform perennial deadheading, etc. etc. so that the garden is perpared for spring growth, adding mulch or frost cover where needed...]

Is the industry standard different for different types of gardens?
-or is this a question for the Landscape Forum?
thanks
edzard

I think you misinterpreted my "allowed to mature to their intended shape and size." that is, that intended by the designer, to mean
"that if the MBG person is a believer in sustainability, then all things should be maintained (enabled) to maximum growth?"

ah,.. I see the difference. thanks... e

Inkognito, here is my adopted quote for the year: On a philosophical level, at its best, working in a Japanese garden can inspire a form of contemplation so that tasks are performed attentively.

Edzard, no "normal gardens" here. Mo, blo, go or chop-n-drop have no work in a Japanese style garden. Even mundane maintenance would not be prudent performed by most lawn services. If there is no understanding of the landscape, how can any decisions be made?

I witnessed a seasoned expert direct the planting of a tree over a small water feature and would have been in total agreement if I hadn't been familiar with the garden's original purpose and design. The tree was removed.

I confidently removed a strangely positioned and unnaturally sized pine branch from a tree next to a pond, only to discover the vision of the trainer a day later that would have been dynamic and beautiful. Yes, the normal lawn maintenance person might feel the need to show their superiority to the customer by sauntering up to a tree and removing the strangely hanging branch or limbing up the specimens interfering with the lawn equipment. They would not know what they had done!

So then, have many in the forum had experience in finding a local resource in maintenance of their gardens? - on what level? to what success?

So you think working as an uekiya has something to do with contemplation? Wow, that would be pretty humourous to most of the men working around here! It's hard work.

But then again, laying bricks might be a contemplative activity to someone. Or slicing fish. Or driving a Keikyu bus...

I agree Bill, all of the tasks you mention could be done in an attentive fashion and would be more enjoyable for it which goes to show that hard work and contemplation are not mutually exclusive. But " AT ITS BEST, working in a Japanese garden can INSPIRE a form of contemplation so that tasks are performed attentively." which may not be true of driving a bus.

But " AT ITS BEST, working in a Japanese garden can INSPIRE a form of contemplation so that tasks are performed attentively." which may not be true of driving a bus.

Seems to me that the inspiration received is strongly dependent on the intentions of the receiver -- in this case a laborer. And to me, it's the same for the moblogo guy as for the bus driver. While the job focus is to simply "get 'er done", the bus driver can choose to push the gas pedal, the brake pedal and the clutch, and call it a day, or he can create a smoother, more cheerful, enjoyable ride by how willing he is to bring a certain attitude and attentiveness to the workplace. Same for the gardener. Is he just there to perform a task, or is he open to notice growth and change in relationship and perspective of the living things planted in the garden, and know whether and/or how to respond?

Bringing that extra attention to the workplace requires understanding the purpose, the philosophy, the inter-relationships of the elements and the consequences of change so that decisions can be made that are true to that purpose, philosophy and elemental design. The garden has no intentions of its own in terms of contemplative value, and left to its own devices will grow until the original design is unrecognizable. So I think I see ALL maintenance as development, with the net effect depending on the heart and mind of the person performing the work.

How's that for waxing purely philosophical? ;)

Susan

We spend most of our lives (at least the best years?) at our chosen occupation. It would be a waste if we did not do our best and enjoy doing it.

"Whatever your hands find to do, you must do with all your heart."

I must admit that yesterday, I was chastized for enjoying my work a bit too much. I was put to lining up the bamboo waddle in the layers of a Katsura style bamboo fence. After I saw what a difference it made, I really started putting concentration into it. Evidently I was moving at about 1/5 the required speed : (

I was told as youngster to move with "speed and alacrity" and I tried. Years later I looked up "alacrity".
In a way I think what you are experiencing Don is at the bottom of edzards enquiry, for; how do you do the job well and at a commercially viable speed? If you sacrifice all for speed then surely you will not work well and the opposite is also true. Then there is the question of which/what a client would pay for, remembering, of course that this is 2005.

My slowness with the fencing was excused as it was my first time to attempt this procedure. I can only get faster. Like plucking pine needles, if you don't start out slow, you could destroy the future of the tree. Eventually you will get faster without sacrificing accuracy.

As a value, this speed born from experience is worth more as more work can be done in a shorter time. A person apprenticing in a particular skill would usually be paid less.

This apprentice stage perhaps should be considered the lowest level of maintenance skill that should be allowed in a Japanese garden. Perhaps this is the level at which the dedicated DIY begins - slowly learning, developing, hungry for information and opportunity. This leads to experience. Experience leads to speed and accuracy. With luck and opportunity, it hopefully leads to understanding.

And then it's buck rub season and all human expectation and love/lust is undone and layed to waste in a few nocturnal wrestling matches. The ultimate frustration.

There must be great satisfaction and risk in an endeavor that transcends months and years and success is measured after decades. My hat is off to you guys and gals and I envy you. Aerospace is much more immediate and frantic.

"So I think I see ALL maintenance as development, with the net effect depending on the heart and mind of the person performing the work." susan

Perhaps here lies the real problem?
If a company is trying to be a Wall Street exchange corporation with the objective of making money for its shareholders then the objective of the garden would be to to do the minimum for the most financial return. (essentially the objective of any business)

I do recollect the lives of gardeners (rather hard life at times), in which the objective of the gardener was to provide the most enjoyable living area for a client for which he was compensated weekly or monthly, most often at a set level - which became his 'lifestyle'.
Whereas, a contract to 'maintain' is created with an individual or company, then the company hires the least qualified people it can find, (hardly an apprenticeship position) based on what the minimum it is that they can pay them to fullfill a set written measurable amount of work.

The gardener, did not have a contract that had a minimum, but did and was expected to do what was needed, rather than performing only specified tasks.

point being: maintaining, keeping the same, is done by written description, whereas the development may be an 'unknown' or unidentifyable issue, that may not be describable.
Therefore is development just something that happens along the way while a written 'maintenance' is fulfilled? And if someone who had the interest/knowledge happened to develop something, then this was a boon.

thanks,
edzard

Edzard, can living, growing, self-changing things be "kept the same?" The Rheingold arborvitae in front of our local post office have been "maintained" at 18" tall and 24" wide for at least 15 years now. They are at the point where every single tuffet in the row has big gaping spots where it was shorn back into old wood. Yes, it has kept them at the prescribed size, but there is certainly nothing positive to be gained by viewing them.

Ideally, "development" would be planned. Obviously, because Ma Nature can throw a mean curve, the plan can't be set in concrete, but one would hope that there is at least a general view to the future. Today, though, most people don't think beyond the static original plan, and that applies to plenty of things besides gardens. So yes, it does seem to me that unless a garden owner understands future growth and change, and specifically seeks out a "gardener" who understands continuing development, then whatever comes out of the "maintenance guy" is a crap shoot.

Then, are we saying that the best way forward would be to educate the consumer rather than the maintenance people?
edzard

Always! An educated consumer creates a demand that the maintenance supplier must step up to in order to remain profitable.

This is all a lot easier to say than to do, though, isn't it? ;)

however,... -now- most of our consumers want something better (more specific than random cutting 'for health'), just can not find it, because it is not available.
However, it was only through the arborists repeating that topping would kill/damage trees that the consumers finally asked for something else. Industry driven rather than consumer driven. And consumers still want trees topped.

Even when consumers know better, in the vacuum of technical availability, they begin to give up, which is a usual thing, -- and the lowest activity required always wins out.

had a conversation today about landscape standards, how to improve etc., and because they need to be written, quantified for testing of applicants, they will always be low so that they are achieveable by the lowest general applicant...

-and that 'standards' are mostly hardscape, brickwork etc. -something easily time/standard measureable, which is product driven rather than consumer driven. ie: the paving person -> consumer has a selection of brick (patterns, NB) made available to them which is limited by what the manufacturer provides, and, based on the pavers preference, the consumer gets to choose from his favourites...

--pattern NB, which then establishes the pattern for our paving areas.

Now this pattern may cause anxiety due to the pattern repetitions, color, angle it is installed in, the way light reflects upon it, and so on.. and many people have come to 'not like that pattern' of brickwork, never identifying why they don't like, and, have not alternative for an area, except asphalt or gravel ... I'd have to observe that if consumers wanted to lower their blood pressure, they'd be asking for this, but industry reigns...

by contrast, the Japanese gardener interviews the client, determines a pattern that would be (ie) soothing, determines the angle of visual incidence for maximizing opportunities, (example, mixing large stones, euro pavers with smaller patterns creates a more soothing environment (reducing heartbeat/blood pressure) than does the old Holland, Keystone bricks...

and the only very slow response on the suppliers part has been to produce the tumbled Euro stone,
-comparatively again, the Jgardener mixes the natural stones with the manufactured stone to fine tune the 'human response' to it...

therefore, our producers drive the market completely, and the Japanese gardeners are bucking the system, whereas the consumers fall prey to the 'low achiever/ high turnover - $$ in pocket' landscapers, because they 'don't have to think about it', or they don't want to 'be too different', never having seen the options available.

compare again, in many cases, for about the same money, walkways etc. it will cost less to put in a Japanese pattern of walkway than brick pavers. The converse is also true, depending on the application.

At the end of the day, dear sus, I'd have to say that trying to educate the pre-conditioned consumer is a waste of time, whereas making more product available and educating installers, may have a hope...
I wonder often if maintenance and development is the same thing, finding that consumers don't want to understand development, because they will have to think about it.. to develop into what???
ooops, can't you just maintain it??? I don't want to think about it.

this would indicate the gardener should just 'maintain' and develop as he goes, which would indicate industry education is in priority to consumer education..
--which means it won't ever be successful, because there is no 'need' for it, because, both parties, would have to 'think about it' which they don't want to.
(ie: "hey, ya know they don't pay me enough to think...")

? thoughts, suggestions ?
edzard

Perhaps this is the eternal dilemma when trying to commercialize art and/or philosophy? Either that, or "if you want it done right, ya gotta do it yourself!"

;)

I dont know in which context the questions are put, so I just give my own simple opinion here. Maintaining a garden or a bonsai is a strange kind of thing. In one case, we want the garden to change (grow); in the other case we want them to be unchanged because we already like them very much. If you use merely mature trees during the making of the garden, than you fall in the latest category. Most of the gardens uses young plants that must grow in order to be given the label "finished garden design". In this case, maintaining a garden means designing it as well. Â. I still donÂt know what you want with this question.

I have yet to find a static plant, so maintenance invariably necessitates directing the plant (pruning, by its nature is creative; how many nodes do I cut? Leave? If I leave an upwardly faced node, the branch goes up. The bud faces down and so goes the branch). So sweeping and raking are maintenance, but as soon as I pick up pruners it's creative?

Awfully muddy water you've charted our course through, Edzard... :)

I don't think there is anything special I want from this conversation, except to feel or find the pulse of public thoughts.
In Japan the garden comes ready made. Large trees are readily available, with shrubs, stone, and moss. The garden is finished on the day of completion. After that comes maintaining the same size, shape, and 'tenor' the gardener envisioned...

In N. America, the issues are different. There are no finished pre-shaped trees, or shrubs, or crates of mosses, which then requires that the garden grows in.
In this process, should the maintenance people be educated to the level of development, understanding the gardens objective??

-in my work I have numerous examples, one which is an arc of small spruce, placed 4 feet apart, in the center of this is a 7 trunked cryptomeria, with singular stonework that does not relate to any other place in the garden.
--problem: the maintainers have been treating each tree as an individual tree and applying 'black pine' techniques to each spruce individually,.. instead of having taken the 'arc' and connecting the dots to make a hedge as the footprint and planting distance indicated.
And treating the 7 trunked tree separate, with a homogenous background.

now, my job is to back up 13 years of maintenance pruning and create a hedge. This will take another 7 or 8 years, and so the garden is not even developed for these years, except, the maintenance crew that comes in, still believes they are right in treating every tree separately...
which boils down to education of the trade, since they think they are following Jpn. garden procedures that every tree planted should be unique to itself.

In Jpn gardens the 'maintenance' knowledge, skills are normally at the point in the learning cycle, after you have designed and feel few challenges, and after stone setting is done in your sleep... perhaps after a decade of experience, one is just barely becoming knowledgeable enough to maintain a garden, because, it involves the longterm development of that garden, ie: thinking 30 to 70 years ahead.

if, you lift those pruners.
and
-- are there maintainers out there that are qualified?
-- are there places where maintainers go for education?
or is maintaining just mo-blo-an'go' and that is where it should stay, with a separate development 'crew' or functioning gardeners?
-where do 'development gardeners' get their education? (etc.)
edzard