hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: all compost was not decomposed equal

Hi, John (and everyone else)!

>Having let my subscription lapse...

You evil person! ;-D

>Compost DOES NOT make up for an imbalanced soil, and OG shouldn't be saying
>it does.

I've been rather surprised by this new assertion of theirs -- it seems to
have started quietly last fall, but now they are getting quite loud about it.  

>It will help make many existing nutrients more accessible to plants, but
>cannot add what it does not have.
>More over, as OG and we should all know, all compost was not decomposed
>equal (i.e. materials and the process vary from garden to garden, and even
>week to week in a single garden).

This is what I've always thought, too.  Any soil scientists out there that
can tell us why the change in OG's policy on compost?  Is there research
that we don't know about?

>Also, it is possible to OVER apply compost, tying up nutrients and
>saturating the soil with organic matter.

Heh!  For those of us who are dealing with subsoil because the topsoil was
trucked away to be sold, I don't think this is going to be an issue for a
VERY long time. While I'll agree that it's possible, I don't think it's a
*common* problem.

>On a economic-political note, I personally prefer to support the company
>that is 100% organic in product and ethic, rather than the company selling
>only some organic because it's "popular." Peaceful Valley wins hands-down on
>this one!

Yeah, but buying the organic amendments from the mainstream store KEEPS
organic techniques "popular."  We *want* what we're doing to become
mainstream -- let the chemical users become the "lunatic fringe"! ;-D

Besides, I hate to pay for shipping across the country when I both get the
same item at Home Depot AND make a statement in my own community that kelp,
etc are *THE* items to use in one's garden right here in SE PA!  Plus, lots
of times, in places like Home Depot, you meet folks who aren't real sure
about what organic items they ought to be using.  When they see *you*
loading up your cart with organic stuff, they figure you must know what
you're doing, so they tend to ask "on-the-spot" questions.  At least it
happens to me -- when I don't run into Sally and Janet and starting talking
about other things instead! ;-D

>Why buy kelp meal from a company that also sells chemicals and fungicide
treated seeds?

Because when they see that kelp meal is a bigger seller than chemicals,
they'll give the chemicals smaller shelf space until it's unprofitable to
sell them at all. . .

Just my thoughts on changing the world. . .

Dorene Pasekoff, Coordinator
St. John's United Church of Christ Organic Community Garden

A mission of 
St. John's United Church of Christ, 315 Gay Street, Phoenixville, PA  19460

community_garden maillist  -  community_garden@mallorn.com

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index