Subject: Regulation of compost teas (was: NOSB loses its head)

From: Dale Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:17:07 -0700

Jeff and Lawrence,

Jeff wrote:
> Under the new USDA guidelines for compost practices, fully in effect
> by Oct 21, 2002, compost teas are no longer allowed or recognized as
> organic for foodstuffs production.

>> What a travesty of justice and perversion of
>> science...

Lawrence wrote:
>> Until the public recognizes the need to preserve the best farmland
in
>> the regions local to where they
>> live and work in order to ensure that farmers have prime soil in
>> which they can grow fresh, nutritious,
>> healthy and clean food...

Am I missing something here?  Isn't this about technical aspects of
making compost tea?

Here is the core of what I read from the Task Force recommendations
that Jeff posted:

"Recommendation: Compost teas if used in contact with crops less than
120 days before harvest must be made from high quality compost
described above and not prepared with addition of supplemental
nutrients such as sugars, molasses or other readily available
(soluble) carbon sources."

Based on what the research found, the recommendation doesn't sound
unreasonable.  I don't think they were *prohibiting* "compost teas",
but trying to make their use safer.  Don't you think it is possible
(given the variability of compost) that an inexperienced operator could
brew up highly pathogenic stuff by making what amounts to a nutrient
broth and inoculating it with low quality compost?

Dale

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

.

---

From: Jeff Lowenfels <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 11:46:20 -0800

Dale doesn't think the compost tea rule of the NOSB is unreasonable.

Sure, Dale, it looks reasonable, but first, the inexperience person wouldn't
be making compost tea under your description. Compost by the definition of
the NOSB rules has to be made properly with out pathogens. So why go after
those who want to add sugars to increase beneficial bacteria?

Second, there was NO research....nothing that was peer reviewed, at least.
The studies that were apparently relied upon were flawed and not peer
reviewed. This whole issue of compost tea rules is a political one and I am
becoming convinced it is because certain people, some of whom are on this
list, want to take down Dr. Elaine Ingham. One had the nerve to call those
who follow her work, a cult.......There is some real jealousy here and it
has manifested itself in a senseless rule that can only increase the
reliance on pesticides, fungicides and chemical fertilizers. Too bad.
Academics can be such assholes and do so much damage.

The idea behind  aerobic compost teas is to get the organisms in the compost
to multiply and quickly and in greater numbers than traditional methods. The
process works. The aeration kills any e. coli should there be any in the
compost  due to "inexperienced persons."  The USDA is way out of line on
this one and  IMHO, the rule won't stand.

However, this still doesn't help the NOSP. It is DOA.....

Cheers,

Jeff

.

---

From: Perry Clutts <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 16:16:35 -0400

Jeff (others),

>reviewed. 

I understand the research showed that e-coli was grown in aerobic compost tea that had molasses added. I thought e-coli was an anaerobic organism. Can anyone explain how the e-coli was able to grow in the aerobic conditions? 

I agree with you Jeff.. that the compost rules (turning and temperature) were to make certain there is no e-coli present. If the e-coli was not present in the compost, where did it come from? Is the researcher on this list or does anyone know who it is? How about a copy of the paper on the Internet?

thanks,
Perry

---

From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 16:27:21 -0700

Dale Wilson wrote:
>>>in the regions local to where they live and work in order to ensure that
 >>>farmers have prime soil in which they can grow fresh, nutritious,

> Am I missing something here?  Isn't this about technical aspects of

I was trying to illustrate the situation many small farmers seeking to sell locally
have been facing, increasingly over the years as farmland gets replaced by crackerbox
housing developments and impersonal shopping malls. The NOP compost regulations are
one of many reasons small growers will not seek organic certification and thus be deprived
of their fair share of the marketplace, one they have earned over many decades.
It looks like a vertically integrated effort to drive them out of business,
with the help of the NOP,  and remove all traces of what was once a thriving American industry
from the countryside.
Look at the corrrosive effects drugs have had on rural life and rural economies -
Consider the degenerate culture that has followed this intrusion into the lives of people
who were and in some cases still are the backbone of this country. Wall St., corporate management
and dividends are not the whole picture. Look at all the costs involved.
Mexican workers on corporate farms instead of families running their own operations
with outside help from neighboring farms.

> broth and inoculating it with low quality compost?

Interesting you would intimate that some certified organic farmers might perform
their duties in such a sloppy and irresponsible way and that those farms might
even think of allowing "an inexperienced operator" to have access to such critical
materials processing.

My original point stands, if there's no ecoli (the bad strain) in the compost
then there will be none in the enriched tea, no matter what nutrients are added
to it during the brewing.

Don't you think any farmer going to the trouble to get organic certification would be
acutely aware of the potential for generating harmful pathogens in compost and compost tea
to be used on their crops to be sold to their customers? The safety of their products
would be the one thing they would be the most concerned with. I think that by the time
they see it as economically feasable to seek organic certification that their skill
levels and business acumen would have developed to a high state.

--
L.F.London
[email-masked]
http://market-farming.com
http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech/pcwiki/index.php/london

.

---

From: Keith Addison <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 06:11:08 +0900

Hi Lawrence, Dale and all

>levels and business acumen would have developed to a high state.

It's a basic and noxious assumption of this type of bureaucratism
(and of corporatism) that people are not competent to look after
themselves, not capable of getting it right on their own, have to be
told what to do and not left with any other choice. We must obey our
patriarchs. And hence the appalling deskilling of our societies - our
grandfathers were far more capable and competent than we are. Hence
too, in the extreme form, the example we've just been given of North
Korea. The opposite of that example, in a nation that was left in a
very similar position, is the amazing growth of organic agriculture
in Cuba. Groups of American farmers have been visiting Cuba and
returning not only impressed but inspired by the organic revolution
there. Not just Americans. Cuba also seems to put paid to the idea
that fossil fuels are a basic requirement of food production.

Best

Keith Addison
Journey to Forever

.

---

From: Roberto Verzola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 12:06:03 +0800

Cuba is a contradiction. Together with their organic program, they
seem to be pursuing GE technology very aggressively. This may
imply that they are going organic because they're forced to do so
by the lack of agro-chemicals.

Roberto

.

---

From: Dale Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:29:31 -0700

Keith and Lawrence,

I wrote:
>>>unreasonable.  I don't think they were *prohibiting* "compost
>>> teas", but trying to make their use safer.

Lawrence (?) wrote:
>> Don't you think any farmer going to the trouble to get organic
>> certification would be acutely aware of the potential for
>> generating harmful pathogens in compost and compost tea
>> to be used on their crops to be sold to their customers?

Keith wrote:
> patriarchs.

In my gut I agree with you.  I don't like the bureaucratization and
professionalization of everything.  However, the (probably skewed)
perception of food-borne risk among the public will drive the compost
issue, just like it drove pasteurization and addition of sorbic acid to
commercial apple cider (I can't stand the taste of "cider" nowadays).
People will go to any bureaucratic length because they are so
risk-averse.  Personally I don't think that adding mollassas to compost
juice to get a microbial boost is likely to be an important hazard.

But isn't it possible to live with the recommendations?
1. Only use high quality compost
2. Don't add carbohydrate substrates if applied within 120 DOH

> And hence the appalling deskilling of our societies - our
> grandfathers were far more capable and competent than we are.

Being a generalist and do-it-yourselfer, you won't get any argument
from me on this.  But I'm not sure details of compost tea manufacture
are that relevant to this pervasive trend.  Anyone who makes compost
tea of any sort probably doesn't fall into the "deskilled" group!

Dale

.

---

From: Greg and April <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 11:15:40 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Wilson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 13:17
Subject: [SANET-MG] Regulation of compost teas (was: NOSB loses its head)

> broth and inoculating it with low quality compost?

Are you forgetting that many crops are harvested under a 120 days?  Beans
70-90, Cantaloupe 60-90, Celery 115-135, Collards 75-80, Corn 62-94,
Cucumbers 50-70, Kale 60-70, Lettuce 40-83, Peas 55-78, Potatoes 100-120,
Squash 80-115, Tomatoes 52-90.  I don't see how anyone could fallow the
"recomendation", and still use compost tea to best effect, if at all.

Greg H.

Greg H.

.

---

From: Dale Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 05:51:48 -0700

Greg,

>> "Recommendation: Compost teas if used in contact with crops less
>> than 120 days before harvest must be made from high quality compost

> Are you forgetting that many crops are harvested under a 120 days?
> I don't see how anyone could fallow the "recomendation", and still
> use compost tea to best effect, if at all.

The recommendation would permit the use of compost tea made from high
quality compost any time, right up to harvest, as long as no soluble
exogenous food source is added.

I guess what you are really saying is that compost tea does not work
unless one adds sugar, or something like it, to the juice before
application.  Is that true?

Dale

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/

.

---

From: Greg and April <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 09:27:47 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Wilson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 06:51
Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] Regulation of compost teas (was: NOSB loses its
head)

> application.  Is that true?

Alcohol ( diluted ) is a soluble carbon source, but, I don't see it as
adding to microbial activity, and it is easier for plants ( the ones that
can use it ) to up take it as a carbon source when high temps are involved.

Greg H.

.

---

From: Jeff Lowenfels <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 08:37:39 -0800

The idea behind compost tea is to increase the numbers of bacteria and
fungi, protozoa etc in the tea in a short time....say 24 to 36 hours.
Aeration and sugars increase bacterial counts.

One exception is tea made with NATURAL compost....We have such compost here
in Alaska. It is made over 10,000 years and has no manures, pesticides,
fungicides etc......and one of the highest counts of diversified bacteria
you can get.....up to 35,000 different kinds in a table spoon......You can
contact me off line if you want to buy some for tea brewers and remain
organic even if you use the tea within a day of sales......

Still, despite my business, the NOSB rule against sugar makes NO sense......

Cheers,

Jeff Lowenfels

.

---

From: Dale Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:46:40 -0700

Greg,

>> I guess what you are really saying is that compost tea does not
>> work unless one adds sugar, or something like it, to the juice
>> before application.  Is that true?

> Alcohol ( diluted ) is a soluble carbon source, but, I don't see it
> as adding to microbial activity, and it is easier for plants ( the
> ones that can use it ) to up take it as a carbon source when high
> temps are involved.

I thought they were talking mainly about adding food sources for
microorganisms.  Alcohol can be a food for some microbes, but sugar is
better in general.  The idea behind addition of soluble food and
aeration is to induce multiplication of the (presumably) beneficial
microbes in the tea.  These would then be more effective at colonizing
and displacing pathogenic organisms from the plant surface, and/or
inducing systemic acquired resistance in the plant.

Back to my question. Is it really true that compost tea only works when
it is spiked with a food source and aerated before application?

If that is really how it works, a safer approach might be to get a
little culture tube of the right bacteria and use that to inoculate a
batch of sugar water and inorganic salts, aerate it and grow up a
tremendous crop of exactly the species you want.  I have done this with
biocontrol bacteria and it is very easy to do.

Dale

.

---

From: Byron Simonds <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 15:40:38 -0400

>From reading Organic Gardening and Farming as well as Mother Earth News,
I thought the idea behind compost and manure "teas" were to leach out
the soluable nutrients in H2O in order to give a quick response from an
application to plants. Also there was work which showed some disease
suppression to compost tea sprays.

When did the addition on sugars come into play?

Heide Hermary wrote:
>
> Isn't that what EM is about, basically?
> Heide
>
> Dale Wilson wrote:
>

--
Byron Simonds
E-Mail  :[email-masked]
Phone   : (252) 358-7822
Fax       : (252) 358-7880

.

---

From: Jeff Lowenfels <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:52:48 -0800

The idea behind the aeration and the nutrients is to rapidly increase
populations of bacterial and fungi.  You could inoculate a test tube and add
water and sugars, but the idea is for a lay person to be able to increase
the power of their own compost....not the power, but the "spread." It is
hard to cover a lawn with compost, but real easy to cover it with a compost
spray.....

Again, with Alaska Humus, you don't need bacterial food. The aeration alone
does the trick.

As for Alcohol, it kills plants and beneficial microbes.

Cheers,
Jeff L

.

---

From: Jeff Lowenfels <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:53:29 -0800

The problem with EM is that it only has limited diversity of microbes.

.

---

From: Greg and April <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 14:25:26 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Wilson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 12:46
Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] Regulation of compost teas (was: NOSB loses its
head)

> biocontrol bacteria and it is very easy to do.

But then it is not "organic" is it.

When you get right down to it, a compost tea can be used in different ways,
and the way you plan on using it controls how it is made and the way the
nutrients in it, gets into the plant.

One way to use it, is as a foliar spray/drench, in this way the nutrients
are taken up thru the stoma in the leaves. This method it is not about
increasing the bacteria at all, but getting the soluble nutrients out of the
compost and into the plant directly.  And it is as simple as soak the
compost for a few hours, strain and apply.

Another way to use a compost tea, is to put it down around the roots to jump
start the bacteria in that area, and hence increase the nutrient uptake from
the root zone, but, the "tea" can splash up onto the foliage and/or
(depending on the plant) the edible part.

Take your pick, they both have pluses and minuses.

With ether method, you should not have any problems with pathogens as long
as people remember to rinse/wash the food before eating, after all, do you
go and eat right after going to the bathroom without washing?

Personally, I use dried molasses directly on/in my compost pile. When I have
an over abundance of N material, and I start to smell the ammonia, I
sprinkle a handful or two of the molasses in the dampest part for the
compost and mix in a couple of days I check and repeat if necessary.

Greg H.

.

---

From: Jeff Lowenfels <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 12:48:10 -0800

Manure teas are not compost teas. Two different things.

.

---

From: Greg and April <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 14:42:53 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Lowenfels" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 13:52
Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] Regulation of compost teas (was: NOSB loses its
head)

> As for Alcohol, it kills plants and beneficial microbes.

If used in high concentrations it will, but, in diluted form, it can be
applied to the ground or as a foliar spray and many plants particularly
those belonging to the C4 group, will use it as a carbon source, when they
would other wise be unable to up take CO2 on days when the heat has caused
them to close the stoma.

Greg H.

.