[compost_tea] Re: CTTF Report - Tests

From: Kirk Leonard <kirk_at_oregonatural.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 16:16:31 -0700
I think the price of ecoli and enterococci testing may have just gone up, if
there's only a few labs who can test to the specs in CTTF Report, hmm?  I'd
hope more labs would pick it up, since ACT is likely made in many more
places, and costs will come down.

Realistically, folks, there's no way aerated compost tea will be
supported by USNOP without testing.  It's a new form of compost put ON
edible plants, unlike others.  Soil uses are a whole different ballpark, or
bio-park, as it were:). I think the CTTF came up with a good test compromise
which seems do-able.  So we gotta figure this test piece out, seems to me.

Are these tests really a problem or burden?  How much do they actually cost?
How many/which labs do them?  "Coliform MPN" is not the same thing as "CFU
E.coli", absolutely.  E.coli are a better indicator (a few of them), of
pathogen content rather than generic coliforms, right? Big difference, seems
to me. Coliforms are not normally a problem.  Enterococci are a small bunch
of really nasty bacteria, including salmonella, maybe anthrax and a few
other scary creatures, right?

I'm not a biologist but I feel like enterococci are irrelevant to compost
tea, which was my point in sarcasting about CTTF's manure pathogen table at
end in earlier post -- it's about manure, not compost tea or most compost,
as I understand them.  And the standards come from sewage sludge, which no
one would use for tea if they have any sense.  I doubt any sensible person
could or would introduce enterococci or propagate them in compost tea, not
to mention want to.

USDA seems still to want to think of compost tea as raw manure and
ja-ja-jammed this crap into CTTF report, imo. No compost teas are raw
manure.  Not possible as soon as water and air are added, not to mention
sun, wind and soil.  Are enterococci relevant in compost teas?  I think they
are when you use regular, other-than-sewage-sludge compost, which I think is
100% for compost tea...

If USDA demands more than is reasonable or widely available test-wise they
should pay for it.  After all, there have been no reports of any problems
over many centuries.  Zero on ACT more than a decade, too.  But we should
pay some attention here, hmm?

Is this CTTF test requirement reasonable?  As pointed out in the report and
several times posted here, testing in the absence of established data is
necessary and appropriate, so I don't think we should quibble with some
testing. Aerated compost tea can meet and likely exceed whatever challenge.
What about these test requirements?

-- Kirk










Yahoo! Groups Links

Received on Thu Apr 22 2004 - 23:05:49 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:12 EST