Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["Greg and April" <gregandapril@earthlink.net>]

Replying to Harvey and Paul.

So how does it matter how long it is before it is returned to the soil, so 
long at it returns to the soil?

I'm not so sure it does as long as it is not out of cycle.


If a crop is grown, then cattle ( and/or other animals ) eat the stubble, 
then the crop waste feeds the animals, while they manure the field.    Is 
this bad?

There is not 100% conversion to manure, and some of the plant material 
leaves the fields, as animal material ( bones, muscle, ect..), but, is 
return the material that stays in fields, is broken down into a form that is 
easier for plants and soil microorganisms to make use of.

The point is, that crop wastes, leaves the field in different ways, but as 
long at there is not a long term negative flow of nutrients, the practice is 
sustainable.

Wheat is a major negative flow crop, but, included with crop rotations, and 
fallow fields it's not a problem.

If one year a crop ( including stubble ) is used in a negative nutrient 
way( say for energy production ), as a part of a rotational system, the long 
term effects should be no worse than growing any other nutrient negative 
crop.    In the end, the negatives and positives have to balance out to a 
neutral or positive nutrient flow to the fields to qualify as sustainable. 
It is just a matter of picking and choosing the crop and field use at the 
proper time, after all you wouldn't plant wheat in ground that had no hope 
of receiving water.

Greg H.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Ussery" <huboxwood@earthlink.net>
To: <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 8:50
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Wheat is the new oil


> But in the original context, I took "crop wastes" to mean things like
> corn and soybean stalks, the residues of crop plants after the
> harvestable parts (the people-food parts) have been taken off. Many
> claim that we can make lots and lots of biofuels by fermenting these
> crop wastes--even manures--and extracting out the volatile burnables.
> And of course we can. But the more we use such "wastes" to run our cars,
> the less are available to return to the soil as organic matter/humus.
> We're already returning vastly less OM to agricultural soils than we're
> taking off--accelerating that trend will only increase the rate at which
> we are turning some of the best agricultural soils God ever took the
> time to turn out--into desert.
>
> ~Harvey
> --

AND

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net>
To: <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 13:29
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Wheat is the new oil


> Think that needs to be stressed. You can't make two and two equal five.
> Returning all available organic waste to the soil was the prime directive
> Sir Albert laid out back in the '40s. It was his demonstrations and
> lectures that prompted J.I. Rodale to start pushing organic growing.