KUER0%

It’s so warm in Utah. Is now the time to start planting your garden? 12%

By David Condos0%

3/24/2026, 2:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Anecdotal, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 20.7% saturation with 190 hits. Analysis detected 651 faulty-reasoning hits from 916 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 28.7% and a BS Rank of 12% (18,743 of 21,180 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 88.50% of the article peer group.

Record-warm temperatures have made Utah’s March feel more like summer. 
That has some gardeners getting their green thumbs out early. 
“As far as sales, they've been better than ever all winter long, because we had no cold weather,” said Brad Olson, owner of Olson’s Garden Shoppe in Utah County. 
As customer demand has risen with temperatures this month, Olson’s shop had to purchase spring plants and supplies earlier than usual to keep up. 
“We're caught a little bit off guard, because we're not stocked as good as we should be,” he said. 
“So, I hurried and ordered two semi loads.” 
The store began selling cool-season veggies, such as potatoes and cabbage, at the beginning of March  a couple of weeks before it normally does. 
Olson’s team also kept busy with big landscaping jobs during a time of year when work typically slows way down. 
“Our business has been in business for 80-something years, and I think this is the first winter that we've landscaped all winter and sold plants all winter,” he said. 
“Who knows what's going to happen. 
Everybody's a little concerned.” 
Concerned, that is, about how the warm, dry winter may impact Utah’s summer. 
Much of the West has spent the past couple of months in the grip of a snow drought, as record-warm temperatures decimated the fluffy white stuff that stocks 95% of Utah’s water supply. 
The freakishly warm weather rolled right into spring. 
On March 21, Salt Lake City’s daytime high reached 84 degrees  its warmest temperature for any March day since at least 1874. 
The city’s historical average high for that day was 57 degrees. 
Provo and Cedar City also set daily temperature records March 21 with highs of 86 and 82, respectively. 
And St. 
George hit a record-setting 94 degrees on March 20, the final day of astronomical winter. 
“Almost every plant I see is very, very confused,” said Victoria Xiong, an assistant professor with the Utah State University Extension office in Kane County. 
Plants that require a lot of heat, such as sunflowers and cosmos, are already sprouting, she said, and will likely require extra care to survive the coming weeks. 
Fruit trees are some of the most bewildered, she said, with apricots and peaches beginning to bloom, even at higher elevations. 
The stages between flowering and fruiting are an especially vulnerable time for the trees, so flowering early could set them up for potential frost damage. 
“People need to be mentally prepared that they might not have an abundant harvest,” Xiong said. 
“They might not have a lot of fruiting just because the weather is so naughty.” 
The March warmth might be just the beginning of this spring’s heat. 
Nearly all of Utah is forecast to see above-average temperatures from April through June, according to the latest seasonal outlook from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 
In 2023, the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture updated its plant hardiness zone map, which shows which plants work in which areas, to reflect warming temperatures nationwide. 
Utah’s average temperature has increased by 3.1 degrees since 1970, according to analysis from Climate Central, and most scientists agree that human-caused emissions are driving similar changes across the globe. 
The warmth can open the door for planting frost-tolerant veggies earlier, said Katie Wagner, an associate professor of horticulture with USU Extension in Salt Lake County. 
That includes spinach, broccoli and other species listed as hardy or semi-hardy in the USU planting calendar. 
“You could go ahead and maybe move up the timeline on those types of vegetables,” she said. 
“But I would be very careful and cautious with trying to plant very tender things right now, because we're really not out of the woods.” 
Lows in the 30s and 40s can still stunt growth for delicate plants, such as peppers and eggplants, even if frost doesn’t kill them entirely. 
For those varieties, she recommends waiting until closer to the historical last frost date  late April or early May in Salt Lake City. 
“Just because it's warm today doesn't mean it's going to be warm two weeks from now,” she said. 
“So, you have to be a little bit careful.” 
The warmer weather has plenty of downsides for gardens, too. 
Weeds may pop up sooner. 
Hot air increases evaporation from soil. 
And with less winter chill, some pests may not have been entirely killed off. 
“We may see some insects and disease pressure this year that we don't always get,” Wagner said. 
Gardeners can check USU’s pest advisory website to see what’s troubling plants in their area and learn how to deal with them, she said. 
Other tips include covering ground with wood mulch to minimize evaporation loss and removing weeds so they don’t steal water. 
It’s also a good idea to wait to fire up sprinklers, Wagner said, because that helps grass roots grow deeper to withstand future droughts. 
The state offers weekly county-level recommendations for lawn irrigation schedules online. 
The potentially hot, dry summer on the horizon may lead gardeners to make some difficult choices. 
In general, young plants usually require more irrigation than established ones, Wagner said. 
So, it could be hard to keep those baby plants alive and might end up costing gardeners economically. 
“This is probably, in my opinion, not the year to be doing a lot of planting of really shallow-rooted types of plants,” such as pansies and other annual flowers, Wagner said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%David Condos: 3.1%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 3.0%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.7%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.6%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.5%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 7.5%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 2.0%David Condos: 2.2%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion2.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 5.8%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 12.0%David Condos: 5.7%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias12.0%This article: 1.1%David Condos: 6.8%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias1.1%This article: 3.2%David Condos: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias3.2%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.2%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.2%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias3.2%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 5.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.5%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.3%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.4%David Condos: 2.6%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.4%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.3%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon3.3%This article: 11.1%David Condos: 5.3%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion11.1%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.9%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.3%David Condos: 2.1%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal6.3%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.5%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice4.5%This article: 20.7%David Condos: 2.5%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination20.7%This article: 3.3%David Condos: 2.1%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

916 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers50%attributed speech461writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Olson • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Olson • 19 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Olson • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Olson • 29 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Olson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Olson • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageVictoria Xiong • 25 words • 0.0% coverageVictoria Xiong • 28 words • 0.0% coverageVictoria Xiong • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageVictoria Xiong • 16 words • 100.0% coverageVictoria Xiong • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 17 words • 100.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 24 words • 100.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 18 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 17 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Wagner • 31 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Brad Olson

65%flagged-word coverage
95 attributed words21% of attributed speech32% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.9 ptsWriter: 8.9%Brad Olson: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-6.5 ptsWriter: 6.5%Brad Olson: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.3 ptsWriter: 4.3%Brad Olson: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.