Re: [compost_tea] soil chemistry facts

From: L Blair <rlbct_at_clear.net.nz>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:45:20 +1200
Elaine, I can't thank you enough for your reply!
You said : "Just trying to be arrow-clear".
Well, it just so happens that I need that!  It has come at a valuable time
for me, as I was getting ready to invest in the CEC approach in a big way.

As I have outlined before, I have been struggling with the various
approaches to growing food and managing soil.  Its interesting that I learnt
first from Sir Albert Howard "An Agricultural Testament" and his wife Lady
Eve Balfour "The Living Soil".  And this was more than 25 years ago!

Somehow I did not come across the CEC merchants until recently; at least
they do tell a story that avoids pesticides.  However, the question in my
mind about high Brix readings was a worry about having excess raw elements
in the food.  And this could lead down an interesting pathway...

However, in the light of what you say (and I must say that I respect your
scientific approach very much), I prefer to go down the approach you suggest
(which should be a VERY interesting pathway!!!).

So thank you for making your message clear for me.

Best regards,
Lynton (who never intends to flame, BTW; life is too short!)

----- Original Message -----
From: <soilfoodweb_at_aol.com>
To: <compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [compost_tea] soil chemistry facts


>
> Lynton asked -
> My first question is about trace elements.  For eg, in NZ there is said to
be
> a shortage of Selenium (among other things).
> Nope, no shortage of Selenium in any of your soils.  It may not be
available
> for your plants, but there is definately plenty of Se in the soil.
>
> Locked up - correct.  But how do you "un-lock" any locked up nutrient?
>
> You get the proper biology back in the soil.
>
> Just exactly how do you do that?  You have to have GOOD compost.  That
means
> checking the compost for organisms.
>
> If you don't bother making sure you have the organisms, just quit now and
> apply toxic chemicals for the rest of your life.
>
> Not checking to make sure you have what you THINK you have is like
assuming
> that when someone says there's anti-biotic in your medicine, it is
actually
> there.  Why do we have the FDA?  People try to sell bad things all the
time.
> Regulations are unfortunately necessary.
>
> Also, of course, the result of the NPK mindset is that what Se there is
has
> been further locked out).   Isn't there a case for 'dosing' the soil (via
> compost preferably) (or plants or animals) with the likes of Se, Cu, etc?
>
> Only if you REALLY are out of nutrients.  And we are looking at the FACT
that
> there is NO AGRICULTURAL SOIL, in the US or in Austrailia where we really
> have LOST anything!!!!!
>
> Do you have soils in NZ where you have actually lost, completely, or to
below
> plant-requirement levels, any nutrient?  I am not aware that anyone has
ever
> documented that.  Perhaps the nutrients are not available, but that
doesn't
> mean you need to add back in more nutrients. It's a waste of your money,
and
> destroys water quality.
>
> Lynton wrote:
> Then there is the question of soil type.  For example could a sandy soil
be
> lower in nutrients and need suppliments?  (extreme case: sand itself).
>
> Any hard data for that?  No - there's plenty of any nutrient in any soi,
> straight sand or otherwise.  The nutrient is present in the soil - not
available,
> perhaps, but again, that doesn't mean you add more of something you
already
> have plenty of.
>
> Lynton wrote:
> And thirdly, what about climate?  I am thinking that a wet climate would
> have more opportunity to leach minerals, while a dry climate would retain
> them (one of Albrecht's theories).
>
> That's the theory, of course.  But where's the data?  All we have is that
> exchangeable nutrients are lacking.
>
> That doesn't mean add something that is in plenty in your soil.  You have
to
> get the biology back.  That's all,  They'll move those nutrients from the
huge
> storage concentration of nutrients, but not-available nutrients, into the
> available nutrients.
>
> Why buy something you don't need?  Get the biology back, and never add
more
> chemicals.
>
> This has been an eye-opener for me.  I've been saying, you have to add
back
> into the soil the nutrients you take off in the crop.
>
> But the DATA show that is not true!  We have 15,000 years of PO4
sequestered
> in most ag soils.  You don't need more!
>
> Lynton wrote:
> I've done a bit of reading of different theories recently, and one thing
> that stands out is the health of plants and animals grown on the
> Albrecht-Reams-Beddoe chemical approach.  And when I buy vegetables and
fruit
> (organic of course), most have blemishes and don't keep long - signs of
lack
> of health, and I'm assuming mineral deficiency.  (One exception that
stands
> out in memory is some BD apples grown in Hawkes Bay).
>
> Lynton, think this through.  Just because you stop using toxic pesticides,
> have you got your biology back?  Properly balanced?
>
> No.  Many organic people do not make compost properly.  They kill the
biology
> by using copper sulfate, rotenone, peroxide, and so forth.  Aren't those
> toxic chemicals?  what's the effect on the biology?
>
> Death.
>
> Albrecht - Reams are looking at EXCHANGEABLE nutrients.  Are the nutrients
in
> your soil in a plant available form?  No, they aren't.
>
> Why not?  You don't have the biology you need to make teh nutrients
> available.
>
> Start working on how you get the biology right.  The sign that you are
doing
> it right is when you don't need to add nutrients, when your roots are down
a
> metter or more into the soil.  Easy to assay?  Sure.
>
> OK?  Did I make the message clear this time?  I apprecaite you asking when
> something I say isn't clear.  and I apprecaite that your resopnse isn't
nasty,
> attacking or arrogant.  I try my best not to be any of the above, but
sometimes
> I don't always get the fact that people take what I say as me attacking.
> Hope you don't interpret my response in that light.  Just trying to be
> arrow-clear.
>
> Elaine R. Ingham
> Soil Foodweb Inc., Corvallis, Oregon
> Soil Foodweb Inc., Port Jefferson, New York
> Soil Foodweb Institute, Lismore Australia
> Soil Foodweb Institue Cambridge, New Zealand
> Soil Foodweb Inc., Hilversum, The Netherlands
> Laboratorios de Soil Foodweb, Culiacan, Mexico
> Soil Foodweb Inc., Jerome, Idaho
>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Received on Sun Aug 29 2004 - 22:13:05 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:27 EST