Re: [compost_tea] Re:Re: chemical based -> biological approach

From: Jeff Lowenfels <jeff_at_gardener.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 12:09:46 -0900

Chris,

Let me tell you my 'test' for success with AACT and the biological approach=
. I used to feed my back lawn with Miracle Gro liquid lawn food....very hig=
h nitrogen and mycorrhizal-damaging phosphorus. My position in town require=
s that my lawn look as good or better than any other one in town: I write t=
he garden column in the paper. I have plenty of critics. Worse, people do =
what I do.

I took my lawn off Miracle grow a few years back. Junkie that it was, if I =
missed one of the twice or thrice yearly applications and the lawn showed t=
hat fact. One third of the lawn was fed CT and soybean meal, one third just=
 the soybean and one third nothing. The entire lawn got the same sun, water=
, play and moose abuse.

Incidentally, I tested my teas to death the prior winter and spent quite a=
 bit of money getting them to the point where I knew I had great tea. So I=
 knew I was making good tea.

After the first season the visual differences between the three sections wa=
s enough proof for me. The second season clinched it and knowing the entire=
 area would be a nice, soft, green, thick lawn was all the proof I needed t=
o spray the whole thing with tea and put soy bean meal down to feed the mic=
robes...and to tell my readers to do the same, despite the extra mushrooms =
that have appeared!

There are enough lawn sprayers on this list to attest to the success of tea=
 in this way: If you substitute teas and microbe food for chemicals, you c=
an still get a green lawn.

Incidentally, this season I suspect I can put down the soy bean meal and sp=
ray only once and "get" the same results as I used to with three applicatio=
ns of chemical.

Cheers,

Jeff
Cheers,

Jeff





Received on Sat Nov 22 2003 - 17:13:28 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:14:52 EST