Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] Compost tea vs compost direct on acre

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Robert Norsen <bob@bnbrew.com>
  • To: Healthy soil and sustainable growing <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Compost tea vs compost direct on acre
  • Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:23:21 -0700 (PDT)

To Paul and Dr Melendrez - the important  well demonstrated part of both messages is
the results that are being demonstrated by Betsy Ross.  Until you read her report and observe the results she and neigbors are getting with ACT there is little reason for me to argue.  Her demonstration is perhaps one of the most important reports in agriculture in the last few years.   
 
And yes I know about the wide variety of life in soil and in ACT beyond the bacteria and all about the O2 saturation possible at sea level and at temperatures.    And Dr., Your have counted and know the number of bacteria in 500 gallons of ACT and in 37 tons of Compost?    Or the number that would survive from each situation?   No?  Neither do/ did  I.    Probably a not a good idea to extrapolate numbers based on small samples.  While the result may be close they never look plausable, never provable either way.     Bob.   

TradingPostPaul <tradingpost@riseup.net> wrote:

I'm still waiting for the evidence and studies to back up these claims for
compost tea. You're only focusing on bacteria when there are countless
other microbe populations involved in fertile soil and plant growth.
Furthermore, you're only comparing compost and compost tea on large
acreage. Obviously there are more efficient methods of soil improvement on
large acreage. Even when acreage is composted it isn't usually bought but
produced onsite. Please explain in light of Dr. Melendrez' response too.

paul, tradingpost@riseup.net
---------------

The outstanding scientific discovery of the twentieth century is not
television, or radio, but rather the complexity of the land organism. Only
those who know the most about it can appreciate how little we know about
it.
- Aldo Leopold in Round River, 1933

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 6/11/2006 at 2:31 PM Robert Norsen wrote:

>My reply to several replies to my " ACT is better at less cost" answer
>to Ken H.
> " Probably enough bacteria already in the soil." That is not what has
>been found when ACT is added there is usually a strong response in growth
>and in plant nutritional content. More on that below.
>
> "ACT is just a process of leachate from the compost. Lay the compost
>out on a field the rain will wash the microbes and nutrients into the
>soil" - - - - Not by a dam site.
>
> Laid out in the sun and weather how many will survive? How many will
>get to the soil and plants? How many will be destroyed by UV? How many
>will be in the compost in the first place?
>
> ACT extracts the microbes. In a powerful but gentle scrubbing action
>the brewer collects a very high % of microbes and nutrients from the
>compost into an ideal water condition for this life. Nutrients are added
>to produce rapid population increase. When the numbers have increased
>1,000s of times, nutrients consumed and the microbes have returned to a
>durable - dormant - condition the ACT is applied to foliage and to soil.
> On foliage the foliage offers nutrients so that beneficial microbes
>remain to feed on, multiply and to protect the plant. Hard to apply
>compost to foliage.
> On soil the microbes reach the soil with/in liquid moisture that enables
>this life to reach plant roots, there to be nourished by the plant, to
>flourish. Microbes carry nutrients needed by plants - in body, create
>slime that holds water, feed soil life such as earth worms and continue to
>multiply.
>
> Bacteria are attracted by root exudates emitted by plant roots to
>attract the microbes. The microbes hold the nutrients in body until
>released by protozoa. Thus unlike dissolved chemical liquid nutrients
>that do wash away with rain, the biological life is held and nourished by
>plant roots until released to the plant. This natural process increases
>nutritional value thousands of times and puts the nutrients exactly where
>needed by the plant. Bacteria eat plant exudates the plant furnishes from
>sunlight and CO2. The bacteria alter the condition of the exudates to make
>a suitable plant food and thus keeps that nutrition coming to the plant.
> What amounts to tiny amounts of nitrogen in bacteria, is more effective
>for plant growth than much larger quantity of nitrogen added as a
>chemical. A chemical that a high % does wash down thru the soil to become
>a contamination in the aquafer. Other nutrients that are not evident in
>soil tests and not directly available to
> plants are released from the soil by bacteria and fungi
> and delivered to the plant at the roots.
> Enough bacteria already in the soil ? Perhaps. Enough bacteria under
>a pasture, the bacteria outweigh the cows!
> Does a typical pasture have enough? Will ACT add a useful diversity?
>Takes careful testing to know.
> Does adding ACT to typical pasture prove to do any good? This might be
>a better test! Ask Betsy Ross, of Texas. Her carefully run research
>and report indicated a remarkable 2x to 4 x increase in animal weight
>gain and startling improvement in meat quality after adding ACT to her
>pastures. But- read her report!! Many Texas ranchers observed what
>Betsy did and her results. Now those Texas ranchers are doing what Betsy
>did. And the beef is found to be equal to wild salmon in nutritional
>value!!
>
> BTW 1/4 inch of compost as suggested for gardens is a lot of tons of
>compost when added to 1,000 acre pasture. Anyone know how many? Chris,
>the rancher, suggested $ 8,000 per acre to apply enough compost. I am
>trying to help a Chris put 20 g ACT per acre on 1,000 acres. Not a small
>task either.
> 1,000 acres is in Texas not the largest ranch. Think 10 to 100 times
>that big. The problem of improving pasture by any means is a big
>project.
>
> Objective- Increase animal weight gain x 2 in a given period. Increase
>quality to eliminate/ reduce feed lot. Sell pasture / grass fed beef.
>Eliminate 'mad cow' and GM hazard. Improve CLA content of beef. CLA is
>the (10%) fraction of grass fed beef fat that helps a human system store
>and recover fat as an energy source. Without CLA the body can store but
>not recover fat for energy. Think of the result if a body can store but
>not recover fat !!
> - Always hungry - can't expend energy long between meals - can't use
>fat even when feeling starved - ACT can make a huge difference in
>American / world health. Bob
>
>John Smith wrote:
> The soil holds probably as many bacteria as it needs to hold. Adding
>more doesn't seem to make sense to me. It's the nutrients that the plants
>need. I would have thought that the slow release of nutrients from the
>compost is what matters. Compost tea would be a quick booster which might
>get leached away by the rain.
>
> On 6/10/06, Robert Norsen wrote: Hi Ken - When
>you spread compost on your field that is good. 2 tons per acre will have
>some effect
> on building the soil, producing a crop. If you look close you can see
>this amount of compost after spreading it. You will have the bacteria
>present in 4,000 lbs of compost. If it rains soon enough some will enter
>the soil. Some will live. None will apply to the foliage.
>
> If you put 15 POUNDS of compost in a 50 g bewer in 20+ hours you will
>have extracted the live bacteria from the compost, mutiplied it by 10,000
>in that time, now you can put that on your acre. The 15 lbs now is as
>many bacteria as would be in 37 tons of compost, in a liquid it is
>likely to live in / on the soil and also on the foliage. The Bacteria and
>fungi will make the nutrients already in your soil available to your crop
>in addition to the sometimes critical trace nutrients in the Compost
>
> If you think it is a lot of work to make the compost tea 1 hour, and
>apply 1 hour, compared that to the work of spreading the 2 tons compost
>on your acre, have to it. (Not using a $40K spreader truck.)
>
> Compost TEA was by promoted by lazy farmers wanting to escape poverty
>and who heard Elaine.
> 2 tons of compost cost is - $ 200 - $400 ? + Labor ???
> $500?
> 15 lbs compost, $ 1.25, Nutrients, $ 10.00 ? Brewer prorated per
>brew, $ 1.00 Labor $53?
>
> Effect on the crop??? Who wants to guess that one??
> Bob
>
> High - I bet this will bring out a bunch of math experts. My math is a
>quicky. Bob
>Ken Hargesheimer < minifarms2@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Readers,



_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page