Re: [compost_tea] soil chemistry facts

From: L Blair <rlbct_at_clear.net.nz>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 10:04:13 +1200
This is very interesting, Elaine.

I hope you're having a good time in Oz.

My first question is about trace elements.  For eg, in NZ there is said to
be a shortage of Selenium (among other things).  (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?

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).

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).

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).

Of course, the one thing I havn't seen is veges/fruits claiming to have been
grown with ACT!
And there is the news from Betsy Ross that ACT improves her cattle's health.
(And I'm not disbelieving your message, but I'm struggling to come to some
sort of system to proceed with).

Regards,
Lynton
----- Original Message -----
From: <soilfoodweb_at_aol.com>
To: <compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [compost_tea] soil chemistry facts


> Teaching the Soil Biollgy and Soil Chemistry course with Dr. Lancaster
here
> at Southern Cross University, and we are showing some very interesting
> relationships between soil chem and soil biol.
>
> Did you know that NO AGRICULTURAL SOIL lacks the NUTRIENTS needed to grow
> plants?
>
> Maybe one or two rare exceptions to that rule when we get into non-ag
soils,
> but any soil used for agriculture does not lack the nutrients needed for
plant
> growth.
>
> So, why do we add fertilizers?
>
> Because the AVAILABLE nutrients may be limited.
>
> In the ag world, we do things to make the nutrients in a soil
NOT-AVAILABLE
> to the plants.  How stupid is this?
>
> Why would we behave this way?  Either no one understands what is really
going
> on in soil, or we are being lead astray by people who want to sell you
things
> that you don't really need.
>
> How do you move nutrients from the not-available pool to the available
pool
> in soil?
>
> The answer - SOIL BIOLOGY
>
> Soil organisms, in the right places, active at the right time.  All that
is
> needed is to learn how to make sure the organisms are there and active.
> Simple, inexpensive, and everyone can learn how to do this, at very little
cost.
>
> Soil biology - in your compost, compost tea, and easily monitored in a
> qualitative fashion by anyone with a decent small microscope.   Need
quantitative
> numbers?  The lab can help you with that.
>
> But no one needs to add inorganic fertilizer to their soil, unless they
lack
> the biology that should be there.  When you look at total nutrients
present in
> any soil, there's more than adequate levels in any ag soil.
>
> We calculated how many years' worth of phosphate was actually present in
> wheat filed soil in Australian, soils where growers have been told they
needed to
> add thousands of dollars of PO4 because there was no phophate present.
There
> was 15,000 years worth of phosphate present in that soil (something like
> $48,000 worth of "fertilizer"), if that phosphate could be made available
to the
> plants.
>
> Makes you wonder about the soil chemists telling you that there's "no
> phosphate" present.
>
> Well, ok, no AVAILABLE phosphate.  But that's really a WORLD different
from
> no phosphate at all, don't you agree?  It is a lack of MICROORGANISMS to
> solubilize that phosphate that is the problem, not a lack of phosphate.
>
> When do we get off the toxic chemical bandwagon?
> And back on the bandwagon that supports life?
>
> Elaine Ingham
> soilfoodweb_at_aol.com
> Soil Foodweb Institute, Lismore, Australia
> Graduate Research, Southern Cross University
> Soil Foodweb Inc., Corvallis, OR, USA
>    and other places.......
>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Received on Sat Aug 28 2004 - 19:03:08 EDT

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