minerals

Andy Richker lamu at wt.net
Tue Sep 16 15:48:22 EDT 1997


Jack Rowe wrote:


>That's an interesting question, which I'm going to throw some guesses at...
>
>As far as phosphorous/phosphates, these are considered "immobile" in soil,
>which means that as soon as they dissolve (which is gradually) they are
>electrically-bonded or "adhered" to soil particles and so don't leach away
>readily. However, by picking up the adhered soil particle itself and

snip



>Since most rock powders act over 3 - 4 years,

>From what I have been reading on Paramagnetic rocks (Phil Callahan) I think
you have a much longer effect because of the paramagnetic forces, it is not
just about the phosphorous. I remember someone's post a few weeks ago on
the uselessnes of Rocks etc...
Please excuse me if this is directed at the wrong situation or out of context.

all this is probably
>happily-close to moot. In a good organic soil, rock powders can become
>reasonably available pretty quickly. By the way, a soil test will show, on
>the average US farm/garden, a surfeit of (expensive) phosphorous -- doesn't
>take much (NRC’s “Alt. Ag.” again...).
>
>Sad Note... the innocent-sounding term "immobile in soil" is a sobering
>example of the profound depth to which the paradigm of "modern agriculture"
>has penetrated in just 60-odd (damn odd!) years.

I remember speaking with a USDA man who works in the Valley in South Texas
on soil erosion and promotes soil coverage and when I asked how can the
farmers ignore the soil life, he said they just look at as a commodity and
a factor of farming.  He also mentioned the Malathion application there 2
years ago and how many farmers it put out of business in the Valley because
of the destruction of all beneficials and the resulting pest proliferation.
Well enough of my ramblings.

Andy

A masochist is one who paints himself into a corner . . .
  and then applies a second coat.

                                           Alfred E. Neuman




More information about the permaculture mailing list