[compost_tea] Re: G.S. I . Tea results, Hi everyone, Dr.e ,ted ,steve,thanks for the help

From: David Hall <dchall8_at_texas.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:41:10 -0600
Rule number 1 for successfully growing stuff is to pick
well-adapted plants. 
[Tom Jaszewski] Interesting if you have the luxury of following "rules".
Actually I find that to be a somewhat misguided judgment. In the world of
golf, estate, and resort management we learn to culture what has been
installed.
Don't go changing the subject on me.  We're talking about judging a tea by
its ability to drain water into the soil.  My suggestion presupposed that
there was a choice.  Apologies for not reading between the lines. 
I can see where using compost tea would be a
great short cut to getting the beneficial microbes in place.  Still
after considerable in depth discussions with many professional turf
caretakers using pure chemical programs,
[Tom Jaszewski] I'm not certain they would be the best choice for assessing
sustainable practices....
I'm not offering these guys experts for sustainable practices.  Sustainable
practices was not part of the marketing ploy for using compost tea - it was
watering frequency.  I'm using the professionals' considerable experience as
evidence that you can use a full chemical program and still be able to water
deeply.  That's all I'm saying. 
I believe the microbes are
not a consideration to the ability of soil to absorb water to great
depths.
[Tom Jaszewski] Sorry Dave but you're just flat out wrong, and I don't think
it's well thought out to base your opinion on that single experience.
Just in case this discussion slips further off track, we are not talking
about me being right or wrong.  We are talking about totals of about one
hundred chemically managed lawns absorbing water for hours on end without
runoff.  No tea was used on them.  The management practices were very
deliberate, intense and successful.  I can tell you nobody was more
disappointed than I was at the inevitable conclusion.  If these guys had had
sporadic success, I would not have rolled over on my position. 
If you don't wish to learn from my experience on this, you will have to
repeat the experience yourself with your own battery of chemical experts.
Finding ones with this experience may take you awhile.  I just posted the
watering technique used successfully by these turf managers to "train" their
properties to need water less often. 
I'm as organic as I can be, and I evangelize as much as I
can, but on the subject of deep watering, there is too much evidence
that turf under pure chemical programs can be watered deeply if they
purposely develop that capacity.
[Tom Jaszewski] I'd like to read that evidence, could you point it out? I
would argue that without adequate soil biology, in many soils, we would dead
end the process. Before ACT and high quality compost most soils here NEVER
allowed for the development of deep roots. Often in urban landscapes the
soils are so compacted that water alone will never break the soil open or
develop structure in soils.
I'm afraid you will have to do your own research on this.  My sources have
dried up, so to speak.  Your argument was mine exactly at the beginning.  As
the evidence against me built, it would have been suicidal to keep resting
on microbes alone.  These guys were coming at me in droves with property
after property that never needed mechanical aeration, absorbed unlimited
amounts of water, and did not require watering for a minimum of 7 days in
the Phoenix summer.  One guy managed only properties where he had the key to
the automatic waterer.  He had 30 properties and he assured me (I realize
this is the Internet) that none of his properties was watered more than
weekly.  In the end I believed him.  Since then I have established "My 1-2-3
of Turf Management" that starts with 1) deep infrequent watering, 2) mowing
tall, and 3) regular fertilizing (organic or chemical).  The weight I gage
for success in a turf program are 1): 60%, 2): 30%, and 3): 10%.  The
differences between organic and chemical programs are home safety,
environmental support, and the lesser consideration that 100% organic
properties are absolutely no hassle at all to manage.  Every year I get
messages from forum readers who have switched to the 1-2-3 and have totally
turned their turf around.  Hassle factor goes to near zero and they suddenly
love gardening. 
  Can microbially balanced soils be
watered more deeply?  No doubt, but for the purposes we're talking
about here, I don't see the infrequent watering as giving you a
marketing edge for compost tea.  That's all I'm saying.
[Tom Jaszewski] That may be true in you experience. However in 20 years of
experience with urban soils it simply IS an edge.
If it gives you a marketing edge, great!  Again I'm saying that your savvy
chemical competition can make the same argument and demonstrate it all day
long with satisfied customer after satisfied customer.  If you want to argue
my experience we have nothing to talk about because we are on the same side.
Visit a couple website forums for professional turf managers and ask them.
I might add that most commercial turf managers rely on mechanical aeration
as a part of their recreational vehicle payment plans, so you really do have
to look hard to find those who eschew mechanical aeration in favor of deep
infrequent watering. 
David Hall
San Antonio, TX


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links








Received on Tue Nov 09 2004 - 02:17:53 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:35 EST