Saturday essay: And the rains came
Wrote historian James Boswell 250 years ago today, on July 6, 1763:
“Rain is good for vegetables, and for the animals who eat those vegetables, and for the animals who eat those animals.”
Perhaps. For that exercise in the food chain is predicated on actually having vegetables.
The rains have come. And they don't appear to have any design on leaving anytime soon. One forecasting model doesn't predict a sunny, warm and rain-free day in Western Pennsylvania until Friday next.
Yes, rain is good for vegetables, what with all that great nitrogen and such. But if these rains keep up, it will be nearly impossible to keep up with the early blight that the cool spring and never-ending cycle of rain and humid conditions hath wrought on the tomatoes and the potatoes and an eggplant near you.
All this good news (ahem) came just after adding a sixth raised bed to ease a serious overcrowding problem in the greenhouse. The eggplant had just been safely (ahem) transplanted into the new bed when the first word of the blight arrived with the updated soggy forecast.
The peppers now will stay put in the greenhouse, where the moisture can be better controlled. The lower leaves of the tomatoes will be removed with each new advancing sign of blight; mulch has been applied in hopes of subduing the spores. And the eggplant, now swaggering in its own space, will be monitored for the first signs of the fungus that it likely won't escape.
Here's to extended sunshine soon. Here's to rain, more measured, being good for vegetables once again. Here's to faith being restored in Mr. Boswell's words.
— Colin McNickle
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The Solyndra scandal: Government culpability
- Sunday pops
- Hogtying a terrorist: Heroes step up
- The Box
- Ford City facts: Blaming the messenger
- Saturday essay: Cusps of change
- Witnesses can help
- The markets: Easy money’s slap
- The Pa. pensions debate: Union hypocrisy
- President Carbon: Hypocrisy’s trip
- Elephants & the Pittsburgh Zoo: Who knows best?