Re: Moira and others
- To: m*@ucdavis.edu
- Subject: Re: Moira and others
- From: J* A*
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 18:20:44 +1100 (EST)
At 19:58 26/02/00 +0800, Barbara wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>>In a research project in UK about 10 years ago, the findings were as
>>follows: bone meal no longer is of much value because the cattle are no
>>longer fed what they had been fed for years. I am no scientist. So I wrote
>>the fellow who did the report and he said an analysis of the bones revealed
>>there was no real value to using them on plants any more. I must track down
>>that report. That is the reason I have not used it any more. Bill Grant,
>>central coast California
>
>That's facinating about the bone meal.
But sort of hard to believe. The composition of bones doesn't really depend
significantly on what the animal's been fed (within reason). Unless it's
some rare trace element -- which would only be missing from your garden in
exceptional circumstances. I thought it was the phosphate in bones that was
useful, and that's certainly still there.
> So the task now is to find something
>else which would provide equivalent nurishment for root development.
In this country at least, as in Moira and Tim's New Zealand, few sheep and
cattle go through feedlots anyway, so they never would have been given
whatever goodies Barbara's scientist says are no longer there in the UK.
Pigs and chooks are a different matter, of course.
I presume blood-and-bone (which, as opposed to "bone meal", is also a source
of nitrogen and iron) is still as good as ever?
John.
