Newsgroups: rec.gardens From: james@hplb.hpl.hp.com (James Harrison) Subject: SUMMARY of zone info for non-US residents Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 12:05:18 GMT I had many responses to my question about how to work out which zone you correspond to if you are not in North America. Here is a summary of those which cover the general theory. Thanks also to those who answered my specific question which I won't reproduce since it's specific to my location... Georgina J. Allbrook (GALLBROOK@waikato.ac.nz) forwarded an article by Roger Case (rcase@RT66.com) who wrote: > Some genius at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) > came up with this zone system for rating hardiness. It's based on > the lowest approximate range of average annual minimum temperatures > where a species will grow. Naturally, it uses good ol' Fahrenheit > temperatures. (Hey, we'll go metric when we're good and ready. Now's > not the time.) I guess it's simply easier to say "Zone 5" than to > say "minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit to minus 10 degrees Fahrenheit > approximate range of average annual minimum temperature" -- once you > get everyone, nurseries, writers, consumers, etc., to agree on the > system. But, I still try to give the range in addition to the zone > number because that has a wee bit more meaning (unless you don't > speak Fahrenheit; get out your calculator!). > The table is simple: > Zone Approximate range of average annual minimum temperatures > > 1 below -50 F [Not even in Minnesota!] > 2 -50 to -40 F > 3 -40 to -30 F > 4 -30 to -20 F > 5 -20 to -10 F > 6 -10 to 0 F > 7 0 to 10 F > 8 10 to 20 F > 9 20 to 30 F > 10 30 to 40 F > But the maps are complex. (and only for the US --the question Hud > is responding to was from the UK and much like yours, o.e. "what are > these zones referred to in the correspondence of this newsgroup and > other gardening sources) > As far as I know, it's just a US thing, though the zone maps I see > always seem to include Canada. For the east, it's pretty easy to > read the maps because the zones are in fairly broad bands. Out west, > with mountains making things more interesting, the zones are really > convoluted. To be most sure of your zone you need to consult a > detailed map, or just know your climate well, even in the east where > microclimates can push you a zone away from your nearby neighbors. > Now, why they didn't just decide to rate hardiness with a simple > number corresponding precisely to the average annual minimum > temperature (or maybe the nearest multiple of 10, if we must be > inaccurate) that a species could tolerate, I'll never know. Georgina J. Allbrook (GALLBROOK@waikato.ac.nz) wrote: > I asked this question last week, and have had a few > responses. The crux of the matter is that the zone only refers to > the minimum temperature and does not take into account the amount of > rain or the maximum temperature. I live in the North Island of New > Zealand and as far as I can tell I live in zone 9 or 10. This > corresponds to Florida or California, I feel that this is incredible > because it is much hotter in these states. It is unfortunate that > your posting is in Farenheit, the replies I got were in Celcius. > The zones are as follows; > zone 1 -45 > 2 -45 - -40 > 3 -40 - -34 > 4 -34 - -28 > 5 -28 - -23 > 6 -23 - -17 > 7 -17 - -12 > 8 -12 - -6 > 9 -6 - -1 > 10 -1 - 4 Jerry Heverly(heverlyj@ccnet.com) wrote: > According to my sources there is no one accepted Zone map. > According to Wyman's Gardening Encyclopedia(MacMillan) and Taylor's > Gardening Enclyclopedia(Houghton Mifflin, Cambridge) there are > several discordant systems out there. > "The Hardiness Zone{Wyman says}...is based solely on average > annual minimum temperatures. It...has been in use...since 1938. > {I}t was based on records summarized by the U.S. Weather Bureau over > a 40-year period. Data from Canada was supplied by the > Meteorological Division, Department of Transport of the Canadian > Government. The U.S. and Canada are arbitrarily divided into 10 > zones, 9 of which are in the U.S. These zones are based on 5-, 10- > or 15-degree differences in the average minimum temperatures." > Taylor says: "While many refinements of method have been > used for plotting such zones, perhaps the most readily workable one > is the plan evolved by Alfred Rehder of considering the lowest mean > temperature of the coldest month." > Apparently new maps were developed by a)the U.S. Dept of > Agriculture in 1959-60 and b) by Canada somewhat later. Neither map > jived completely with the 1938 system and much confusion seems to > have resulted. The Canadians established nine new zones just within > their own nation with no connection with the U.S. map. > The Wyman map is one number higher than the Taylor map(Wyman > 10=Taylor 9, etc.). What's REALLY confusing is that the two maps > have dramatically different 'Average annual minimums'. For instance > my area of California(zone 8 Taylor, zone 9 Wyman) is listed as: > Wyman 30-40 degrees F. > Taylor 50-60 degrees F! > I know, from record-keeping done by students at my college, > that Wyman is correct, Taylor incorrect. (Wyman is dated 1971, > Taylor 1938 with updates in 1959). > I started this reply thinking I could help you(and me) but, > as you can see I'm more confused than when I started. If someone > wiser does not answer you before this weekend I intend to do more > research on this subject at the Univ of Cal. Biosciences Library. > Till then,