Ook,

FWIW, on an old episode of This Old House they buried composite post
"anchors" in the ground, which in turn had a PVC sleeve inserted into them
along with a 1" diameter piece of rebar that was long enough to stick up
above ground level. Each wooden fence post had a hole bored into its end and
was placed over the top of the protruding rebar. This way the posts were
never in contact with the ground.

When I tried to find out further information about these composite post
"anchors", all that I could turn up was that Walpole Woodworkers had
something to do with them. Not much info on their website and I never did
get around to actually visiting one of their locations to see if these items
were available.

It seems like a viable system to me. If so, it may help put an end to the
constant debate of whether or not to use cement when installing fence posts.

Anyone else, have any info on these? Please post it here for all to share.
TIA. HTH.

Peter.

"Ook" Ook Don't send me any freakin' spam at zootal dot com delete the
Don't send me any freakin' spam wrote in message
...
I know I'm beating a dead dog here, but I find myself unclear about the
pros/cons of setting fence posts in dirt, gravel, or concrete. More
specifically, I'm undecided about which way to go. I need some input from
those who have done this. I'm mostly interested in what is strong and what
will last the longest. I don't want to have to dig them all out 10 years
from now and be stuck with these big concrete chunks.

Dirt: easiest to do, may not be the strongest. It rains a lot here, 9
months out of the year, so I'm concerned about the constant contact with
wet soil.

Gravel. Some recently suggested. Cheaper and easier then concrete, gravel
drains water from post. Stronger then just dirt, post may last longer.
Gravel drains water from post.

Concrete. More work. Strongest. Post in contact with concrete may still
rot out in 10 years. Difficult to replace.