Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>]

E J, It might have something useful in it but I'll never know, I deleted him 
from this list years ago over his flaming and dogmatic attacks on 
biointensive methods. Now, I almost never criticize garden writers. But I 
feel obligated to call attention to some of his sweeping pronouncements.

   Solomon's words from that link:
   "In hard times, the family can be greatly helped by growing a highly 
productive food garden, requiring little cash outlay or watering. Currently 
popular intensive vegetable gardening methods are largely inappropriate to 
this new circumstance. Crowded raised beds require high inputs of water, 
fertility and organic matter, and demand large amounts of human time and 
effort. But, except for labor, these inputs depend on the price of oil. Prior 
to the 1970s, North American home food growing used more land with less 
labor, with wider plant spacing, with less or no irrigation, and all done 
with sharp hand tools. "

  Fine, if any of that were true.
  Before 1970 home growers used only "sharp hand tools"? Really? And used 
"more land with less labor, with wider plant spacing, with less or no 
irrigation"? Makes you wonder what he thinks happened in 1970 to interrupt 
this idyllic scene.

  Do "crowded raised beds" require high inputs of water? In wet climates? I'm 
semi-arid and I still water less than once a week because of good mulch on 
the beds. A sensible approach would be to look at the actual ratio of water 
to the amount of food produced. Compared to industrial vegetable operations, 
intensive, mulched vegetable production is positively miserly with water. 
Higher levels of organic matter simply hold moisture better and leach 
fertility less. It's accepted fact. In Steve Solomon's universe, raising the 
level of organic matter is too much work.

   I favor the long time organic writers who urge building soil fertility and 
organic matter, mostly because of the produce quality, quantity on less space 
available, and restoration of good soil. And growing the most we can in any 
space we have is now even more urgent than when the book came out. I can't 
see the logic of halfway working a lot more land to produce less per acre, on 
his claim that it would need less work - all by hand tools. Even if everybody 
had all the land they want.

   And what's his reasoning behind "water, fertility and organic matter" all 
depend on the price of oil? How's that work? In my work, about the only use 
of oil is driving to and from market. And spacing plants farther apart 
survives drought better - even with less irrigation, labor, and organic soil 
building? Really? I'm sorry but decades of gardeners reports in Rodale's 
Organic Gardening & Farming don't support trying to grow anything that way.

   Amazon.com has some good reader comments on the book, and then there are 
the other kind:
   "The books subtitle, "Growing food in hard times", refers to the coming 
shortage of oil and the economic troubles ahead. Don't let this scare you 
away, the author spends very little time on this soapbox. The book falls a 
little short of the promise, though; after explaining why fertilizer, 
including the organic kinds, water, fuel for machines, etc. will be scarce 
and expensive, he spends a lot of space discussing imported fertilizer 
ingredients, sprinkler systems, and large plant spacing, none of which, by 
his own assertion, will be available to most of us in the future."
   Another:
   "Also, it was frustrating for a book that purported to teach gardening for 
hard times to say it's not worth it to garden in clay soil or rocky soil. I 
would've thought there would be a focus on things that can be done to 
maximize growth in all conditions. This is Gardening When It Counts, not 
Gardening In Ideal Conditions... That and gardening is more expensive than I 
thought. Especially as the author notes that once oil prices go up so will 
the cost of all the fertilizers he advises you will need. Can I afford to 
garden when it counts? I'm not sure.
  Another reviewer:
   "The author selected the title only to make sales based off what's in at 
the moment, self-sufficiency/survivalist know-how. A lot of people are in 
tough financial situations and one of the best ways to address this would be 
both the financial and therapeutic benefits of home gardens, lose a job and 
hell, why not start a home garden to keep sane while saving money? but 
unfortunately what's happened here is a dry-as-dirt read geared towards 
higher end more expensive projects, being passed off as a money saver for the 
little guys going through hard times... this is the WRONG place to start if 
your living with a medium sized back/front yard, and I promise you wont go 
wrong with just about any other garden book as a jumping off point. Pick up 
an old one at the thriftstore, borrow a book from a neighbor, check out your 
local expletive deleted library for crisake. just dont buy this book new 
unless your project can run into the 100s of dollars and you have a private 
field. Some, and I mean SOME of this information is good as a backup 
reference, but that information is widely available, any gardening book will 
contain it, I got a different one years ago at the thrift store for 1.69 and 
its been infinitely more helpful. "


paul tradingpost@lobo.net


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

On 11/22/2010 at 7:50 AM EJ wrote:

>Have you read (or tried) Gardening When It Counts Growing Food in Hard
>Times by Steve Solomon (http://www.newsociety.com/bookid/3920) for  bed
>vs rows?
>
>On 21/11/10 11:38 AM, Tradingpost wrote:
>> That looks helpful esp for germination temps. How much to plant is a
>pretty rough guide tho. Like most charts it's meant for inefficient row
>planting, not beds. Beds versus rows, no contest. Dates for starting
>indoors is useful, but it should be noted those times can vary a lot
>depending on light and temperature. Some of those will get too leggy if
>left only in a sunny window that long. And what it doesn't tell us is what
>size pot some of those will need, tomatoes for example. 8 weeks is too
>long in a 4" pot and rootbound it'll never  reach its potential after
>transplant.
>>
>> paul tradingpost@lobo.net
>>