From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Farming- a bunch of catastrophies that result in a lifestyle

Hi. I have enough room to do either 8 plants at 400 square feet each, or 6 plants at 800 square feet.
We briefly touched on this in chat the other day and it got me thinking. Is there a limit to how wide a plant can be?
We were discussing my patch, which is a rectangle 120' long x 40' wide. It is sloped, so there is 'high side' and a 'low side'. Initially I was planning to do 8 plants, 4 along each long axis making them 20' wide x 20' long for each plant, ie: 400 square feet. That puts 200 square in front of the kin, and 200 square after the kin.
Sue got me thinking about doing 6 total, 3 on each long axis. This way would be 40' wide x 20' long for each plant, ie 800 square total for each plant. 400 square behind kin, 400 square in front.
My thinking is that (based on how my plants have acted in the past) the plant puts out tremendous material until it sets the kin, then actual plant growth slows way down, which is what we want.
So how wide is too wide? Any thoughts on this?

10/28/2014 8:28:17 AM

Nottingham, UK

I often wondered this but I guess I am limited by my growing environment which is often too cool for rapid plant growth.
This means my plants are not as big as they need to be come pollination time and then as you mentioned, the plant soon halts growth once it kicks in. Therefore my plants are usually 300 sq ft in size. I'd love them to be bigger and think I can only do this by changing the environment.

Could you do a split, say two of each seed and grow three 40' wide and three 20' wide.

I know Ian Paton mentioned in his diary that he would like his patch to be wider but I am not sure what his current width is.

10/28/2014 11:35:19 AM

Waterville, Ohio

LB, I'd say any sides over 20' are way to long with the ideal range anywhere from 12-15'. To achieve the largest plant necessary for fruit production, vines need to be prunned to allow the others to gain steam.
At least in my experience, it seems like a constant struggle getting length out of those last secondaries from the fruit before pollination time.

10/28/2014 12:33:53 PM

Colorado

LB you might consider the 800 square ft. Grow from a corner on the diagonal. Short side vines at the back,spider pattern(long side vines) just before the fruit and Short side vies after the fruit.I think 30 wide is ideal but not totally essential.

10/28/2014 1:07:33 PM

JACKSON, WISCONSIN. ; )

I would shrink patch.. 30 x 120 ... Run 4 plants grow bigger pumpkins with less plants to tend to... Make them 30 x 30 add some walk ways run stumps 6 ft apart ... Grow field pumpkins in the 10 x 120 area... Or mix it up.. Some field kins.. Tomatoes... Maybe even a squash for good measure

10/28/2014 3:04:02 PM

JACKSON, WISCONSIN. ; )

Or make it another 10 ft wider and grow 25 x 30 with 8 plants

10/28/2014 3:05:39 PM

Marshfield, Ma, USA

Larger plants will get you bigger pumpkins.Just my opinion.When the AGGC website was running, square footage of each plant was one of the statistic available. The majority of larger pumpkins were grown on plants of at least 600, and often 800 sf or more. Mine average around
750.

10/28/2014 5:23:00 PM

East Jordan, MI

My two cents...the optimal size. 25x30 or 30x30. (WxL).

I agree that pruning of earlier sides push the later sides to grow faster (and that is where you need the plant to push the fruit -- sides closest to the fruit) and also that smaller plant beget smaller pumpkins...

I will also suggest that 8 plants is sheer insanity and that you will most likely take shortcuts on all of them trying to keep up, or favor one and let several just be mediocre. We did 6 in 2013 (and lost one mid season)...never again.

3-4 is perfect for someone with a full time job, and you can still get everything done without sacrificing lbs at the end.

10/28/2014 6:29:35 PM

Anamosa, IA BPIowegian@aol.com

I agree with the fewer. larger plants idea. I'm retired and had my 22 yr old son home from college doing the heavy chores. We tried growing 9 AG's 5 long gourds, Indian corn, field pumpkins, tomatoes and watermelons. It was way too much. The flood did me a favor by thinning out the patch. Next year I'm cutting way back. And common sense tells you that more leaves = more photosynthesis and more roots = more water and nutrient upkeep.

10/28/2014 7:53:07 PM

Farming- a bunch of catastrophies that result in a lifestyle

Thanks for all the ideas and input. While 8 seems like a lot to some, it is a reduction in number for me as I grew 11 this year, all on 250 square feet per plant. I kept up and had my best year ever, almost tripling my personal best. While my weights are nothing compared to others, I am happy as hell to have gotten so close to 1,000 pounds in my second year. I am hopeful for next year!!

10/29/2014 7:40:31 AM

East Jordan, MI

11? WOW, you must be like the energizer bunny....lol

Well keep up the good work and keep it fun.

10/29/2014 7:48:31 AM

Farming- a bunch of catastrophies that result in a lifestyle

I'm "pretty sure" i'm going to do 6 plants.....if I can 'wittle' down my list of "I wanna plant..!!!" LOL. When I had all 11 (two plants got destroyed in the mini hurricane) it was quite the job to keep all their vines pinned down....and work two jobs. I was tired, but pleased as hell to be growing my favorite thing: PUMPKINS!!!

10/29/2014 11:10:41 AM