SKU: 17874208923
lavender plant looking grey

lavender plant looking grey Shop 'Goodwin Creek Lavender - Lavandula Goodwin Creek' Care & Info

$24.46 $27.18
Save 10%
No.2 Bestseller on clinica-fatima.com.ar >

Pay in installments of $6.79 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Nov 8 - Nov 13

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

lavender plant looking grey Shop 'Goodwin Creek Lavender - Lavandula Goodwin Creek' Care & InfoThe Goodwin Creek lavender, known as Lavandula Goodwin Creek is a popular lavender variety known for its striking silvery grey foliage, deep purple blue flowers with long bloom time, and rich fragrance. Its versatility, beauty, and ability to attract pollinators have earned it a place in many Mediterranean style gardens. Besides Opuntia, this Goodwin Creek is one of the few cold hardy plants that withstand winter temperatures as low as 20 F. Native to

The Goodwin Creek lavender, known as Lavandula ‘Goodwin Creek’ is a popular lavender variety known for its striking silvery-grey foliage, deep purple-blue flowers with long bloom time, and rich fragrance. Its versatility, beauty, and ability to attract pollinators have earned it a place in many Mediterranean-style gardens. Besides Opuntia, this Goodwin Creek is one of the few cold hardy plants that withstand winter temperatures as low as -20 °F. 

Native to the Mediterranean region, the Lavandula ‘Goodwin Creek’ is often referred to by several common names, including French Lavender, or Lavender ‘Goodwin Creek Grey’. These names reflect its appearance, heritage, and its affinity with the broader family of French lavenders. 

The Goodwin Creek Lavender is a relatively compact lavender variety, that can grow up to 3 feet tall and 2 feet wide

Its moderate size makes it ideal for borders, garden beds, or containers, offering a neat and well-rounded form that can be pruned to maintain its shape.

The most notable feature of Goodwin Creek Lavender is its soft, woolly, grey-green leaves, which are finely toothed and give the plant a distinct, textured appearance.

The shrub’s foliage emits a calming lavender scent, even when brushed against lightly. The flowers of Goodwin Creek Lavender are a deep purple-blue, blooming from late spring through fall.

The long-lasting blooms are perfect for cut flower arrangements, dried flowers, or simply enjoying in the garden. The flowering spikes are long and graceful, emerging on tall stems that rise above the silvery foliage.

Goodwin Creek lavender is also known for its soothing aroma and potential calming effects, making it a popular choice for aromatherapy and relaxation purposes. Its gentle nature makes it suitable for direct skin contact, such as in homemade bath products or as a natural air freshener.  

When and How to Water Your Goodwin Creek Lavender 

When it comes to watering, it's important to strike a balance, as lavender plants, including Goodwin Creek lavender, are drought-tolerant once established. Once the lavender is established, usually after the first year, you can reduce the frequency of watering. During this stage, Goodwin Creek lavender prefers drier conditions. Depending on the climate and weather, watering every two to three weeks should suffice. 

From spring through early fall, during the growing season, regular watering is crucial, especially in the first year after planting, to help the roots develop properly. It's recommended to water deeply once a week, allowing the top inch of soil to dry out between waterings. This promotes healthy root growth and prevents overwatering. 

In the late fall and winter, during the dormant season, when the plant's growth slows, significantly reduces watering. Only water if the soil becomes very dry, as lavender can suffer from root rot if the soil remains too wet during this period. 

Light Requirements – Where to Place Your Goodwin Creek Lavender 

When grown indoors, your Lavandula Goodwin Creek thrives best in a bright, sunny location. A south-facing window is ideal, as it provides the maximum amount of sunlight throughout the day. For optimal growth, the plant should receive at least 4-6 hours of direct sunlight daily.  

For outdoor cultivation, Goodwin Creek lavender also requires full sun to thrive. Planting it in a location that receives at least 6 to 8 hours of direct sunlight each day is crucial.

This exposure helps the plant to develop its aromatic oils and vibrant blooms, which are characteristic of this lavender variety. Additionally, planting in a well-drained area is important, as lavender prefers dry conditions, and excess moisture can lead to root rot.

It's worth noting that while Goodwin Creek lavender can tolerate some light shade, prolonged periods in low-light conditions can hinder its growth and flowering.

Therefore, choosing the right spot in your garden is vital. If you're in a hotter climate, some afternoon shade can be beneficial to prevent the plant from becoming stressed due to excessive heat. 

Optimal Soil & Fertilizer Needs 

Goodwin Creek lavender thrives best in well-drained soil that mimics its natural habitat. The optimal soil type for this lavender variety is sandy or gravelly soil which allows for excellent drainage. A pH level between 6.0 and 7.0 is ideal, as lavender prefers slightly alkaline conditions.

If your garden soil is heavy or clay-like, it's advisable to amend it with sand or perlite to improve drainage. This will help prevent root rot, which can occur if the roots sit in waterlogged conditions. Instead, make or buy a well-draining potting mix, or ideally use our specialized potting mixGo to planetdesert.com/collections/soil-top-dressing-and-amendments/products/soil-cactus-mix-blend-1-gal-4-qt-cacti-succulent-dirt-compost-growing-media that contains 5 natural substrates and mycorrhizae to promote the development of a strong root system that helps your Lavender plant to thrive. 

When it comes to fertilization, Goodwin Creek lavender has relatively low nutrient requirements compared to many other plants. Over-fertilizing can lead to excessive foliage growth at the expense of flowers, which is not desirable for lavender. A light application of a balanced, slow-release fertilizer in early spring can promote healthy growth, but it’s essential to follow the manufacturer's instructions to avoid applying too much. Alternatively, using organic fertilizers, such as compost or well-rotted manure, can provide the necessary nutrients without the risk of over-fertilization.

If you prefer a more tailored approach, you can also use a fertilizer that is specifically formulated for flowering plants, as this can encourage blooming. However, it's best to apply fertilizers sparingly, as lavender is adapted to thrive in less nutrient-rich environments. 

Hardiness Zones & More 

When grown indoors, the Lavandula Goodwin Creek thrives in temperatures ranging from 60 to 75 °F. It's important to maintain a consistent temperature, as lavender does not tolerate extreme fluctuations. Additionally, indoor humidity levels should be kept relatively low, ideally between 30% to 50%. High humidity can lead to fungal issues, so ensuring good air circulation around the plant is essential. Placing the lavender near a sunny window or using grow lights can help maintain the right temperature and light conditions for healthy growth. 

For outdoor cultivation, Goodwin Creek lavender is hardy in USDA hardiness zones 6 to 9. This means it can withstand winter temperatures as low as -20 °F. This range makes it suitable for various climates, but it's crucial to ensure that the plant is not exposed to excessive moisture during the winter months, as this can lead to root rot. 

The ideal temperature during the growing season is between 70 to 85 °F. While lavender can tolerate some heat, excessively high temperatures above 90 °F can stress the plant, especially if combined with high humidity. Therefore, in hotter climates, providing some afternoon shade can be beneficial. 

Wildlife - Goodwin Creek Lavender attracts the following Friendly-Pollinators

Goodwin Creek lavender is a fantastic choice for attracting a wide variety of pollinators, including bees, butterflies, and even hummingbirds. The nectar-rich, fragrant purple blooms provide a valuable food source for these creatures, especially during the plant’s extended blooming season from early summer to fall. Bees are particularly attracted to the lavender for its high nectar content, while butterflies and hummingbirds are drawn to the vibrant colors and scent.

Butterflies
Bees
Hummingbirds
Lady Bugs
Multi Pollinators
Other Birds

Toxicity: This Lavender plant is considered non-toxic to humans and most pets, making it a safe choice for gardens where children or pets may roam.  

How to Propagate Goodwin Creek Lavender 

Lavandula ‘Goodwin Creek’ can be propagated through cuttings or by division. To propagate by cuttings, take softwood cuttings from the plant in spring or early summer. Dip the cut ends in rooting hormone and place them in a well-drained potting mix. To keep the cuttings moist, place them in a warm, bright area and mist them on a regular basis. Once rooted, they can be moved to larger pots or directly into the garden.

Key Takeaways 

  • Goodwin Creek lavender is cold hardy down to USDA zone 6. This means it can withstand winter temperatures as low as -20 °F.
  • Goodwin Creek lavender has an extended blooming season, often producing deep purple flowers from early summer through fall, providing continuous beauty.
  • Its dense, bushy growth makes it ideal for small spaces, garden borders, and containers, ensuring it fits in a variety of settings.
  • This lavender plant is as admired for its silver-grey, fragrant foliage as it is for its blooms, adding texture and fragrance to the garden even during non-blooming months.
  • Once established, this lavender thrives in dry, sunny conditions, making it an excellent choice for low-water landscapes.
  • The highly fragrant flowers of Goodwin Creek lavender are attractive to pollinators, including bees and butterflies, helping to support your local ecosystem.

The Bottom Line 

Overall, the Goodwin Creek Lavender (Lavandula ‘Goodwin Creek’) is a standout cold hardy variety, offering year-round beauty with its silvery foliage and long-lasting, fragrant blooms. Its ability to attract pollinators including bees, butterflies, and hummingbirds combined with its drought-tolerant nature and low-maintenance care requirements, makes it an ideal choice for gardeners of all skill levels.

By planting Goodwin Creek lavender, you not only enhance the beauty of your garden but also contribute to the support of essential pollinators, fostering a thriving, biodiverse ecosystem. Whether planted in a garden bed, as part of a pollinator garden, or grown in containers, this lavender variety will bring fragrance, color, and a sense of serenity to any outdoor or indoor space. 

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 17874208923

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell lavender plant looking grey

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.0 ★★★★★
Based on 17 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
G
Verified Purchase
garynini
Los Angeles, US
★★★★★ 5
Clear, cogent, and illuminating
Format: Kindle
Clear, cogent, and illuminating explanation of the difference between two approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalism and the Living Constitution
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015
C
Verified Purchase
Chris Morton
Chelsea, US
★★★★★ 5
Excellent!!!
Format: Kindle
A wonderfully refreshing argument for "the living constitution". Most surprisingly is that much of the argument is based in the philosophy of Edmund Burke, father of modern conservatism.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on February 22, 2017
M
Verified Purchase
Matt Cockerill
Dallas, US
★★★★★ 5
Five Stars
Format: Hardcover
Strauss demolishes originalism in a concise and accessible volume.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 11, 2014
S
Verified Purchase
Stephen J. Jaros
Whiting, US
★★★★★ 3
Ultimately disappointing .. but still a good read
Format: Hardcover
This book does have a few commendable features. It is written in laymen's language, you don't have to be a constitutional law scholar like David A. Strauss to comprehend the arguments. And it's short. Won't take more than a couple of hours to read. But as a critique of the "originalist" constitutional doctrine, it is hit and miss. For example, Strauss argues that originalism has three major flaws (p.18): 1) the impossibility of determining what the understanding of the founding fathers was on a particular issue. 2) the impossibility of translating an original understanding so that it addresses today's problems. 3) no answer for Thomas Jefferson's question about why we, the living, should be governed by the "dead hand" of past generations, including the founders. Of these three, the first is the most telling, because it is indeed sometimes the case that we do not know what the founders would have thought about a particular issue, because that issue simply did not exist at the time of the enactment of the constitution or a particular amendment, or because that original meaning could be lost to history. The patent-ability of new life forms as a result of genetic engineering being a good example (but, other technological examples, like cases related to airplanes and cars, are NOT good examples, since while the founders were unaware of these technological advances, it's safe to assume they would recognize them as transportation vehicles, so their understanding of ships and horse carriages would apply to them). That's why i am what Strauss might call a "sometimes originalist" - my view is that IF there is no reasonable doubt about what the enactors of a constitutional provision would have thought about a case, then that should control the decision a court arrives at. But obviously, if the issue was unknown to the enactors, or if their views are forever lost to us due to the passage of time, then there is no "original understanding" of that particular issue, and some other method of constitutional interpretation must be relied on. The second and third objections are far less compelling to me. The second objection is IMO a non-issue. To ask "well, we know that in 1880 the enactors of the 14th amendment did not believe its equal protection clause outlawed employment discrimination against women, but would they believe that if they were living in the year 2000, with all the economic/cultural/technological changes that have developed over those 120 years?" is an irrelevant question. It's like asking if the 1969 Congress that enacted the Clean Air Act would still enact it if that Congress were to debate the issue in 2010: it's purely speculative and ungermane, since neither statutes nor constitutional provisions have expiration dates on them. Likewise, the 3rd objection is both shallow and disingenuous. Shallow because Jefferson clearly understood that the constitution, like laws enacted by the legislature, are subject to change by later generations, who can amend the constitution or pass new legislation to supersede what previous generations have accomplished. Disingenuous, because the invocation of Jefferson seems to be a tactical decision by Strauss, a way to tweak originalists by citing one of the very greatest of our founding fathers. Yet Jefferson can also be quoted to support an originalist view. For example, in 1801 he said: "The Constitution on which our union rests, shall be administered by me according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the people of the United States, at the time of its adoption....These explanations are preserved in the publications of the time, and are too recent in the memories of most men to admit of question." (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, quoted from a letter dated 3/27/1801). The first part of this quote clearly indicates that Jefferson believed that constitutional provisions should be interpreted according to original understanding, not "modern, evolved" standards of meaning as David Strauss would contend. The second part speaks to the need i identified before, that of knowing within the bounds of reasonable doubt what the enactors understood a provision to mean. Beyond all this, though, is David Strauss's contention that a "living constitution", as defined by a common-law like accretion of judicial precedent in constitutional matters that leave the original meaning of the text behind, is necessary because otherwise our constitution would become an archaic relic unable to meet the demands of a changing society, and that the formal amendment process is too slow and cumbersome. Professor Strauss correctly notes that Jefferson believed that our institutions must evolve with the development of society; however, he crucially fails to note that to Jefferson, the primary mechanism of such innovation was to be the actions of the legislature. Constitutional provisions are expounded in broad, general language not to enable future judges to interpret them in light of changing societal conditions, but to permit elected bodies, like legislatures and congress, wide latitude to address the problems of today. Legislative bodies, which directly reflect the ebbs and flows of societal change and are accountable to the people, were Jefferson's preferred vehicle of constitutional innovation, not the decisions of insulated, life-tenured court judges. On this point, unlike on many others, Jefferson was in agreement with John Marshall. As Jean Edward Smith (1996) writes "When (in McCulloch v. Maryland) Marshall spoke of the Constitution as "intended for ages to come" and of the need to adapt it "to the various crises of human affairs", he was alluding to the responsibility of Congress, not the Court. And the limits on Congress were defined by the political process, not the judiciary" (p. 445). Thus, for example, while the enactors of the 14th amendment did not intend for it to ban employment discrimination against women, it also was not intended to prevent Congress or the state legislatures, at the time of the enactment or in the future, from enacting legislation that does protect women from employment discrimination should that type of legislation be deemed necessary or advisable. Jefferson was far more wary of "innovative" actions by judges, exemplified by his belief that "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning, the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please". Yet it is exactly this type of judicial activism that Strauss means when advocates a "living constitution". Strauss's fundamental error is revealed on page 103 when he says that "We cannot say that the text of the constitution does not matter ... no (textual) provision of the constitution can be overruled in the way a precedent can, or disregarded the way original understandings often are". What Strauss is saying here (well, he wouldn't put it this way, but this is my view of the matter) is that when a judge wants to be activist, to impose his/her personal policy preferences on a case, it's very important that the judge somehow, through clever verbal gymnastics, no matter how convoluted, "ground" that ruling in some actual constitutional-textual language. This is very important for achieving the political purpose of maintaining respect for the court in the eyes of the public. But to me, Strauss creates a false dichotomy: The text of the constitution is ONE AND THE SAME with its "original understanding". The 'text', the actual words of the constitution, does not exist independent of the original understanding of those words, the text is merely the communicative vessel used to convey that original understanding. That's the way language works. It's a method to convey meaning. Thus, to invoke the Due Process Clause of the 5th amendment to outlaw Federal segregation laws (as the Court did in 1955) when the enactors of the 5th amendment clearly (as Strauss admits) did not intend for it to mean that, is the SAME THING as ignoring the "text" of the constitution, since the text and original understanding are one and the same. Overall, i recommend this book. One will learn alot about constitutional history, and Professor Strauss is surely correct in that the "living constitution" view is in fact the dominant way in which the Court has gone about its business in practice, regardless of what legal theoreticians have thought. But, don't expect to be convinced by much Professor Strauss has to say about why this is a good thing.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
R
Ross L. Meyer
Louisville, US
★★★★★ 5
Originalist v Living Document , 5 - 4
Format: Hardcover
I found the author's arguments to be logical and compelling. Those who embrace the so-called originalist view of the Constitution, for example Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, claim that they know - with great certainty - the absolute intent of the Constitution's authors. Further they claim that the Constitution provides specifics and principles which of course it does. It is simple to understand the specifics, but what about the principles? Principles, it seems to me, can and do have differing interpretations. One of the definitions of the word principle found in Merriam-Webster states, "a moral rule or belief that helps you know what is right and wrong and that influences your actions." As we all know, rules and beliefs frequently mean different things to different people. If it were not so, Supreme Court decisions would inevitably be decided 9 - 0. Many are familiar with the Supreme Court's case District of Columbia v. Heller in which Justice Scalia opined that the Second Amendment shouldn't stop the U.S. from barring certain weapons. While his opinion certainly seems reasonable to me, I cannot find that principle in the Constitution. Rather it seems to be a logical conclusion based on modern society, mores, and laws - perhaps, as Professor Strauss argues, Common Law. Whether one accepts the originalist view of the Constitution or, as I, believes a living interpretation of the great document is preferable, the one thing we can all agree on is that our nation is one of laws. To that end, it is incumbent on all citizens to accept and abide by the pronouncements of our judges, agree with them or not.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 18, 2014

recommand products

DIY Pumpkin Succulent Kit Fall Decor Halloween Decor
21.78
Astrid Hanging Planter
28.62
Plant Gifts | Iridescent Fantasy Succulent Garden
23.70
Succulent – Liberty Landscape Supply
23.23
Succulent Hanging Basket – Liberty Landscape Supply
23.45