Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] The only way to tell what your soil really needs???

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] The only way to tell what your soil really needs???
  • Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 08:06:00 -0600


Balance is one of those deceptive concepts pushed for chemical farming. In
the organic writers, soil with additions of plant matter from many sources
allows plants to use only the nutrients they need. Composted or aged matter
in soil provides a natural buffer for pH also. As for well composted and
amended, it usually means soil that's been built up over more than one season
with plant matter from various sources. We don't worry about too much of this
or that because plants have always had the ability to use what they need if
its available. And with organic matter from various sources, the odds of not
getting enough of one thing are negligible. This is simply the common wisdom
of organic growers for decades. Or millenia in the case of Farmers of Forty
Centuries (F.H. King).

Dieter mentioned biologically active soil. Soil scientists are only beginning
to understand the basics of soil biology, and organically built soil is the
key to simplify all the issues. Microbes play an active role in feeding plant
roots by processing what's in the soil itself, and even work within plant
roots like the flora in our own gut (our lives depend on it). Various
nutrients or compounds may be present according to soil tests but unavailable
to plants because soil not organically amended may not have the microbe
population to make them available. Or the reverse - not show up in tests but
be available when plants want them. Plants can signal microbes biochemically
to team up and make it happen. It's just far too complicated for extension
agents to grasp. But nature makes it simple for growers. And things have been
growing for eons without our help.

paul tradingpost@lobo.net


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

On 8/24/2010 at 2:17 AM mdnagel@verizon.net wrote:

>"And I have yet to see any significant evidence of some key elements
>missing in well-composted and amended soil"
>
>But... what is "well composted and amended soil?"
>
>I'm not trying to be difficult here, but just saying these words provides
>no real clarification or present an apparent guide as to how one achieves
>this state of balance >should there be a significant imbalance<.
>
>I am in total agreement that balance is key, but when that balance is out
>of whack it seems that there would be a need for _more_ , or less, of
>something to put it back in whack. And, given that it's clear that
>different crops take up different amounts of minerals I think that it's
>pretty safe to say that different crop residues won't necessarily replace
>the minerals extracted and exported from another crop.
>
>I have not, and will not, suggest that soil tests are some magic bullet, I
>know better than that. But on the other hand I don't believe that any
>random composting of materials is a magic bullet for just any soil
>deficiencies.
>
>Again, I'm not arguing that soil tests can be all that knowing/telling.
>As you note, soil is very complex, in which case "well-composed and
>amended soil" seems, to me, to be a bit too simple of a guideline to
>address imbalances: do I get more cow/horse manure, or do I get more <fill
>in the blank>? Sure, over time if one were to overwhelm existing
>deficient soil with "balanced" amendments then one would achieve a balance.
>
>"Variety is a simple thing; the Rodales and other organic writers have
>long urged incorporating plant matter from various plants rather than just
>a single plant source."
>
>Again, simple enough to state, but how does one know whether one has got
>enough "various plants?"
>
>From what I've read the key foundation is the ratio of calcium and
>magnesium, that these control the availability of all other minerals.
>From Julius Ruechel's book "Grass-Fed Cattle: How to Produce and Market
>Natural Beef" (pgs. 168-169) he writes:
>
> Soil fertility is controlled not by individual minerals in the soil,
>but by the overall balance or ratio of minerals. A colloid is the smallest
>soil particle, made up of either clay minerals or organic matter. It is
>like a little wafer that attracts and holds mineral ions through
>electrical charges. (Mineral ions, also called cations, are nonorganic
>soil elements - calcium, magnesium, nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium,
>sodium, sulfur, copper, zinc, and so forth - that have acquired an
>electrical charge.) This is essentially how soil nutrients are stored in
>the soil. Each mineral element represents a certain percentage of the
>available sites (called base saturation) on each colloid.
>
> The plant draws nutrients from the colloid through its own electrical
>charges in the roots and not acids. When the balance of elements is
>correct, the plant is able to access each nutrient according to its needs.
>If the ratio of mineral ions on the colloid is incorrect, the interaction
>of electrical charges among the various minerals ions will cause some
>elements to be bound more tightly to the colloid while others are held
>more loosely, making it difficult for the plant to access the correct
>proportion of minerals.
>
>---
>
>Yes, balance is key!
>
>
>-Mark Nagel
>Everett, WA
>
>
>Aug 23, 2010 07:09:08 PM, livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org wrote:
>
>>
>>The first catch as I see it is they say there are 60-some key elements
>used
>>by plant growth. No test can be done for all of them even if anyone could
>afford
>>it, not to mention the problem of adding same to the soil in question,
>and conjugated
>>in forms plants can use. And I have yet to see any significant evidence
>of some
>>key elements missing in well-composted and amended soil. Variety is a
>simple thing;
>>the Rodales and other organic writers have long urged incorporating plant
>matter
>>from various plants rather than just a single plant source.
>>
>>We have no way of knowing precisely what elements we're "exporting"
>>by removing what we grow off the farm. Or in exactly what quantities. How
>much selenium
>>should we spread per acre? Or sulfur? At what cost?
>>
>>But the biggest problem of all is not about periodic table elements at
>all.
>>Recent studies have shown us that plant roots can also take up
>surprisingly complex
>>organic molecules - not just simple elements as long assumed. Would they
>have this
>>ability if they couldn't make use of such organic compounds directly? So
>who
>>knows what organic compounds do plants need? What if a soil complete in
>elements
>>but missing all organic material turns out not to grow things properly?
>What if
>>they can't develop disease or pest resistance, or drought tolerance? And
>finally,
>>how do you add or even identify all that plants need? We're pretty deep
>in the
>>swamp at that point.
>>
>>The whole official science of what plants need and what form in what
>amount
>>is frankly, stuck in the last century. What passes for official soil
>science is
>>crippled by profit-driven corporations.
>
>>
>>
>>paul tradingpost@lobo.net
>>
>>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>>
>>On 8/23/2010 at 2:16 PM mdnagel@verizon.net wrote:
>>
>>>"A variety of organic materials provide everything soil needs."
>>>
>>>But... what exactly IS a "variety?" What if that variety doesn't
>>include
>>>a key mineral?
>>>
>>>In general I agree that we've got to adjust to using more basic
>approaches
>>>to caring for soil. Soil tests, I'm figuring, might help identify
>>>deficiencies or excesses _before_ our crops tell us. If one knows what
>>>crops he/she is growing then he/she should have a pretty good idea of
>what
>>>gets exported off the farm and, therefore, what needs to be replaced,
>>>which would significantly reduce the need for any outside soil tests.
>>>
>>>
>>>-Mark Nagel
>>>Everett, WA
>>>
>>>
>>>Aug 23, 2010 10:22:51 AM, livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I ran into this on a tomato list and I don't like it. It's also
>>a
>>>commercial.
>>>>
>>>>class="parsedLink"
>>>target="_blank">
>>class="parsedLink"
>target="_blank">http://www.ag.purdue.edu/counties/marion/Pages/SoilSamplingTesting.aspx
>>>>
>>>>"To grow good plants, you need good soil. The only way to tell
>>what your
>>>>soil really needs is to take a soil test. Applying too much fertilizer
>>>could be
>>>>detrimental to your plants. You could waste money or pollute the
>>>environment. Adding
>>>>too little fertilizer or the wrong fertilizer could produce little or
>>no
>>>results."
>>>>
>>>>Apply fertilizer? Hundreds of thousands of organic growers have used
>>>natural
>>>>amendments or compost as the Rodale people urged for decades, and
>>>indigenous people
>>>>for eons before that. A variety of organic materials provide everything
>>>soil needs.
>>>>While soil tests can be useful I think that statement "The only
>>way to
>>>tell
>>>>what your soil really needs is to take a soil test" is way over
>>the top.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>paul tradingpost@lobo.net
>>>>
>>>_____
>_______________________________________________
>Livingontheland mailing list
>Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page