[compost_tea] Suggestion to the group, Re: CT in the Muck
--- I like your ideas John. So I will make a few comments regarding
structure. The field testing takes considerable labor, resources
and "data" (observations recorded from the field/garden/yard and some
laboratory testing as well, requiring more labor and
resources).Bottom line, in my opinion, field/garden/yard testing is
priceless. Cause you can't find much specific info recorded anywhere
in a timely manner. I've used field tests the last 1 1/2 years here
in Kansas.I can spray my entire 50 acre patch much quicker than
laying out,spraying around and photographing "field controls". And I
know field "controls" are priceless (assuming quality tea is used)
too, however, it's labor intensive and like research, requires lots
of recorded observations and many growing seasons. And we need to
know the tea quality before selling it or conducting field trials.
And the field trials may have low yield as well making them more
costly. At this point in my operation ACT use and field trials
requires extra labor and equipment investment. So there's certainly
situations for testing the ACT at the lab AND then spraying the whole
place based on their recommendations, in lieu of field trials.
Best regards,
Dennis Kemnitz
In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "urbanworms" <urbanworms@h...> wrote:
> Dear Everyone,
>
> Muck is soil that has not acquired structure. So what do you do
with Muck?
> Add a bunch of critters, feed them and put them to work building
soil structure.
> Results: health, growth and bountiful harvest.
>
> Perhaps the CT group could use a touch of structure at this point.
Not much,
> though. It's pretty obvious we are a loosely held group of
individualisitic
> individuals. I hate structure and bureaucracy so much that I
sometimes forget
> that a little bit of self imposed structure is needed to keep
things rolling
> forward. This group is doing good things but it has greater
potential. Meeting
> that potential becomes very important when you consider our holy
quest.
> (That "holy quest" comment is only half sarcasm -- the other half
is
> fanaticism.)
>
> Following is a suggestion for adding a touch of structure to our
undertaking. It
> is loosely based on how I see academia dealing with "camps."
(anyone from
> academia should correct my assumptions since I'm just an outside
observer in
> their world.)
>
> Academia has a formal process of argumentation using the scientific
process,
> publication and peer review. It certainly doesn't prevent emotional
reactions,
> but it does impose a structure that moves the science along,
regardless.
>
> As a group, we could request (definitely not require) that members
who have
> been around for a while contribute data of some form to the rest of
the group.
>
> A "newbie member" could acquire a new status of "contributing
member"
> once she/he submits data from a field test or some other type of
study. Other
> members could help with suggestions for study subjects and design
as well
> as provide comments and encouragement as updates are provided. We
all
> need to be testing things for our own benefit anyway.
>
> There are multiple possibilities for other, higher member-status
ratings to
> recognize those of you who have been the true mentors of the list.
But we
> need to keep things as simple as possible.
>
> (Someone should also come up with staus titles that are a whole lot
more
> creative and fun than my lame "contributing member." : - )
>
> This new structure/process would be helpful to me in more than one
way. I
> tend to get things done when I have milestones and clear
expectations from
> those I am working with. And working with/for the group would
motivate me to
> get off my butt and do the testing that I already need to be doing
for myself.
>
> Another consideration is that "contributing member" status could be
required
> before emotional spouting is allowed.
> --------
> That's enough for now. My brain is drained. It's time for others to
chime in or
> tell me to shut up.
>
> John
>
> Urban Worms Recycling &
> Green-n-Healthy Organics
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, Jeff Lowenfels <jeff@g...>
wrote:
> > No, I am not going to let folks get away with saying this list
should
> > go away and has been mired in the muck.... that is just simple
B.S.
> > If you don't want to stick around, then leave, but don't suggest
that
> > there haven't been plenty of useful posts from plenty of people
in
> > addition to Doc Elaine. That is also B.S.
> > There is plenty of give and take and on this list and plenty to
learn
> > from it.
> >
> > If you are offended by my comments on soil soup's machine, refute
them
> > or get over it. If you think Plate tests are great, the defend
them.
> > And if you don't want to stay on the list, then leave. And, most
> > important, if YOU want to moderate this list, just let me know.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> > Plant a Row in your garden to feed the hungry. Join Plant A Row
for the
> > Hungry. Ask me how. www.gwaa.org/Par/index.html
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor |
ADVERTISEMENT
 | |
 |
Yahoo! Groups Links
Received on Wed Aug 04 2004 - 01:15:16 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:26 EST