PDA

View Full Version : looking for suggestions


Pages : [1] 2 3

topdog
01-11-2009, 06:09 PM
this will be my first season in full time applications, & i am looking for advice on set ups for my truck. i purchased a used skid sprayer already, have plenty of spyker spreaders, & looking into gettting a permagreen (haven't decided on new or used yet). i've been looking at some of the post with pictures to see how others are laying out there trucks. any input will be appreciated.

LIBERTYLANDSCAPING
01-11-2009, 07:38 PM
What part of Indiana are you in?

topdog
01-11-2009, 08:21 PM
southern indiana

SpreadNSpray
01-11-2009, 08:44 PM
this will be my first season in full time applications, & i am looking for advice on set ups for my truck. i purchased a used skid sprayer already, have plenty of spyker spreaders, & looking into gettting a permagreen (haven't decided on new or used yet). i've been looking at some of the post with pictures to see how others are laying out there trucks. any input will be appreciated.

What kind of truck? Pick up?..What size bed? Will this truck only be used for applications?

Barefoot James
01-11-2009, 10:40 PM
Are you licensed? Go organic it is safer for you and customers and less competetion - at least today!

rcreech
01-12-2009, 12:35 AM
Are you licensed? Go organic it is safer for you and customers and less competetion - at least today!

Oh yeah....and he forget to add that is doesn't work! :dizzy:


RE-ENACTMENT FROM ORGANIC APPLICATORS

"Oh Mr customer you have weeds...well that is ok becuase they add mycoryze to the soil and you will have a great root mass on your turf and weeds also absorb destructive sun rays that are getting through the ozone because of all the other lawn care companies that are using chemicals. Weeds are really a good thing. We don't like to see anything killed, plus there is no such thing as an organic selective weed control. BTW...we are having a vegetarian party during Obama's inaguaration...so if you are interested maybe you could bring some spinich dip!"

phasthound
01-12-2009, 07:47 AM
Oh yeah....and he forget to add that is doesn't work! :dizzy:


RE-ENACTMENT FROM ORGANIC APPLICATORS

"Oh Mr customer you have weeds...well that is ok becuase they add mycoryze to the soil and you will have a great root mass on your turf and weeds also absorb destructive sun rays that are getting through the ozone because of all the other lawn care companies that are using chemicals. Weeds are really a good thing. We don't like to see anything killed, plus there is no such thing as an organic selective weed control. BTW...we are having a vegetarian party during Obama's inaguaration...so if you are interested maybe you could bring some spinich dip!"

You're 100% correct..................................about no organic selective weed control. :)

topdog
01-12-2009, 08:04 AM
yes, i am licensed. i went through Purdue last season to get my license.
i have 4 work trucks, 4 employees, & mow about 100 accounts a week. this is just my first year doing the apps side. i bought out the guy i used to sub apps to (he wanted to retire). he has aprox 200 app customers. i am really excited for the upcoming season.
i was really looking for advice on all the small little things you guys have learned on the way. for example what glooves you like, what type spill kits you carry with you, setting up truck/trailer, extra stuff to carry with you, & etc..
i already have most everything i think i need, spreaders, skid sprayer, flags, door hangers, LICENSE, trucks, insurance, trailers, blowers, & etc.

Thanks,

Scott

rcreech
01-12-2009, 08:16 AM
You're 100% correct..................................about no organic selective weed control. :)

Barry,

I was just trying to make a funny! :laugh:

No disrespect to you or your product! You know where I stand!

I don't have ANY trouble with people using organics...just don't appreciate people that push them!

Wares me out!

BTW...thanks for the sample! I will call you soon!

Smallaxe
01-12-2009, 08:45 AM
yes, i am licensed. i went through Purdue last season to get my license.
i have 4 work trucks, 4 employees, & mow about 100 accounts a week. this is just my first year doing the apps side. i bought out the guy i used to sub apps to (he wanted to retire). he has aprox 200 app customers. i am really excited for the upcoming season.
i was really looking for advice on all the small little things you guys have learned on the way. for example what glooves you like, what type spill kits you carry with you, setting up truck/trailer, extra stuff to carry with you, & etc..
i already have most everything i think i need, spreaders, skid sprayer, flags, door hangers, LICENSE, trucks, insurance, trailers, blowers, & etc.

Thanks,

Scott

Too bad the guy you bought from doesn't run through a season with you. Work out the bugs and questions OJT. Skimp on training = expensive inefficencies. I'd pay him to do ridealongs for a while. One day OJT is better than 20 hours of advice.

Advice comes from preference as a general rule. Not everybody prefers blondes.

sprayboy
01-12-2009, 09:14 AM
Did you buy any of his equipment or just his accounts?

If you got his equip. and he was successful, you should be able to carry on just fine. I think that when customers see the same trucks that it eases their mind a little on things. You can tweak setups as you go along later.

I agree with smallaxe, if you can get the previous owner to help out with training and help get you through the first round that would be a big plus.

Barefoot James
01-12-2009, 02:29 PM
I don't do organics because of global warming - don't think it is real. But I do believe in dead soil and groundwater contamination. Look at the gulf or Chesapeake Bay. Granted lots of “organic poop from cows too (they should compost it and use it for good)” but there is way more evidence of over use of oil made NPK with salt carriers and herbicides and pesticides that have killed the soil. These all leach into the ground water, streams, rivers and on to the ocean – red tides in the gulf as big as NJ. Farmlands are killing themselves and this nation. Yards using synthetics and homeowners who are not trained with synthetics are doing their fair share of damage too but not to the magnitude of agricultural lands/farms.

If you have irrigation synthetics work and over time you get the “opportunity” to spend even more on your NPK and herbs and pests as your soil will need more to work as good (as it did) and you will get to pay more as prices go up on an oil based product – this is really a great program – LOL - PLUS you get to pay more for irrigation as your property will need even more water to carry the nutrients hydrophonically to the plant to work as good as it did many years ago before all life in the soil was killed and helped the NPK work. This is why Barry’s program could be a viable one to get you to start to see that organic matter, humus and mycorrhizae will help NPK work better. But over time the real science will prove that even this product is not the solution – only a bridge – a bridge for the soil and to get your mind and your soil working again.

Now the flip side of the coin is “IF” you have irrigation – if not the NPK just does not work (like it could) and the grass looks like (fill in the blank) unless it rains and during July – August when it does not the yard dies and looks just plain bad. You see synthetics need water as a carrier for it to work and bypass the soil – straight into the plants roots. No water no results. The natural system means if the soil is healthy, living and full of humus and organic matter then it will feed the plants and only need what rain it gets to do so.

I doubled my business in 2008 – “Why” because all I have to do is show folks my yards in July during a drought vs. Mr. True Greens (or any other synthetic companies) and you can see the HUGE difference in quality of turf. Drought times are the best times to show the big difference in natural vs. synthetic chemicals. That mycorrhizae you are talking about really shines in times of drought. Our weed plan is to eliminate them with synthetics (hypocrite??) no realist. I get rid of them – once (their party is over) and start the property over. I focus from then on making sure the soil is healthy and alive and plant seed and aerate, more seed, more aeration, more seed – you getting the picture here. OUR weed program is healthier soil – soil that grass thrives in and so much seed germination it out competes the weeds. Weeds don’t like healthy soil or 3.5-inch fescue and bare spots are not allowed (we seed them) so this is how we handle and control weeds.

Now lets look at disease issues for plants. Organics have their own system that beat diseases back – but to Moms and Dads they are more interested in disease issues for their family and pets. Cancers, autism, rashes, breathing problems, etc and host of other medical diseases are attributed to herbicides and pesticides. Do you know how many more medical problems long time applicators of synthetics have vs. organic only farmers/applicators? Have you ever objectively read any materials by William A. Albrecht – who did tests on soil fertility from the beginning of NPK until about 30 years ago (when he died) and used the US military records from WWII (on ALL personal) as his source. Facts speak loudly in the case of being good stewards of what God gave us. God gave us a perfect system and man thinks they can always one up God? I just don’t buy into that way of thinking.

Check out http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/news/pub/pdf/conquest_print.pdf. Great study done by Dr Walter Clay Lowdermilk. “Conquest of the Land through 7,000 Years. This was written way back in 1938 and shows how man continues to foul up what God gave us. Living soil has rose up empires and taken them under. It also shows how in some cases man has used what HE gave us for good, using natural systems to enhance lands/soil productivity.
I’m a man who wants to help others get what they want and be safe in doing so. If I could not get the results then I would not be writing this to you. God gave us all the abilities we have and to close our minds and rely on ourselves is not what God desires. God desires us to rely on HIM and His way is a more natural way of doing things.

Ask your self has synthetics ever IMPROVED the soil for better – not temporary yields, soil fertility. Everything I study, read and farms I visit their #1 concern (besides all the political stuff and economy) is they don’t get the same yields or quality they used to get – makes you go hummmm!
BTW I like spinach dip especially on a Ritz cracker with green chili’s from NM but I won’t be celebrating this terms inauguration. I’m very much a conservative I follow Jesus what about you?

RigglePLC
01-12-2009, 03:06 PM
Topdog, you are on the right track. Just allow a little extra time to get the hang of it in first few days. Spill kit depends on your Inidana law. Try to get one you can fit behind the seat to keep it dry. Put it in an old gym bag or fert bag taped shut. You probably need to redo your invoices so you can check the box for the chemical you used, and the dose and concentration, with EPA number, for your records. Find a way to chain the spread in the corner of your truck so it won't tip over. Find a way to stack about 20 bags of fert in truck--around the skid sprayer. And be sure to use a one-ton truck so you can handle the weight. Or did you plan to do weed control one month and come back with fert the next month? Good plan so far.

rcreech
01-12-2009, 04:29 PM
I don't do organics because of global warming - don't think it is real. But I do believe in dead soil and groundwater contamination. Look at the gulf or Chesapeake Bay. Granted lots of “organic poop from cows too (they should compost it and use it for good)” but there is way more evidence of over use of oil made NPK with salt carriers and herbicides and pesticides that have killed the soil. These all leach into the ground water, streams, rivers and on to the ocean – red tides in the gulf as big as NJ. Farmlands are killing themselves and this nation. Yards using synthetics and homeowners who are not trained with synthetics are doing their fair share of damage too but not to the magnitude of agricultural lands/farms.

If you have irrigation synthetics work and over time you get the “opportunity” to spend even more on your NPK and herbs and pests as your soil will need more to work as good (as it did) and you will get to pay more as prices go up on an oil based product – this is really a great program – LOL - PLUS you get to pay more for irrigation as your property will need even more water to carry the nutrients hydrophonically to the plant to work as good as it did many years ago before all life in the soil was killed and helped the NPK work. This is why Barry’s program could be a viable one to get you to start to see that organic matter, humus and mycorrhizae will help NPK work better. But over time the real science will prove that even this product is not the solution – only a bridge – a bridge for the soil and to get your mind and your soil working again.

Now the flip side of the coin is “IF” you have irrigation – if not the NPK just does not work (like it could) and the grass looks like (fill in the blank) unless it rains and during July – August when it does not the yard dies and looks just plain bad. You see synthetics need water as a carrier for it to work and bypass the soil – straight into the plants roots. No water no results. The natural system means if the soil is healthy, living and full of humus and organic matter then it will feed the plants and only need what rain it gets to do so.

I doubled my business in 2008 – “Why” because all I have to do is show folks my yards in July during a drought vs. Mr. True Greens (or any other synthetic companies) and you can see the HUGE difference in quality of turf. Drought times are the best times to show the big difference in natural vs. synthetic chemicals. That mycorrhizae you are talking about really shines in times of drought. Our weed plan is to eliminate them with synthetics (hypocrite??) no realist. I get rid of them – once (their party is over) and start the property over. I focus from then on making sure the soil is healthy and alive and plant seed and aerate, more seed, more aeration, more seed – you getting the picture here. OUR weed program is healthier soil – soil that grass thrives in and so much seed germination it out competes the weeds. Weeds don’t like healthy soil or 3.5-inch fescue and bare spots are not allowed (we seed them) so this is how we handle and control weeds.

Now lets look at disease issues for plants. Organics have their own system that beat diseases back – but to Moms and Dads they are more interested in disease issues for their family and pets. Cancers, autism, rashes, breathing problems, etc and host of other medical diseases are attributed to herbicides and pesticides. Do you know how many more medical problems long time applicators of synthetics have vs. organic only farmers/applicators? Have you ever objectively read any materials by William A. Albrecht – who did tests on soil fertility from the beginning of NPK until about 30 years ago (when he died) and used the US military records from WWII (on ALL personal) as his source. Facts speak loudly in the case of being good stewards of what God gave us. God gave us a perfect system and man thinks they can always one up God? I just don’t buy into that way of thinking.

Check out http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/news/pub/pdf/conquest_print.pdf. Great study done by Dr Walter Clay Lowdermilk. “Conquest of the Land through 7,000 Years. This was written way back in 1938 and shows how man continues to foul up what God gave us. Living soil has rose up empires and taken them under. It also shows how in some cases man has used what HE gave us for good, using natural systems to enhance lands/soil productivity.
I’m a man who wants to help others get what they want and be safe in doing so. If I could not get the results then I would not be writing this to you. God gave us all the abilities we have and to close our minds and rely on ourselves is not what God desires. God desires us to rely on HIM and His way is a more natural way of doing things.

Ask your self has synthetics ever IMPROVED the soil for better – not temporary yields, soil fertility. Everything I study, read and farms I visit their #1 concern (besides all the political stuff and economy) is they don’t get the same yields or quality they used to get – makes you go hummmm!BTW I like spinach dip especially on a Ritz cracker with green chili’s from NM but I won’t be celebrating this terms inauguration. I’m very much a conservative I follow Jesus what about you?

I was just messing around Barefoot! You are not too bad on pushing organics...but several others have been really bad!

From several people that I have talked to...they have had very little luck with getting good results with organics. I have not tried to (due to volume of material needed and cost). I am looking into Barry's bridge products right now and going to give them a gander to see whats going on.

I disagree with a lot of what you stated, but a lot of what you said is VERY TRUE.

I do think this world is going down hill fast and I don't think we live in a perfect world by any means! Cancer is running rapid, but who know why! Don't blame it all on herb and fert!

Food additives, industry, sun, air pollutants, cell phones, microwaves, family genetics and many other things may be the culprit. We are all ruining this world together, so don't think organic lawncare is going to make much of a difference!

Totally disagree with you on the AG side! Where are farmers getting decreased yields. Other then weather related incidents. yields are increasing on avg EVERY year. The avg corn yield right now is around 153 bu/ac and steadily climbing due to genetics and traits (bio tech). Right now they are predicting a 300 bu avg by 2030.

I totally agree that the lord is probably up there shaking his head at us and shaking his finger at us...but it is all part of the script (per say). We all have to screw up this bad so he will come back and get us (hopefully very soon)!

I hate spinich dip by the way! :laugh:

Real Green
01-12-2009, 04:39 PM
I was just messing around Barefoot! You are not too bad on pushing organics...but several others have been really bad!

From several people that I have talked to...they have had very little luck with getting good results with organics. I have not tried to (due to volume of material needed and cost). I am looking into Barry's bridge products right now and going to give them a gander to see whats going on.

I disagree with a lot of what you stated, but a lot of what you said is VERY TRUE.

I do think this world is going down hill fast and I don't think we live in a perfect world by any means! Cancer is running rapid, but who know why! Don't blame it all on herb and fert!

Food additives, industry, sun, air pollutants, cell phones, microwaves, family genetics and many other things may be the culprit. We are all ruining this world together, so don't think organic lawncare is going to make much of a difference!

Totally disagree with you on the AG side! Where are farmers getting decreased yields. Other then weather related incidents. yields are increasing on avg EVERY year. The avg corn yield right now is around 153 bu/ac and steadily climbing due to genetics and traits (bio tech). Right now they are predicting a 300 bu avg by 2030.

I totally agree that the lord is probably up there shaking his head at us and shaking his finger at us...but it is all part of the script (per say). We all have to screw up this bad so he will come back and get us (hopefully very soon)!

I hate spinich dip by the way! :laugh:

CREECH, we are so closed minded. I mean what do we know? We use outdated products and force our opinions on everyone else.

rcreech
01-12-2009, 04:59 PM
Barefoot,

You are not very far South of me...so I would like a list of all the farmers you talked to that are seeing decreases in yields!

I am a seed dealer for Beck's Hybrids up here and always looking for new business. I can make your friends a lot of money!!!!!!

If they are using the latest genetics and traits their is no reason for yields to drop. Drought tolerance and disease tolerance is improving in the newest genetics every year!


I will pay you $100/contact and I will increase their yields dramatically and look like a hero.

PM me if you are interested! :laugh:

Barefoot James
01-12-2009, 05:20 PM
First off you are a good brother Rodney.

Second is I doubt lawn care practices are specifically responsible for causing the rampant issues of disease, cancers, etc on a large scale but they do have many cases where they have pinpointed it to synthetics on lawns. This is an area that one person like me/ could be the messenger and have an impact to possibly save a life or two both here and after. Ag too. We have a huge problem with how to feed the masses. I think natural alternatives are the way to grow and save our soils. We are learning more and more towards these efforts and time will show – the system is there we just have to work together to get it working again. I think more folks need to revisit living and raising their families on the farm as a means of gainful employment and quality of life. Too many get rich quick folks are turning our country into the armpit of society. Nothing is wrong with profit but at what cost to others and ones own morality
In 3rd world countries it will HAVE to be organic/sustainable, because they can’t afford the Chems – but since we have the means we should be showing them how to do it – unfortunately since we don’t do it ourselves we don’t know how to teach anyone. So this is why I tell these stories – I can be a messenger and help those who know MUCH more than me show others. You have much more experience than I in lawn care and ag and forgotten more than I probably know. I’m glad to see you looking at bridge products. Nutrient Plus is more cost effective short and long term – but you need to buy them by the truckload to maximize profits. They do work like they say and show he benefits of both worlds – however over time you will still need to use more and the costs will rise. Good start but keep looking for a better end.

Third - increases in AG? Not with out field rotations (waiting on organics to recover the soil – totally an organic technique) and organic soil amendments - no field with straight synthetics is producing more yields they have synthetics plus organics or synthetics plus mechanical irrigation. SYNTHETICS only with what ever rain yields are down.

I will take you up on this as I make my rounds in a few weeks. I'm just getting involved myself with the ag end in terms of the advantages in soil life and usage of humic/fulvic acids, cation exchanges, mycorrhizae, etc.

turfsolutions
01-12-2009, 05:52 PM
Wow this thread went off on a tangent. I would look into a zspray stand on unit before deciding. z-spray.com. I believe they are out of Indiana as well so that will save on shipping.

rcreech
01-12-2009, 05:53 PM
Third - increases in AG? Not with out field rotations (waiting on organics to recover the soil – totally an organic technique) and organic soil amendments - no field with straight synthetics is producing more yields they have synthetics plus organics or synthetics plus mechanical irrigation. SYNTHETICS only with what ever rain yields are down.



There are no commercial farms out here spreading ammendments or using organics! Organic farming is seriously a joke. They raise 30 bu corn when we raise 140! WEED CONTROL is king in corn! And organic ag has no weed control. Are you seriously that close minded to say that any fields treated with straight synthestic is producing more yields?

Actually with todays genetics...soils don't play near the role they once did! Genetics is key! Used to duringa drought we would raise 60-80 bu corn. This year we had a horrible drought and raised 140+ Bu corn. That is pure genetics! I can take a junk soil and put the correct hybrid on it an PUMP out the corn! I PROMISE!!!

Also, rotations in ag means we are switching crops every year. This doens't mean that the land is laying dormant! How do you linking organics and crop rotation?

Of course rotations are important...but this is from a disease and insect angle. Also it is smart to rotate corn and beans as there is good N carry from fixation by beans (means less N cost for corn).

But out WEST in the corn belt they raise corn EVERY YEAR and don't rotate. They plow and bury all debris which limits the disease pressure and they are using traits on their corn for cornborer and rootworm.

Trust me...I work in the corn business all winter. You can not convince me that yields are decreasing. I farm and I am also in the seed trenches all winter!

Here ya go!

http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/node/2261

rcreech
01-12-2009, 06:00 PM
Read this also:

The whole article is good...but read "Where corn yield increases are coming from"

Just found this, since you don't believe me!

http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/2007/2-12/300bpa.html

rcreech
01-12-2009, 06:03 PM
Please state your source for decreased yields due to DEAD soils when using syn fertilizers. I would really like the read it!

Barefoot James
01-12-2009, 11:21 PM
Why do you keep saying that? Volumes of evidence proves other wise. Please read on -
Like I said in above YOU have much more experience than I - obviously with corn. I'm not talking about genetically mutated corn. Take twins - identical in every way and give the slower weaker one steroids and bam he gets stronger and faster than his sibling. Does that make is safer. Does mutated corn taste better or will prove to be safe down the road? Who is to say? Again cancer rates are rising could this be part of the problem - who is to say? Time and science will tell. Just looking at other options – that are safer and deliver results. They can grow corn as big as a 5 year-old kid but would you eat it? You have missed my point. My point is 1 to 1 or 2 to 2 not version 1 to version 24. Good soil fertility comes from organic matter, humus and mycorrhizae and if your genetically mutated corn was grown in fertile soil vs. the soil it is growing in it would be even bigger and have even greater yield. Roundup ready corn and we eat it – wow – think about that what could it really be doing to us long term – great for fuel but to put in our body? Scary. Weeds could be controlled or minimized in other safer ways – even in cornfields.

Let's move this discussion to something that is a little harder (or at least more time consuming) to manipulate - genetically.

Pecans or any food grown on trees.

Organic Pecans: Another option for Growers

The pecan's name comes from an Algonquian word meaning "a nut that requires a stone to crack." Widely consumed out of hand and used as an ingredient in baked goods and confections, pecans are a good source of protein. And the antioxidants and plant sterols they contain may improve consumers' cholesterol status by reducing the "bad" LDL cholesterol levels. Despite only having commercially produced the nut since the 1880s, U.S. growers now provide roughly 90 percent of the world's pecans, with an annual crop of about 200 million pounds worth about $400 million dollars.

New ARS studies in Weslaco, Texas, are showing that it may be possible for growers to boost their revenue further by growing pecans organically. In 2002, ARS scientists—led by Joe Bradford, research leader for the Integrated Farming and Natural Resources Research Unit in Weslaco—began transitioning part of a 27-year-old pecan orchard from conventional management to certified-organic management. The 20-acre test site is located within the Adolph (Sonny) and Noreen Gebert pecan orchard in Comanche County, in north-central Texas.

Bradford was contacted by Sonny Gebert in 2001, after Gebert tuned in to a radio show during which the two hosts mentioned Bradford's research on organic crops. Gebert then phoned Bradford, and the two arranged to meet in Goldthwaite, Texas, at a Texas A&M workshop in 2002. Gebert agreed to let Bradford and his collaborators manage half of the nearly 800 pecan trees in the Gebert orchard using organic principles. ARS would manage the older portion of the orchard, which was planted in 1981. The Geberts would continue to manage the newer portion, planted in 1986.

The main objective of the project is to provide pecan growers with information on how to convert to an organic system from a conventional management system that relies on synthetic chemicals. Bradford and his technicians are constantly changing the variables within the system and examining the interactions that result from those changes.

Healthier Trees From Healthy Soil

The ARS organic management system was based on first increasing soil organic matter, balancing the nutrients and biology of the soil, and using organic pesticides only when needed. Bradford theorized that by improving tree health through improved soil health, the trees would naturally become more resistant to disease and insect attack. The researchers decided to evaluate several soil treatments in the test orchard and to treat the trees aboveground using organic methods. They began applying treatments in the fall of 2002, shortly after their first summer visit with Sonny Gebert.
They studied five pecan varieties—Caddo, Cheyenne, Desirable, Pawnee, and Wichita—applying various organic amendments several times during the year, both to the soil and to the leaves. As many as 15 soil fertility and biological treatments were applied, while the aboveground portion of the orchard received a uniform foliar treatment. Treatments used include poultry litter and compost, rock minerals, MycoApply® mycorrhizal fungi, and nutrients such as iron, zinc, boron, copper, and manganese.

Since the death of Sonny Gebert in early 2008, management of his pecan orchard has been taken over by Danny Phillips, a retired Extension agent from Hamilton County who is employed by Noreen Gebert. The ARS scientists continue to travel to the orchard about once each month from March until the November harvest—the growing season for pecans—to apply soil treatments and compost teas.

Larry Zibilske, a soil scientist in Bradford's research unit, became involved in the project during the 2008 growing season. He is measuring changes in soil microbial properties resulting from the various treatments applied over the last 6 years. As soil fertility increases with organic treatments, microbial populations benefit greatly. Not only do they become more diverse, they also take a more active role in providing nutrients to the trees and protecting the roots from pathogens. The key is to modify the soil microbial habitat so that the beneficial organisms persist and provide a lasting, nurturing environment for the trees.

Evaluating the Results

Contrary to conventional growers' expectations, the ARS organically treated test site outyielded the Geberts' conventionally managed, chemically fertilized orchard in each of 5 years. The best ARS treatment surpassed the Gebert control by 18 pounds per tree—44.10 pounds compared to 25.85 pounds—in 2005 and by 12 pounds per tree—45.09 pounds compared to 33.39 pounds—in 2007. Because pecans are an alternate-bearing tree, both orchards' yields were very low in 2004 and 2006.

"This is the most successful organic project I have been involved with," says Bradford. "The results are especially satisfying, because we have shown that it's possible to grow nuts under the organic system that are far superior in looks and in taste."

Also involved in the project are plant physiologist Nasir Malik and entomologist Allan Showler, who both work in Bradford's unit. Malik and Showler will next compare some of the nutritional values of the organic and conventional pecans harvested this fall.

But What About Pecan Pests?

Another positive result was that the ARS researchers learned how—with the help of beneficial Trichogramma wasps—to control the pecan casebearer. As one of pecans' major pests, the larvae of this one-third-inch-long gray moth tunnel into the small, immature nutlets, killing them. The very tiny parasitic wasps of the genus Trichogramma lay their eggs inside casebearer eggs, turning them black and preventing the casebearer larvae within from developing.

As a backup control, the scientists used the organic bacterial insecticide known as "spinosad," which is derived naturally from a soil-dwelling bacterium, Saccharopolyspora spinosa.

The researchers also found that foliar applications of compost tea—a brew made of compost, small amounts of food sources for microbes, and water—somewhat increased trees' resistance to insects and achieved some disease control when applied each month after flowering. They think that another major pest of pecans, the pecan weevil, was somewhat controlled by compost tea applied to soil. Additional research in 2008 will verify whether this treatment will be added to the recommendations by Bradford and his team.

Currently, ARS scientists are working to better control pecan scab caused by a fungus that, if not curbed, can cause entire crops from most varieties to be lost during periods of frequent rains or extended dew. Scab is the most destructive disease of pecans in the hot, humid South.

The researchers also believe that the alternate-bearing characteristic of pecan production will lessen—or disappear—after several years of organic management. ARS data shows that pecan trees in the Hamilton organic orchard bear 40 pounds per tree in the good years and about 4 pounds per tree in the lower yielding years—a drastic difference that can make or break some of the smaller pecan producers. Bradford thinks that the organic system will eventually even out the wild discrepancies between the good and bad yields.

"This year, which is the low-yield year in the alternate-bearing cycle, the conventional orchard has few to no pecans, yet our organic orchard has a lot of pecans. The typical 4 pounds per tree measured in 2004 and 2006 could be at least 15-20 pounds this year," he says.

Dollar Value
Pecans from the Gebert orchard generally sell for about $2.00 per pound wholesale. Using the average yield for the conventional management system of 25 pounds per tree and roughly 35 trees per acre, sale of the crop generates about $1,750 per acre (25x35x$2). But the ARS best-management organic system yield of 44 pounds per tree would gross $3,080 per acre (44x35x$2), for an increase in sales of $1,330 per acre. While production costs add about $100 per acre, the value of the pecans is increased by at least $1.50 per pound. Thus, pecans harvested from an orchard certified as organic would generate $5,290 per acre [(44x35x$3.50) – $100]—for an increase of $3,540 per acre above the returns from the conventional management system.

These greater dollar returns prove that adopting an organic system and obtaining certification could provide a valuable additional source of income to pecan growers, thanks to increased yields and improved kernel quality. "I believe our greatest accomplishment is that we, as scientists, have shown it's possible to design a management system that growers will adopt," says Bradford. "That's really the biggest thing—to prove that this is a change for the better."

He also notes that converting pecan production from conventional to organic can translate to other crops. "We think that the techniques we've tested here can apply to peaches, apricots, apples, walnuts—to all tree crops, and to plants in general."—By Alfredo Flores, Agricultural Research Service Information Staff.

Mike Amaranthus
drmike@mycorrhizae.com

JDUtah
01-13-2009, 01:09 AM
Why do you keep saying that? Volumes of evidence proves other wise. Please read on


Barefoot,

Please show a study (it doesn't even have to be peer reviewed) where the regular and appropriate use of fertilizer (4-6 lbs N per K in 4+ apps) kills soil life. I have yet to see any proof. I have searched and searched and only found things that prove otherwise...

Thanks in advance.

You say "Volumes of evidence"? The only 'volume' of evidence I have found is Dr. I's book.. but in there she only mentions the theory of how "microbe cells explode" (which is actually backwards if I remember correctly)... Plus she gives no minimum tolerance of soil salt levels to prevent this, nor proves that the regular use of mineral ferts even comes close to that threshold... volumes of proof where? I am not trying to pick a fight. I really want to see this proof you speak of.

topdog
01-13-2009, 06:02 AM
wow, didn't check the forums yesterday, was moving snow plows around, & took a truck into the shop for a new set of tires, alignment, & upper tie rod.
didn't mean to start a war....haha. thanks for the advice! the guy i bought it from did sell me is skid sprayer. he's permagreen centri is shot.
he will help me get going with any questions. we actually had lunch togther yesterday and drove around some of the odd yards. i just like to do my "homework", and learn as much as i can. that being said some things can only be learned by doing them & years of experience.
I have 3 3/4 ton trucks do you think they won't handle the weight?

thanks again for the info. this will be my 5th season & i am really looking forward to it!

rcreech
01-13-2009, 06:50 AM
Barefoot,

I am not trying to be a jerk here...but please have your facts before posting! You are just shooting from the hip like you did the other day in the RENOVATION forum and you are getting yourself pretty deep!

You were talking about killing soils with fert and herbicides, crop rotations and yields dropping off from all the guys you talk to and now you are switching to PECAN production :dizzy:! I didn't know you guys raised pecans down there. How many farmers did you talk to down there in KY that is seeing a pecan yield decrease? :laugh:

BTW...how do you crop rotate every year with pecan trees? :laugh:

Yes yield increases are due to genetics and we are proud of this and I stated that. My point was...yields are not decreasing. Again the soil can only do so much on its own.
Look on the map I provided earlier and you will see we raised 30 Bu corn back before the 1950's. That was before fertilizers and plant genetics were being used. So I think it is safe to say we would be raising 25-40 bu corn with the best soils and no genetics or SYNTHECIC fertilizer.

I GUESS YOU ARE RIGHT AS THIS COULD CURE CANCER...BECAUSE IF WE QIUT USING THE BEST GENETICS AND FERT THIS COUNTRY WOULD STARVE TO DEATH INSTEAD!

rcreech
01-13-2009, 06:56 AM
wow, didn't check the forums yesterday, was moving snow plows around, & took a truck into the shop for a new set of tires, alignment, & upper tie rod.
didn't mean to start a war....haha. thanks for the advice! the guy i bought it from did sell me is skid sprayer. he's permagreen centri is shot.
he will help me get going with any questions. we actually had lunch togther yesterday and drove around some of the odd yards. i just like to do my "homework", and learn as much as i can. that being said some things can only be learned by doing them & years of experience.
I have 3 3/4 ton trucks do you think they won't handle the weight?

thanks again for the info. this will be my 5th season & i am really looking forward to it!


Sorry to take over your thread! This happens a lot when the organic boys come over here and try to save the world with their mycoryze!

Sorry,
Rodney Creech

RigglePLC
01-13-2009, 09:01 AM
Topdog,you are preparing perfectly--your opertion should work fine. About the weight. Skid sprayer 500 lbs, 200 gal water 1660 pounds, 20 bags of fert 1000 lbs. You, with generous lunch and a jug of water, 200. That is 3300, if you intend to carry fert and 200 gallons of water at the same time. This spring, if we hear 4 big bangs from Indiana we will know--its your tires.

sprayboy
01-13-2009, 09:12 AM
[QUOTE=Barefoot James;2694674]Roundup ready corn and we eat it – wow – think about that what could it really be doing to us long term – great for fuel but to put in our body? Scary.

Corn has been sprayed for years and years with other chemicals and we are still here. Why is Roundup so different?

phasthound
01-13-2009, 09:19 AM
Sorry to take over your thread! This happens a lot when the organic boys come over here and try to save the world with their mycoryze!

Sorry,
Rodney Creech

I dunno Rodney, I see the sharing of ideas and results as a good thing. There is a great deal of information coming up the pike from research being done on biological farming and landscaping techniques. This is science based knowledge that is giving us a deeper understanding of agronomics and economics.

I'm not against the use of pesticides or synthetic fertilizers. However, I am in favor of reducing the need for them by using products and techniques that improve soil and plant health. I do not view it as "organic vs synthetic", rather as a learning process that will improve our understanding of how we can best provide healthy landscapes and food sources. I have no doubt that organic based systems which include IPM principles is a viable approach.

rcreech
01-13-2009, 12:02 PM
I dunno Rodney, I see the sharing of ideas and results as a good thing. There is a great deal of information coming up the pike from research being done on biological farming and landscaping techniques. This is science based knowledge that is giving us a deeper understanding of agronomics and economics.

I'm not against the use of pesticides or synthetic fertilizers. However, I am in favor of reducing the need for them by using products and techniques that improve soil and plant health. I do not view it as "organic vs synthetic", rather as a learning process that will improve our understanding of how we can best provide healthy landscapes and food sources. I have no doubt that organic based systems which include IPM principles is a viable approach.

I totally agree...but is anyone doing this right now on the commercial scale?

Not that I am aware of!

It will have to be affordable and effecient or it won't fly!

My point is, we are increasing yields dramatically with syn ferts and obvioisly not killing the soils.

I feel like I am on constant defense with these Org boys! What we do is very sound! All I am doing is stating the facts to show they are wrong!

And I will continue as long as needed! :)

A lot of false info posted on here by the hippies and I ain't gonna let it fly.

Again, I don't have a problem with organic products...but they have to work, make me money and be effecient!

JDUtah
01-13-2009, 01:37 PM
I love how much people limit themselves by taking what other people have to say personally. But to each his own I guess. If their emotions cause them to put themselves into a little box more power to them, well less actually.

I am still waiting on this 'volume of evidence'... oh wait... they don't like me in the organic forum, maybe they have me on ignore too. lol

Bottom line is, neither practice kills the other and synthetics currently have orders of magnitude more scientific evidence than organic practices. Barry has the right idea by working to bridge the two.

The only side claiming one is killing the other is the organic side... the only side that is generally closed minded is the organic side... who has who on ignore? Who has their eyes open and is still open to "other" ideas? hmmmmm....

lol organics would be advanced so much faster if it didn't attract emotional based rational, but I guess that is just an inherent weakness that organics will have to overcome...

Rant over. What was this thread titled? :laugh:

NattyLawn
01-13-2009, 02:18 PM
I love how much people limit themselves by taking what other people have to say personally. But to each his own I guess. If their emotions cause them to put themselves into a little box more power to them, well less actually.

I am still waiting on this 'volume of evidence'... oh wait... they don't like me in the organic forum, maybe they have me on ignore too. lol

Bottom line is, neither practice kills the other and synthetics currently have orders of magnitude more scientific evidence than organic practices. Barry has the right idea by working to bridge the two.

The only side claiming one is killing the other is the organic side... the only side that is generally closed minded is the organic side... who has who on ignore? Who has their eyes open and is still open to "other" ideas? hmmmmm....

lol organics would be advanced so much faster if it didn't attract emotional based rational, but I guess that is just an inherent weakness that organics will have to overcome...

Rant over. What was this thread titled? :laugh:

This is the thing you that people don't get....I DO BOTH!!!!!!!!!!!! I apply organics and synthetics. How many of you on this forum have done both? How many of you have built bridge programs, organic programs? Nope, we come over here and it's "organics don't work" "they're too expensive" "how do you know synthetic ferts kill soil biology".

Who's the one's playing one side vs. the other when most on the organic side have done both?

JD,take a look at some of the posts in the older threads and tell me who has their eyes open to new ideas. I'm always open to change. The minute you stop doing that your business will suffer. A lot of people on this side have been using the same products for years, even decades. I'm totally shocked that rcreech would even take a sample of Nutrients Plus when he's bashed everyone else for the last few years. Fact is, I'm not learning anything from rcreech or you for that matter. I've been on this site before I worked where I work now, and will probably be here after I move on. I'm here to learn and pick up ideas from others in the field. I'm not the one defending my approach vs theirs. What bothers me is how hard people stick to their guns without listening or reading what others have to say.

So for you to judge me is a little close minded.

rcreech
01-13-2009, 03:03 PM
I have to agree with this one. No practices are perfect and thus all are broken. Continually working to improve what you use/do is central to progress and business success.

If you don't constantly change, you will be left behind.


Very true as I agree with you guys...but I am talking strictly about lawn health! Not the business! I constantly change and improve my business, but we are all technically using the same products as 20 years ago....UREA! It works great and even the bridge products have it! I don't have a problem not changing when needed. Those that just change for the fun of it ain't get'n any farther then I am, yet it is costing them more.

I have already said I am going to look into Bridge products...but that isn't much different then what I am doing now! I am definitly OPEN to other ideas, but they will be tested extensively before used in my business!

If you slow feed a lawn and keep the weeds out, you are pretty much good to go in this business.

There are many ways to treat or take care of a lawn and really all that matters is that it is green and weed free (or close). Doesn't mean one program is better then the other!

Lawn Health is very simple! I don't see anyone being left behind in lawncare if the customers lawn is green and being maintained in a professional manner!

Natty,

You started this war along time ago and I am not sure why and don't really care...but we need to bury the hatchet! I don't come on here to make friends by any means...but have made a ton in the process! There are some great people on here! Sorry I took the cheap shot at you, but you seem to really bring me out when you post on here AT ME! I don't go at you like that until you come at me. Let's chill out!

Good luck to ya!

phasthound
01-13-2009, 03:55 PM
Peace.

Oh wait........................does that make me a Hippie? :confused:

NattyLawn
01-13-2009, 04:04 PM
Natty,

You started this war along time ago and I am not sure why and don't really care...but we need to bury the hatchet! I don't come on here to make friends by any means...but have made a ton in the process! There are some great people on here! Sorry I took the cheap shot at you, but you seem to really bring me out when you post on here AT ME! I don't go at you like that until you come at me. Let's chill out!

Good luck to ya!

Just like with JD, it's always the other guy's fault. You were just politely calling Barefoot out, right?

Just like Ric doesn't like American, the same can be said for us...Leave it at that.

Good luck to ya!

JDUtah
01-13-2009, 04:17 PM
It's never my fault! If it were I might have to say sorry... :hammerhead:

rcreech
01-13-2009, 04:34 PM
Just like with JD, it's always the other guy's fault. You were just politely calling Barefoot out, right?

Just like Ric doesn't like American, the same can be said for us...Leave it at that.

Good luck to ya!


Yes, I was defiinitly calling Barefoot out! I am not apologizing in any way for correcting him when he stated totally inaccurate information!

Which makes my point!

You always come into posts that have nothing to do with you and add your negative bull crap and as stated...you start crap with me~!

THANKS YOU FOR MAKING MY POINT!

You make it way to easy man! :cool2:

I was just apologizing for making the comment as that wasn't big of me!

No friendship is fine with me ol' buddy!

heritage
01-13-2009, 04:37 PM
Yes, I was defiinitly calling Barefoot out!

Which makes my point!

You always come in with your negative bull crap and as stated...you start crap with me~!

THANKS YOU FOR MAKING MY POINT!

You make it way to easy man! :cool2:

Get a Life.

Drama is BAD....

Want drama...Go watch a soap opera.

Let's make this a GOOD informative site again, and RID the Drama Crud!


Pete

rcreech
01-13-2009, 04:40 PM
Get a Life.

Drama is BAD....

Want drama...Go watch a soap opera.

Let's make this a GOOD informative site again, and RID the Drama Crud!


Pete

Thanks for your input Pete! :laugh:

NattyLawn
01-14-2009, 12:02 PM
Yes, I was defiinitly calling Barefoot out! I am not apologizing in any way for correcting him when he stated totally inaccurate information!

Which makes my point!

You always come into posts that have nothing to do with you and add your negative bull crap and as stated...you start crap with me~!

THANKS YOU FOR MAKING MY POINT!

You make it way to easy man! :cool2:

I was just apologizing for making the comment as that wasn't big of me!

No friendship is fine with me ol' buddy!

I should just let you get the last word, because that's what you really want, but you make the same argument every time organics comes up. That's why I jump in. It's out of a lack of knowledge.

Just like I stated before, it's always my fault, even though you go out of your way in other posts stating you have issues with me and other organic applicators. It's old, and you act like you're this great base of information, when you spread mis-information yourself.

rcreech
01-14-2009, 12:10 PM
I should just let you get the last word, because that's what you really want, but you make the same argument every time organics comes up. That's why I jump in. It's out of a lack of knowledge.

Just like I stated before, it's always my fault, even though you go out of your way in other posts stating you have issues with me and other organic applicators. It's old, and you act like you're this great base of information, when you spread mis-information yourself.


Your right...I like getting the last word!:laugh:

phasthound
01-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Your right...I like getting the last word!:laugh:

Rodney, you are having way too much fun with this. :laugh:

rcreech
01-14-2009, 06:20 PM
Rodney, you are having way too much fun with this. :laugh:

Didn't start out that way...but having fun now :laugh:

JDUtah
01-14-2009, 06:53 PM
What if I came in and stole the last line?













Quick mods... close the thread!!!!!!!! ;)

rcreech
01-14-2009, 06:54 PM
It's old, and you act like you're this great base of information, when you spread mis-information yourself.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot...where did I state mis-information?

I definitly don't think I am a great base of info or always perfect...but if I state something it can always be backed up! That's a fact, Jack!

Please post so I can see what you are talking about!

Everytime I ask for someone on here to prove or show me their data/info they just ignore my post. That means they don't have anything to back it up.

So with that said, either put up...or shut up! Where did I state mis-information?

Thanks,
Rodney Creech

rcreech
01-14-2009, 06:56 PM
What if I came in and stole the last line?













Quick mods... close the thread!!!!!!!! ;)


Sorry...aready snuck in two now! :laugh:

turf hokie
01-14-2009, 08:34 PM
Sorry...aready snuck in two now! :laugh:

Oh boy this is not gonna be good......










word

NattyLawn
01-14-2009, 09:30 PM
Oh yeah, I almost forgot...where did I state mis-information?

I definitly don't think I am a great base of info or always perfect...but if I state something it can always be backed up! That's a fact, Jack!

Please post so I can see what you are talking about!

Everytime I ask for someone on here to prove or show me their data/info they just ignore my post. That means they don't have anything to back it up.

So with that said, either put up...or shut up! Where did I state mis-information?

Thanks,
Rodney Creech

Do we really need to re-hash the "N, the big picture" thread? You never back anything up and talk in circles. It doesn't matter what we post or link to, you specifically said you don't read any of it (kiril probably posted 50 links). All in all, you prove my point. It's the same old argument from you about organics. You're not willing to learn anything new or look at anyone else's viewpoints. Anyone reading this can see that. Like I keep saying, I can run your program, but you can't run my organic based or organic program. That's bugs you....

Barry, please send that sample overnight! Hell, send him a bag and bill us...I can't wait for the rcreech review and how it doesn't work!

rcreech
01-14-2009, 10:26 PM
Do we really need to re-hash the "N, the big picture" thread? You never back anything up and talk in circles. It doesn't matter what we post or link to, you specifically said you don't read any of it (kiril probably posted 50 links). All in all, you prove my point. It's the same old argument from you about organics. You're not willing to learn anything new or look at anyone else's viewpoints. Anyone reading this can see that. Like I keep saying, I can run your program, but you can't run my organic based or organic program. That's bugs you....

Barry, please send that sample overnight! Hell, send him a bag and bill us...I can't wait for the rcreech review and how it doesn't work!


NO...please bring up the N "the big picture". What did I say that wan't correct? I am not affraid at all to revisit as Kiril and I were ok and agreed on that it just took a while to get on the same page!

People may not believe this, but I am not usually confrontational...but state something that isn't correct and I will be the first to jump on and will fight it to the end! I can't stand it when people state totally wrong info!

Just like when Barefoot stated about corn yields decreasing every year due to syn fert. He said it and ran! He is totally wrong, and never fessed up or tried to back up himself. That happens on here all the time!

So...please let me know what mis-info you are talking about! I want to see it! I want to see the "details". Tell me what you think was wrong with what I said! That is all I am asking for!

I have NEVER said that Bridge product don't work! I am actually pretty excited to test them and see what they do. I DID say however that a pure organic program don't work as there is no weed control.

It might work where you are...but my clients WANT DEAD WEEDS!

I don't have a problem with organic fert...I just don't see the benefit of paying more per K and handling all the volume (I am not talking bridge here).

I actually already have the sample and have talked to Barry several times. The product looks very nice.

Call Barry and he will tell you where I stand! I have said this many times before and will say it again! I don't have a problem with organic products. I really only have a problem with the people that think it is the ONLY way.

So please, if you are going to post I state mis-info...just back it up!

Barefoot James
01-14-2009, 11:24 PM
Like I said in above YOU have much more experience than I - obviously with corn. I'm not talking about genetically mutated corn.
Rodney you don't read well between the lines. I admitted see above that I was wrong - wrong, wrong, wrong about the corn. Should not have even gone there - You Rodney are KING Kong on the Empire State Building, MAC DADDY, Corn Man. But farmers still have lesser yields than they could if they could better manage the organic side of their feilds and had better solutions and/or knowledge about the organic side of their soil profile. The yields would be even bigger. That is my point and I did a poor job communicating.

This all started about lawn care and you said organics don't work. You are wrong and did not ever and will never admit it - but that's just Rodney. You did say you were just having fun, etc - appreciated:laugh:. But my whole deal with you is soil fertility is not improved by synthetic ferts and synthetic ferts can only damage soil fertility - not improve them.
Here is a known FACT - Synthetic P over 10% will kill mycorrhizae - as far as I'm aware Myco is an organic fungi and can't be grown synthetically. So that alone proves that synthetics DECREASE soil fertility.
That's it you too are wrong too - we just are not communicating well.
I just want to help this world and synthetic users understand that they can get better results if they also incorporate organic practices - because organics will give your genetic corn even greater yields with organics than without. You can get better yields with less ferts and less water - that should be interesting to a farmer - save $$ and make more for less. :usflag::canadaflag:

Kiril
01-15-2009, 12:03 AM
Same ol ****, different day. Not that Rod will read it .....

http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~christos/articles/cv_organic_farming.html

For some more info:

http://afsic.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?info_center=2&tax_level=1

http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/reprint/100/3/785.pdf

Oh but wait, there is more ... 242 hits in the Agronomy Journal alone for the search term "sustainable farming" (since we all know everything Rod states is agronomic fact)

http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/search?andorexactfulltext=and&resourcetype=1&disp_type=&sortspec=relevance&author1=&fulltext=sustainable+farming&pubdate_year=&volume=&firstpage=

Should I go find some maps to post?

Guess what Rod, the future is sustainable agriculture, either get on board or get left behind.

Kiril
01-15-2009, 12:17 AM
There are no commercial farms out here spreading ammendments or using organics!

Really Rod ..........

http://www.oeffa.org/countymap.php

Oh, and the definition of a commercial farm

http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Acommercial+farm

A farm which is deemed to be a viable farm operation and which normally produces sufficient income to support a farm family.

JDUtah
01-15-2009, 01:30 AM
Here is a known FACT - Synthetic P over 10% will kill mycorrhizae

Applied at what rate? 10% is a relative number and cannot be used as a threshold...

Do I acknowledge that a high concentration of mineral P can discourage the normal growth of mycorrhizae? Yes.

rcreech
01-15-2009, 12:29 PM
Rodney you don't read well between the lines. I admitted see above that I was wrong - wrong, wrong, wrong about the corn. Should not have even gone there - You Rodney are KING Kong on the Empire State Building, MAC DADDY, Corn Man. But farmers still have lesser yields than they could if they could better manage the organic side of their feilds and had better solutions and/or knowledge about the organic side of their soil profile. The yields would be even bigger. That is my point and I did a poor job communicating.

This all started about lawn care and you said organics don't work. You are wrong and did not ever and will never admit it - but that's just Rodney. You did say you were just having fun, etc - appreciated:laugh:. But my whole deal with you is soil fertility is not improved by synthetic ferts and synthetic ferts can only damage soil fertility - not improve them.
Here is a known FACT - Synthetic P over 10% will kill mycorrhizae - as far as I'm aware Myco is an organic fungi and can't be grown synthetically. So that alone proves that synthetics DECREASE soil fertility.
That's it you too are wrong too - we just are not communicating well.
I just want to help this world and synthetic users understand that they can get better results if they also incorporate organic practices - because organics will give your genetic corn even greater yields with organics than without. You can get better yields with less ferts and less water - that should be interesting to a farmer - save $$ and make more for less. :usflag::canadaflag:


You said you talked to people around and their yields were down due to using Sny Fert? Now you are saying they could be better. I am confused!

Let me explain my miscommunication!

When I say the orgnanice don't work...I am talking about the complete program. I am not saying that bridge products don't work or organic ammendments...I am just saying the program doens't work!

NO WEED CONTROL is a failed program in most programs.

rcreech
01-15-2009, 12:38 PM
Kiril,

Welcome back!

Did Natty call for some backup? :laugh:

Again...all the info you get is where you google it and post it on here and try to look smart! It is hilarious! :laugh:

You know everybodies region don't you?


REMEMBER the real world is what you need to be worring about!

I didn't say no organic farms....I SAID no COMMERCIAL organic farms.

I said COMMERCIAL farms for a reason. Yes your term may be accurate for commerical farms, but I don't know of any "large farms" producing organic grains.

But I can tell you one thing....I am in the heart of the corn belt here in OH and I used to know 1 guy that raised organic and he was getting killed!

The orgnic grain acres out her are nil and if you can (since you love to search for useless info) can you find out the % of organic corn in the US?

Bet it is less then 5% just guessing and probably a lot lower then that!

Remember we farm to make money! Some years we are barely making money with the inputs at maximum yields.

How do you expect a guy raisng organic corn with 80% LESS yield to stay in business? I know he doesn't have the high input costs we have, but he doesn't have yield either!!!!!

NattyLawn
01-15-2009, 12:50 PM
Kiril,

Welcome back!

Did Natty call for some backup? :laugh:

Again...all the info you get is where you google it and post it on here and try to look smart! It is hilarious! :laugh:

You know everybodies region don't you?


REMEMBER the real world is what you need to be worring about!

I didn't say no organic farms....I SAID no COMMERCIAL organic farms.

I said COMMERCIAL farms for a reason. Yes your term may be accurate for commerical farms, but I don't know of any "large farms" producing organic grains.

But I can tell you one thing....I am in the heart of the corn belt here in OH and I used to know 1 guy that raised organic and he was getting killed!

The orgnic grain acres out her are nil and if you can (since you love to search for useless info) can you find out the % of organic corn in the US?

Bet it is less then 5% just guessing and probably a lot lower then that!

Remember we farm to make money! Some years we are barely making money with the inputs at maximum yields.

How do you expect a guy raisng organic corn with 80% LESS yield to stay in business? I know he doesn't have the high input costs we have, but he doesn't have yield either!!!!!

No backup needed for people who don't listen.

Your short sightedness is amazing. I was in IL in early December visiting organic non-gmo corn, grain and dairy farmers who are very successful and way more ahead of the curve than you. But I guess since there's only 5% of farmers doing it it must not be successful, right? Or is it because they're like you and not willing to adapt to different ideas?

AcresUSA is one example of the organic farming community as a movement in the midwest. How many thousands of farmers attending their conference in St. Louis in early December? Most of the farming community I saw were leaving the day after I left.

Just keep up the fight Rod....

Real Green
01-15-2009, 12:52 PM
Kiril, I really think you are great. I mean that. :)

Has anyone in this thread seen The Dark Knight recently? Batman and the Joker is the greatest way to describe Rodney and Kiril's relationship.

Anyway, this is off topic, but Kiril, I would like to have a conversation with you about composting. Maybe through PM or E-mail? Reason being is I am guessing you are very edcuated on this issue.

Now I am done. You guys can go back to having your fun. Can't wait to see the info that get's tossed around... I learn so much because of you all.

Kiril
01-15-2009, 02:02 PM
I said COMMERCIAL farms for a reason. Yes your term may be accurate for commerical farms, but I don't know of any "large farms" producing organic grains.

:laugh: You back-peddle with the best of them.

Kiril
01-15-2009, 02:10 PM
Anyway, this is off topic, but Kiril, I would like to have a conversation with you about composting.

Feel free to PM me, but in all honesty, if your looking for advice on large scale composting operations, you would be better off talking to TreeGal. My niche is sustainable land & water management.

Mr. Nice
01-15-2009, 03:21 PM
The average farmer and landscapers brought up learning a chemical only approach to soil and plant management have trouble relating and understanding how a organic biological system works. There is a lot of information that one has to acquire before he/she can implement that type of system and be productive. as a professional

Some are afraid of the learning curve?

Just because there is no selective organic weed control product does not mean that if you implement a organic program you will have more weeds.

It's really about proper management, bottom line. some will be unable to
practice a true productive,weed free if the case organic program because simply they lack the skill's to do it.



Mycorrhizal fungi to my best knowledge are not killed by high P but are detoured to grow because they do best in soil that has low P and in turn will receive more carbon compounds from the plant.

rcreech
01-15-2009, 04:26 PM
:laugh: You back-peddle with the best of them.


READ THIS ATTACHMENT!

This is from 2005...but at that time .05% of the farmland in the US was ORGANIC!


This was even less then I was guessing!

rcreech
01-15-2009, 04:30 PM
No backup needed for people who don't listen.

Your short sightedness is amazing. I was in IL in early December visiting organic non-gmo corn, grain and dairy farmers who are very successful and way more ahead of the curve than you. But I guess since there's only 5% of farmers doing it it must not be successful, right? Or is it because they're like you and not willing to adapt to different ideas?

AcresUSA is one example of the organic farming community as a movement in the midwest. How many thousands of farmers attending their conference in St. Louis in early December? Most of the farming community I saw were leaving the day after I left.

Just keep up the fight Rod....

I go to seminars all the time to learn! That doesn't mean that these guys are growers. And add all the acres up from 1000 people and probably not all are farmers and you may still only have a total of 2000 acres. Who knows..but this doesn't carry much weight with me!

I am not saying there isn't grain raised organically...I am just saying that the "big boys" in the corn belt ain't doing it!

rcreech
01-15-2009, 04:44 PM
AcresUSA is one example of the organic farming community as a movement in the midwest. How many thousands of farmers attending their conference in St. Louis in early December? Most of the farming community I saw were leaving the day after I left.

Just keep up the fight Rod....


I just called AcresUSA and talked to your friends there!

They are actually sending me a copy of their magazine! :)

I talked to her about the conference and you ask "how many thousands attened the conference" since you asked?

I asked....and she said 1....1000 that is. You made it sound like many! :laugh:

I asked her what size farmers in general do organic grain production...small or large? I think you know what the answer is!

I asked for the avg size organic farm out there but she didn't know! I am going to dig on this though!

You guys are crazy if you think organic farming big! Could it be big in the future? SURE!

But it has to be manageable and profitable! And I don't see it happening anytime soon!

rcreech
01-15-2009, 04:51 PM
Forgot to post site showing the .5% of organic production in the US!

Sorry!



http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Organic/

As stated...commercial farms (or large grain producers) are not raising organics or this number would be much larger. That is a drop in the bucket for the grain market as this includes wheat, soy and corn!


BTW Natty...what did I say that was mis-information?

If you are going to state I state mis-info...you should have some examples!

Please, I want to see it!

NattyLawn
01-15-2009, 06:16 PM
Forgot to post site showing the .5% of organic production in the US!

Sorry!



http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Organic/

As stated...commercial farms (or large grain producers) are not raising organics or this number would be much larger. That is a drop in the bucket for the grain market as this includes wheat, soy and corn!


BTW Natty...what did I say that was mis-information?

If you are going to state I state mis-info...you should have some examples!

Please, I want to see it!

Nice...Thanks for the link....C'mon Rod, dig some more! You might learn something!

Kiril
01-15-2009, 08:15 PM
[SIZE="5"]As stated...commercial farms (or large grain producers) are not raising organics or this number would be much larger.

Lets us reiterate what you actually said Rod

There are no commercial farms out here spreading ammendments or using organics!

Do you now wish to recant your original statement?

Furthermore, your attempt to save face only covers certified organics, yet your original statement covers ALL farming that uses organic amendments, no? I suppose you will now say that in order for a farm to use organics, it must also be certified?

I suppose none of your "commercial" farms make use of cover crops, heh?

You really are a piece of work Rod.

Kiril
01-16-2009, 12:23 AM
Contrary to what Rod wants people to think, sustainable agriculture does not necessarily mean certified organic. The research and practices involved with sustainable Ag/practices can be easily extended to landscapes. Anyone who is truly interested in staying current needs to pay attention to what is going on with respect to this.

Here is some sources for information on sustainable agriculture for those who are interested.

http://www.sare.org/index.htm

http://attra.ncat.org/

http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/pubs/agnic/susag.shtml

rcreech
01-16-2009, 08:13 AM
So now we are talking sustainable and not organic? :laugh:

Who is changing here?

WOW!

What started this whole thing was barefoot talking about farmers with decreasing yields dut to using sny fert and he said organic ammendments should be used and also no pesticides. THAT IS ORGANIC TO ME!

I guess I am wrong...as we used to spread manure on our farm which I guess could be used as an organic ammendment!

POINT IS...we are a long time from organic commercial production due to yield loss and profitability!

Yes...we definitly use cover crops, I am 100% no-till (which is awesome) for that matter and even have one farm with buffer strips along a creek.

We are not out here to ruin the world as you think we are! We try hard to do a good job and to take care of what we have!

But we have to use fert and herbs to get a crop. If we don't...we are looking at a crop failure!

So you if you want to switch this talk to sustainable ag....that is fine, but I have been talking about organic farming the whole time!

YOU NEED TO GET OUT HERE IN THE REAL WORLD AND NOT GET ALL YOUR INFO FROM THE INTERNET!

It is really funny how much a guy in Ca knows about the corn belt! :laugh:

Kiril
01-16-2009, 08:59 AM
POINT IS...we are a long time from organic commercial production due to yield loss and profitability!

You see Rod, that is where you are wrong. If you would take the time to read what is being done to make Agriculture more sustainable you wouldn't be so quick to judge.

Yes...we definitly use cover crops, I am 100% no-till (which is awesome) for that matter and even have one farm with buffer strips along a creek.

Ah, so not only are you using organic amendments but you are also using sustainable practices. Nice way to invalidate your own argument.

We are not out here to ruin the world as you think we are! We try hard to do a good job and to take care of what we have!

Putting words in my mouth Rod. What I do think is some people are more concerned with profit margin than what happens to the land they farm/maintain and the environment that surrounds it.

But we have to use fert and herbs to get a crop. If we don't...we are looking at a crop failure!

That is a little extreme don't you think Rod, or have you really farmed your soil to the verge of death and the only way you can support your crops is with synthetics?

So you if you want to switch this talk to sustainable ag....that is fine, but I have been talking about organic farming the whole time!

Organic farming IS a facet of sustainable agriculture, but then you know that don't you.

If you meant certified organic agriculture then why didn't you specifically say that Rod? Do you expect people who visit this forum to read your mind?

You need to be CRYSTAL CLEAR about what you are talking about because alot of B.S. comes from you that can be easily misunderstood by people just looking for information. You say one thing, then you retract it, even within the same sentence. The double talk from you is astounding, and you can bet when I see it, I will call you on it.

BTW ROD, I've been in the "real world" for 15 years in this field, and I live smack dab in the middle of Agriculture (literally).

But then what more can I expect from you except underhanded comments and posts that do nothing more than mislead people unless they happen to align with your narrow view of the world. Sound about right? Do we need a review of your posts in this thread?

billy blade
01-16-2009, 09:18 AM
Spreading manure is not the only organic answer to Organic farming, Humates ( humic acid ) (Fulvic acid) Carbon , Amino's will complete the Crop program , Manure will not help to utilize ALL the NPK, (synthetic or Organic) the way Humate products will. You can increase the yield of ANY crop by Adding Humate products on a semi regular basis, pre planting, First feeding, and if needed last feeding , it is important to note that the proper blend of Micro nutrients at the proper cycle times is a must as well, Humate product will buffer the PH and Unlock the nutrients making them more readily available to the plant when needed, I have seen 30% increase in yield in Corn and better in Rice & wheat. Which by the way, all programs had reduced the application of (synthetic) NPK .. UREA-TP-MOP...by 50% they added the more needed elements at specific times in the form of foliar application, the humates are the key to plant health & nutrient uptake.

less synthetic .................................substantial savings
added humates & nutrients...... re spent savings with some savings left over
Increase yield per acre ...........increased profit per acre
reduced shrinking (evaporation) in corn to market

with out the proper bacteria, Fungi, etc. you will need heavy amounts of synthetic fert to feed. a good portion of which is locked up in the soil never used by the plant. that's why you need to use more synthetic, the plant is dependent on you. they also are more prone to insects & disease.

rcreech
01-16-2009, 11:21 AM
To me...being a good steward of the land....and organics are two totally different things!

No weed control, or GMO corn would kill the corn belt! Without GMO corn (insect traits) the Western Cornbelt sees anywhere from 40-50 bu losses/year. If you don't use herbicides you have to do a lot of cultivation which takes a lot of time, fuel and steel.

You tell me when how soon you think this is going to happen?

You can always put a slant and what I say, as I don't have my attorney look at my posts before I submit them! :)

Say what you want..and YOU are asking me to be crystal clear! :laugh:

If we were all crystal clear on here it would take 8 pages to say something!

You know a little about EVERYTHING don't you Kiril....and I mean just a little!
You know a little about everything don't you Kiril...and I mean just a little!

You know I'm right...but you sure are not going to admit it and I am fine with that!

We were talking organic vs synthetic (atleast before you jumped in) and that is the way the thread went!

I proved you guys wrong on the organic acres and that is that!

If you want to talk sustainable ag...please start another post asyou are the one that makes this confusing! :cool2:

Look....a guy from Ca is telling a guy in the cornbelt how to raise corn!!!!!! :)

rcreech
01-16-2009, 11:29 AM
Oh yeah...what started this part of the thread!!!!!

Moral of the story....crop yields ARE increasing every year and we are not killing our soils with sny ferts!

Stated this 6 pages ago but somehow the orggies started an arguement for the org side again that got out of control (unfortunatly with my help).

Mr. Nice
01-16-2009, 11:50 AM
To me...being a good steward of the land....and organics are two totally different things!Your not for real are you?

No weed control, or GMO corn would kill the corn belt! Without GMO corn (insect traits) please explain how if no gmo crops were used it would kill the corn belt?

I proved you guys wrong on the organic acres and that is that In 2005, for the first time, all 50 States in the U.S. had some certified organic farmland. U.S. producers dedicated over 4.0 million acres of farmland—1.7 million acres of cropland and 2.3 million acres of range land and pasture—
These are certified but I thought you said only a few thousand acres only..................?

Kiril
01-16-2009, 11:55 AM
To me...being a good steward of the land....and organics are two totally different things!

Whatever Rod. We all know your "definitions" and how often they change. Frankly, at times I am surprised you even have a degree .... or do you?


You know a little about EVERYTHING don't you Kiril....and I mean just a little!

No, I don't know everything, not even close, I'll leave that honor to you Rod, since you like to talk with "authority" on issues you clearly know nothing about..

I proved you guys wrong on the organic acres and that is that!

If that helps you sleep at night, knock yourself out buddy. The point I was making here with regard to YOU was that YOUR statement was B.S.! Should we review it for a third time Rod?

There are no commercial farms out here spreading ammendments or using organics!

Your statement, recorded for all time. Let us continue with the double talk and back-peddle Rod because I am sure quite a few people here are enjoying watching you try to talk your way out of it ..... and failing miserably. :laugh:

Kiril
01-16-2009, 11:56 AM
In 2005, for the first time, all 50 States in the U.S. had some certified organic farmland. U.S. producers dedicated over 4.0 million acres of farmland—1.7 million acres of cropland and 2.3 million acres of range land and pasture—
These are certified but I thought you said only a few thousand acres only..................?

Rod's world only extends for about 100 square miles around his house. :laugh:

Mr. Nice
01-16-2009, 12:08 PM
This happens a lot when the organic boys come over here and try to save the world with their mycoryze!

Darn "orggies" with their dam "mycoryze"?

Barefoot James
01-16-2009, 03:46 PM
Oh yeah...what started this part of the thread!!!!!

Moral of the story....crop yields ARE increasing every year and we are not killing our soils with sny ferts!

Stated this 6 pages ago but somehow the orggies started an arguement for the org side again that got out of control (unfortunatly with my help).


Once again Rod - you are misleading folks - I admit when wrong you should too and stop thinking you are always correct cause as you see you are not.
This is the truthThis all started with a guy looking for suggestions - I suggested he look at doing organics - safer (true) and less competition (true) - nothing more - nothing less) and you go into attack mode spreading false information about how organics don't work. So an expert like Natty or Kiril start to jump in and you’re exposed in so many ways of being wrong. and now the millions and millions of ACRES of organic farmland show up and POW your arguments start to go away.......

I didn't know that corn was not grown in CA is this another fact too. Why wouldn't someone in CA know about growing stuff? I was in the wine industry for 20+ years and they have every micro climate (world wide) for growing grapes right in CA - so no corn come on. They probably grow more varieties of ag in CA than any state in the US - don't know for sure but I bet I'm correct.

"The moral of this story is Rodney is spreading mis information and won't admit it."

So what is your suggestion to that poor thread topic starter :laugh::laugh::laugh: "Organics BAAAAD - Corn GOOOOD". (said in caveman voice):laugh::laugh::laugh:
PS I think the best part of the thread was Page 5:)

topdog
01-16-2009, 04:21 PM
Went and demoed this perma yesterday at JDL.* I have to say the salesperson wasn't very good there.* He said he didn't know much about the machine & fert programs because he has only been working there for 3 years.* In his defense he did say he knew a lot about irrigation.

billy blade
01-16-2009, 04:29 PM
Crop yields have NOT increased ....Far from it, Farmers are buying less synthetic fert due to price increasing. less synthetic fert ,less yield that Sir is a FACT. I deal with many farmers & many new ones each year, It is a leap of faith to leave the synthetic world, we sell products world wide, since 1994.

Using synthetic at a reduced rate of 30 to 50 % but adding Organics & naturals in key development stages will not only SAVE MONEY but INCREASE the yield and be BETTER for the soil & over all environment,Our clients have less crop rotation as well.

This Also holds true in Golf turf & home landscape.

I have plenty of test trial Data in Both categories.:waving:

Barefoot James
01-16-2009, 04:50 PM
Welcome back to YOUR thread - came to regain some control huh. Lots of folks like that PG unit. Spread some organics with it safer and less competition :laugh:

phasthound
01-16-2009, 05:11 PM
Using synthetic at a reduced rate of 30 to 50 % but adding Organics & naturals in key development stages will not only SAVE MONEY but INCREASE the yield and be BETTER for the soil & over all environment.
This Also holds true in Golf turf & home landscape.


Exactly what I've been saying here. I call it Integrated Nutrient Management, the combined use of organic matter and man made nutrient sources to bring you the best results in a way that is more sustainable.

rcreech
01-16-2009, 09:58 PM
If you guys had a clue...I would contine...but you don't!

JDUtah
01-16-2009, 10:14 PM
This thread is an addiction. I really do not care to read it but I can't stop from looking every time something new is posted. lol. :hammerhead:

muddstopper
01-16-2009, 10:29 PM
Durn I hate to jump in here, but I would hate to think that I was only growing 153bushels to the acre of geneticly modifide corn per acre as Rod suggested. We adveraged just a little over 200bs this last season. Fellow up the road adveraged almost 280 bushels peracre on about 300acres. I guess we should research the new modifided seed types a little better so we can get our yeilds down to the adverage. Rod, what is the protien content of your corn?, If its under 10%, you need to try other methods.

One point to consider with the new varities and increased yeilds, is just how healthy is all that corn. While yeilds have been going up yearly, so has the starch content. Problem is, we as humans need protien in our diets, not starch. Starch is great for produceing ethanol. Protien content has been decreasing about 1/10 % every year for the last half century. You might also want to think about how the general health of our population has also declined during the last half century. Are more yeilds better, or are we slowly starveing ourselfs while getting fatter.

James mentioned Dr. Albrecth. In some of his early papers, he presented a map showing the different soil types and fertility levels all across the US. This was done sometime in the 1930's. During WW2, the army gathered records on all members of the military as to their general overall health. These record where stuided by military doctors and they where able to establish that certain illnesses could be charicterised according to where the peerson that had the illness lived before joining the military. Maps where drawn up and lines drawn showing which areas of the country had the most of which ailment. The interesting thing was that some agronomist got hold of those maps and laid them over the soil fertility maps and the lines matched almost perfectly. Does this suggest that fertility in the soil matters when it comes to human health. I think so, and so did a lot of more knowledgeable people than I. Does increased yeilds mean we are growing healther crops, not if our population continue to experience poorer health.

Just something to think about

billy blade
01-16-2009, 10:37 PM
well done mudstopper

rcreech
01-16-2009, 10:54 PM
Durn I hate to jump in here, but I would hate to think that I was only growing 153bushels to the acre of geneticly modifide corn per acre as Rod suggested. We adveraged just a little over 200bs this last season. Fellow up the road adveraged almost 280 bushels peracre on about 300acres. I guess we should research the new modifided seed types a little better so we can get our yeilds down to the adverage. Rod, what is the protien content of your corn?, If its under 10%, you need to try other methods.

One point to consider with the new varities and increased yeilds, is just how healthy is all that corn. While yeilds have been going up yearly, so has the starch content. Problem is, we as humans need protien in our diets, not starch. Starch is great for produceing ethanol. Protien content has been decreasing about 1/10 % every year for the last half century. You might also want to think about how the general health of our population has also declined during the last half century. Are more yeilds better, or are we slowly starveing ourselfs while getting fatter.

James mentioned Dr. Albrecth. In some of his early papers, he presented a map showing the different soil types and fertility levels all across the US. This was done sometime in the 1930's. During WW2, the army gathered records on all members of the military as to their general overall health. These record where stuided by military doctors and they where able to establish that certain illnesses could be charicterised according to where the peerson that had the illness lived before joining the military. Maps where drawn up and lines drawn showing which areas of the country had the most of which ailment. The interesting thing was that some agronomist got hold of those maps and laid them over the soil fertility maps and the lines matched almost perfectly. Does this suggest that fertility in the soil matters when it comes to human health. I think so, and so did a lot of more knowledgeable people than I. Does increased yeilds mean we are growing healther crops, not if our population continue to experience poorer health.

Just something to think about


Mudd,

I would love to raise 200 bu corn every year but weather and lack of topsoil will usually keep us from it unfortunatly!

The 153 bu avg is of the whole country. It increase on avg about 2-3 bu/year and you will see this continuing to increase dramatically soon.


This includes dryland corn out west there are always drought sticken areas in the US (we have had two years in a row). In order for the country avg to be 153...it only makes sense to have corn yields well above and well below the avg.

That is why it is considered an avg.

You CAN raise 200+bu corn without Non-GMO if you don't have the bug pressure. But out west and even here it is VERY important to have traits (GMO corn) to keep ECB and RW from taking it out. They see anywhere from a 40-50 bu reduction on their refuge (untraited) corn.

2012 is when the Nitrogen managment and drought gene is coming to the market. This means the plant will take less N, and we can raise better crops out west in the drylands. We are going to see the overall county avg jump big time over the next 5 years.

rcreech
01-16-2009, 10:55 PM
crop yields have not increased ....

I have plenty of test trial data in both categories.:waving:

lets see it!

rcreech
01-16-2009, 11:12 PM
In 2005, for the first time, all 50 States in the U.S. had some certified organic farmland. U.S. producers dedicated over 4.0 million acres of farmland—1.7 million acres of cropland and 2.3 million acres of range land and pasture—
These are certified but I thought you said only a few thousand acres only..................?

Nice,

What I am saying is...I feel I am a very good steward of the land an I have never contemplated organics. Now go back and read what I stated!

They are two different things to me. I don't do organics, but I am a good steward!

I no-till, grid sample, and apply fert variable rate GPS etc.

We as most farmers care for the soils as they provde our living!

I am the one that posted the 2005 article with the info you discuss (look back through here and you will see it. Although your acres sound great...that is less then .5% of the total US acres.

If you look back I was telling Natty that the people at his BIG MEETING probably only represents that many acres....not the whole US. Although I was even surprised to see that .5% was organic.

As far as my comment about the corn belt not using GMO...I have stated on here several times already that with the amount of insect pressure that they have it is a MUST for them or they fall on their face!

Why would farmers pay $300 a bag for GMO corn...when they can buy NON GMO corn for $125? We are seeing a huge return...that is why!

If there was not return...then the market wouldn't demand it!

RR Beans are not 90+% of the overall market and GMO corn is over 85% now!

Kiril
01-16-2009, 11:13 PM
Food for thought.

For GMO: http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo7.htm

Against GMO: http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo8.htm

rcreech
01-16-2009, 11:19 PM
Food for thought.

http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo8.htm

Info from 2003?

Why has the USDA and why is the EU now accepting if the case?

Remember you can find anything on the internet to support whatever you want!

I am not saying that traits are perfect..but what is? But what is the diff between eating GMO corn,and you eating a seedless grape or watermellon?

Same diff!

Barefoot James
01-16-2009, 11:22 PM
oh wait here it is again


and lack of topsoil will usually keep us from it unfortunatly!

Lack of top soil - why would that be??? Is it unable to regenerate itself? Please tell us why this is Rodney? Usually a soil with good fertility and OM inputs is able to regenerate itself, but if it has no humus in the soil it just disappears and you know what that means???

It means you are wrong and you just said so yourself - see your own quote.

Great perspective Mudd.

rcreech
01-16-2009, 11:43 PM
oh wait here it is again


Lack of top soil - why would that be??? Is it unable to regenerate itself? Please tell us why this is Rodney? Usually a soil with good fertility and OM inputs is able to regenerate itself, but if it has no humus in the soil it just disappears and you know what that means???

It means you are wrong and you just said so yourself - see your own quote.

Great perspective Mudd.

Barefoot,

Regenerate itself! :laugh:


I didn't say POOR soils, I said lack of topsoils! Our soils actually have very good fertility...

Our soils are just naturally shallow just as out west they are naturally deep and beautiful. We have our "sweet spots" up here but to have a whole field is a stretch!

You are stuck with what you got pretty much with the topsoils you have. It is very difficult to change them.

Do you know how much material it takes to raise OM 1%? You better look it up!

There is not much one can do when lack of topsoil! You should know this being from KY! Clay is clay. We raise good crops for what we have...but nothing like the boys out West with 10' of topsoil.

Our soils are hard and are too wet when it rains and when they dry out they dry out BAD!

That is why I stated earlier that soils are not as big of a factor as they used to be! With the new genetics and traits we are increasing yields every year! SOILS although very important, they are not as important as they used to be to the plant as we can overcome many issues with defense.

Tough soils are raising much better crops then they used to!

JDUtah
01-16-2009, 11:46 PM
Not so subliminal messages...

*trucewhiteflag*

:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::laugh::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::laugh::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::laugh::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::laugh::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::laugh::laugh::laugh::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:

*trucewhiteflag*

Lol and I thought I argued...

Kiril
01-16-2009, 11:47 PM
Need I say more?

http://www.weedscience.org/ChronIncrease.gif

http://www.weedscience.org/ChronMOA.GIF

* Heap, I. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Online. Internet. January 16, 2009 . Available www.weedscience.com

Kiril
01-16-2009, 11:50 PM
but nothing like the boys out West with 10' of topsoil.

Got a location for this 10 feet of topsoil Rod?

Do you know how much material it takes to raise OM 1%? You better look it up!

Obviously you don't. Doesn't take much to raise 1/8" of soil organic matter content by 1%.

Mr. Nice
01-16-2009, 11:54 PM
I am not saying that traits are perfect..but what is? But what is the diff between eating GMO corn,and you eating a seedless grape or watermellon?

Same diff!


Is this a fact too?

Kiril
01-17-2009, 12:01 AM
I am not saying that traits are perfect..but what is? But what is the diff between eating GMO corn,and you eating a seedless grape or watermellon?

Same diff!

Watch out Rod, don't get your panties in a bunch.

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/FoE%20I%20Who%20Benefits%202008%20-%20Full%20Report%20FINAL%202-6-08.pdf

rcreech
01-17-2009, 12:12 AM
Got a location for this 10 feet of topsoil Rod?



Obviously you don't. Doesn't take much to raise 1/8" of soil organic matter content by 1%.

WRONG!!!!

Why does it take so long for organic matter levels to increase? An acre of soil six inches deep weighs about 1000 tons, so increasing the proportion of organic matter from two to three percent is actually a 10 ton change. However, you cannot simply add 10 tons of manure or residue and expect to measure a one percent increase in soil organic matter. Only ten to twenty percent of the original material becomes part of the soil organic matter. Much of the rest is converted over several years into carbon dioxide.

http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/cropsystems/components/7402_02.html

Glad I didn't post that before you said it only took 1/8"! :laugh:

You are living in a dream world Kiril!

rcreech
01-17-2009, 12:13 AM
Is this a fact too?

Is what a fact?

Kiril
01-17-2009, 12:22 AM
Glad I didn't post that before you said it only took 1/8"! :laugh

Rod, ol boy, I was pointing out the fact you DID NOT specify how much soil you were attempting to raise OM percentage in.

Do you know how much material it takes to raise OM 1%? You better look it up!

You did not specify a depth now did you? Perhaps the wording of my response was beyond your comprehension?

Let's try this Rod. You have 1/8" of soil, how much OM matter does it take to raise the OM content of that 1/8" of soil by 1%.

BTW, still waiting on that 10 feet of topsoil location and your response to the dramatic rise of herbicide resistant weeds.

Cat got your tongue Rod?

rcreech
01-17-2009, 12:27 AM
Rod, ol boy, I was pointing out the fact you DID NOT specify how much soil you were attempting to raise OM percentage in.



You did not specify a depth now did you? Perhaps the wording of my response was beyond your comprehension?

Let's try this Rod. You have 1/8" of soil, how much OM matter does it take to raise the OM content of that 1/8" of soil by 1%.

BTW, still waiting on that 10 feet of topsoil location and your response to the dramatic rise of herbicide resistant weeds.

Cat got your tongue Rod?

Why would I ask a question like that if I didn't have the answer?

Look who is backtacking now! :laugh:

It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%!

Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!



I love it!

ted putnam
01-17-2009, 12:37 AM
There sure is a lot of kitty litter flying around for this to be a sand box :rolleyes:

Kiril
01-17-2009, 12:43 AM
It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%!

Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

ROFL. OK smart azz, if depth doesn't matter:

1) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 6" depth?

2) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 4" depth?

3) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 1/8" depth?

Please show your work, cause I am really interested in seeing how you can do this without knowing the volume of soil you are working with.

Oh, and BTW, you can assume your source of OM is 100% organic matter. Don't want to stress your brain too much.

ted putnam
01-17-2009, 12:46 AM
.......I think I might have stepped in a dogpile.;)

JDUtah
01-17-2009, 12:46 AM
Roughly calculate how much compost (or whatever) you need to add to raise the SOM to desired percentage level. Assumes moisture % of both soil and compost to be almost the same.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 12:50 AM
ROFL. OK smart azz, if depth doesn't matter:

1) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 6" depth?

2) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 4" depth?

3) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 1/8" depth?

Please show your work, cause I am really interested in seeing how you can do this without knowing the volume of soil you are working with.



If you get a soil sample result...and it states 3% OM...what does that mean to you?

It means that the OM is 3% now doesn't it! And if you want to raise your OM 1%...it is going to take much more the 1/8".

You are the one that typed it buddy! :)

You aint getting out of this one!

It means that the OM is 3% doesn't it?

Kiril
01-17-2009, 12:50 AM
Roughly calculate how much compost (or whatever) you need to add to raise the SOM to desired percentage level. Assumes moisture % of both soil and compost to be almost the same.

JD, you need to stay out of this. BTW, you might want to check your PM in a minute.

JDUtah
01-17-2009, 12:51 AM
Lol RC, he was joking.

Kiril,
Awe, but I wanna play too. But in appreciation of the dead soil thread..

*backs out*

rcreech
01-17-2009, 12:51 AM
Oh yeah...btw...it is Kansas!

Kiril
01-17-2009, 12:52 AM
If you get a soil sample result...and it states 3% OM...what does that mean to you?

It means that the OM is 3% now doesn't it! And if you want to raise your OM 1%...it is going to take much more the 1/8".

You are the one that typed it buddy! :)

You aint getting out of this one!

It means that the OM is 3% doesn't it?

You obviously know nothing about soil sampling.

If you are so sure of yourself, answer the questions Rod, because according to you the answers should be the same for all 3 depths.

Kiril
01-17-2009, 12:53 AM
Oh yeah...btw...it is Kansas!

Where specifically in Kansas Rod?

rcreech
01-17-2009, 12:54 AM
Roughly calculate how much compost (or whatever) you need to add to raise the SOM to desired percentage level. Assumes moisture % of both soil and compost to be almost the same.

Thanks for making my point JD! :)


O'l Kiril is sliding off the cliff on this one! :laugh:

JDUtah
01-17-2009, 12:55 AM
Thanks for making my point JD! :)


O'l Kiril is sliding off the cliff on this one! :laugh:

*jumps in*

It is freaking hilarious

*backs back out*

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:02 AM
Actually I DO know about soil sampling!

That is my point!

If you pull a sample at 2", 4" or 6"...the OM is what it is!

No matter what it takes the same amount to raise it 1%!

If the OM is 6% or 2%...it doesn't matter...it takes a lot of material to raise OM 1%!

You may be able to raise a small flower pot 1% by adding an 1/8"!

READ IT AND WEAP BROTHER!!!!

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:05 AM
O'l Kiril is sliding off the cliff on this one! :laugh:

Are you going to answer the questions or just make childish remarks?

1) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 6" depth?

2) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 4" depth?

3) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 1/8" depth?

Please show your work, cause I am really interested in seeing how you can do this without knowing the volume of soil you are working with.

Oh, and BTW, you can assume your source of OM is 100% organic matter. Don't want to stress your brain too much.


Put your money where your mouth is Rod, because you like to ram it down everyones throat how everything you post is fact.

It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%!

Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:06 AM
Where specifically in Kansas Rod?

I think they Kansas only has about 3 million acres of this soil type!

http://www.ks.nrcs.usda.gov/soils/harneylab.html

I also think that Western IL has some very deep soils also!

I would investigate...but already made my point...so don't want to waste anymore time on this!

We probably only have about 6" of true topsoil here but it is better then that in some areas!

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:11 AM
Actually I DO know about soil sampling!

Really. So Rod, explain to me how a lab determines OM%. Please include all the steps.

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:13 AM
I think they Kansas only has about 3 million acres of this soil type!

http://www.ks.nrcs.usda.gov/soils/harneylab.html

I also think that Western IL has some very deep soils also!

I would investigate...but already made my point...so don't want to waste anymore time on this!

We probably only have about 6" of true topsoil here but it is better then that in some areas!


No you haven't made your point. Give me a location Rod, cause I really want to see where I can find 10 feet of topsoil.

Man, you are really stepping in it tonight.

BTW, I have access to soil reports for just about any location in the country. Let us see your 10 feet if topsoil.
Really Rod, I am truly interested to see this.

Still waiting on that response to the dramatic rise in herbicide resistant weeds.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:16 AM
Really. So Rod, explain to me how a lab determines OM%. Please include all the steps.


I don't have a clue how a lab determines OM, but all I would have to do is look it up.

I am an agronomist...not a lab tech!

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:19 AM
No you haven't made your point. Give me a location Rod, cause I really want to see where I can find 10 feet of topsoil.

Man, you are really stepping in it tonight.

BTW, I have access to soil reports for just about any location in the country. Let us see your 10 feet if topsoil.
Really Rod, I am truly interested to see this.

Still waiting on that response to the dramatic rise in herbicide resistant weeds.

Look! I posted it for you!

Unfortunatly there are becoming more and more resistant weeds all the time. What do you want me to say about it?

Usually this happens with all things as it is just survival of the fitest! Between hard to kill weeds, dependence on the same chemistry every year and reduced rates we screw ourselves. This just causes us to throw a different chemisty at it! When we get Roundup resistance...we just go to Liberty corn and smoke the weeds that way!

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:24 AM
I don't have a clue how a lab determines OM, but all I would have to do is look it up.

Good, So we have established you knowing nothing about soil testing other than how to pull a sample.

Now lets move on to the OM questions and the 10 feet deep topsoil.


1) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 6" depth?

2) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 4" depth?

3) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 1/8" depth?

Please show your work, cause I am really interested in seeing how you can do this without knowing the volume of soil you are working with.

Oh, and BTW, you can assume your source of OM is 100% organic matter. Don't want to stress your brain too much.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:27 AM
You obviously know nothing about soil sampling.

If you are so sure of yourself, answer the questions Rod, because according to you the answers should be the same for all 3 depths.

I didn't say that!

I said the results on the soil test are what they are! The lab doesn't know how deep the soil core was pulled!

It is just a %!

The only time the depth matters is if you would want to increase the OM so much so you would know how much to add!

If you pull a soil sample at 6" (which is very typical here)...then you OM is what it is and it takes that xxxx amount to raise OM 1%.

If you look at what I posted it stated 6" deep, and 1 acre = so many lbs.

It is just base on a %.

So are you saying you have pulled a soil sample 1/8" deep! :dizzy:

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:30 AM
Good, So we have established you knowing nothing about soil testing other than how to pull a sample.

Now lets move on to the OM questions and the 10 feet deep topsoil.


Knowing how the lab analyzes their samples means absolutly nothing to me!

I have been in this business for 14 years...and nobody has ever asked nor have I ever really cared!

All I care about is when I get the results (pH,P,K,BpH, etc.) are the levels for making recs.

OM is really hard to change...so why are we even talking about it. Are you just trying to get out of your "1/8" addition is all that is needed" comment?

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:37 AM
I didn't say that!

This IS what you said Rod.

It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%!

Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

Answer the questions Rod.

I said the results on the soil test are what they are! The lab doesn't know how deep the soil core was pulled!

True, they don't, but tell me what that OM% represents Rod (units please).

If you look at what I posted it stated 6" deep, and 1 acre = so many lbs.

I'm looking at it right now Rod.


It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%!

Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

So are you saying you have pulled a soil sample 1/8" deep! :dizzy:

1) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 6" depth?

2) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 4" depth?

3) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 1/8" depth?

Please show your work, cause I am really interested in seeing how you can do this without knowing the volume of soil you are working with.

Oh, and BTW, you can assume your source of OM is 100% organic matter. Don't want to stress your brain too much.

Do what you always claim you do Rod, back up your statements and answer the damn questions.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:44 AM
How could I even answer your question as you don't have the OM (lab result) listed? That would be a key thing to know!

Thats what I am saying...a % is a %.

Example:

1% at 1 inch is 1%

1% at 2 inches is 1%

1% at 4 inchs is 1%

It is what it is!


Yes the deeper you go the more product it will take to build up OM...but the OM is what it is!

You are just looking at a dilution factor the deeper you go!

It says it right in what I posted!

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:52 AM
How could I even answer your question as you don't have the OM (lab result) listed? That would be a key thing to know!

Really. What does the OM% represent. You don't need a lab result to know that Rod. You might want to go to bed now.

OM:

1% at 1 inch is 1%

1% at 2 inches is 1%

1% at 4 inchs is 1%

It is what it is!


Wrong answer Rod. Read what you wrote!

It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%!

Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

Guess I don't understand what "raising" means. Perhaps you would like to clarify that for me Rod?

Kiril
01-17-2009, 02:06 AM
Still waiting on that Location in Kansas. Perhaps I will just pick a location with Ag, and check to see if it has a 10 foot topsoil. Should I post the results in the morning here Rod, or have you embarrassed yourself enough for one day?

rcreech
01-17-2009, 02:06 AM
Really. What does the OM% represent. You don't need a lab result to know that Rod. You might want to go to bed now.



Wrong answer Rod. Read what you wrote!



Guess I don't understand what "raising" means. Perhaps you would like to clarify that for me Rod?


Yes you would. The higher the OM...technically the less it would take to raise it by volume!

I am the one who posted the article about this (as yes it is a volume thing when applying), and I definitly see your point on that being said wrong!

So, anyway...how hard is it to pull a soil sample at 1/8" deep... :laugh:

Do you do this routinely?

rcreech
01-17-2009, 02:09 AM
Still waiting on that Location in Kansas. Perhaps I will just pick a location with Ag, and check to see if it has a 10 foot topsoil. Should I post the results in the morning here Rod, or have you embarrassed yourself enough for one day?

Look in the post Kiril!

There is only 3+ million acres of this soil.

I think it is around Witchita!

No embarassment here!

YOU ARE THE ONE THAT STATED IT ONLY TAKES 1/8" OF OM MATTER TO RAISE OM 1% IN THE SOIL! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

See ya in the morning! :laugh:

Kiril
01-17-2009, 08:03 AM
Yes you would. The higher the OM...technically the less it would take to raise it by volume!

WOW. Rod, just keep digging that hole deeper.

The questions were how MUCH material would it take to raise the organic matter in a given volume of soil 1%. I did not state how much organic matter was already present, nor what the desired percentage was.

Yes Rod, the desired volume of soil you wish to amend DOES determine how much material you will need to apply. How do we get volume .... on yes Rod, with a DEPTH.

I don't believe I have ever seen someone try so hard to avoid admitting they are wrong. How did you ever make it through school?

So, anyway...how hard is it to pull a soil sample at 1/8" deep... :laugh

No one pulls a 1/8" sample. It was an arbitrary number used to illustrate that the amount of material needed to increase SOM is dependent on the volume of soil you want to amend and on the OM content of the material you are using. I made it easy for you by assuming the material being applied was 100% OM.

So are you going to answer the questions, or are you going to let JD do it?

phasthound
01-17-2009, 08:11 AM
Kiril,

Just curious, can you find the depth of topsoil for Pine Island, NY? It's the deepest I've ever seen.

turf hokie
01-17-2009, 08:18 AM
Kiril,

Just curious, can you find the depth of topsoil for Pine Island, NY? It's the deepest I've ever seen.

Holy Cow Barry, your gonna get into this?

Dont confuse the argument. Soil depth I am sure varies between corn crops and sod crops. And I am sure that some people would not even consider raising sod farming.

But then again I think somebody needs to throw some gas on this fire, I think it might be even more fun to watch.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 08:48 AM
I have never in my life seen anything so stupid!

I actually went to bed 3 hours late last night!

Haven't stayed up that late in probably 5 years! :laugh:

rcreech
01-17-2009, 08:59 AM
Crop yields have NOT increased ....Far from it, Farmers are buying less synthetic fert due to price increasing. less synthetic fert ,less yield that Sir is a FACT. I deal with many farmers & many new ones each year, It is a leap of faith to leave the synthetic world, we sell products world wide, since 1994.

Using synthetic at a reduced rate of 30 to 50 % but adding Organics & naturals in key development stages will not only SAVE MONEY but INCREASE the yield and be BETTER for the soil & over all environment,Our clients have less crop rotation as well.

This Also holds true in Golf turf & home landscape.

I have plenty of test trial Data in Both categories.:waving:



Billy...please provided the data you discuss on decreasing crop yields!

I want to see if as this is totally the opposite of what the USDA says!


Question: What size growers are you selling to and what crops?

I agree that cutting fert or not putting on what the crop needs can cause yield loss. That is a no brainer!

Less fert up front may not mean less yield right away though! If a farm has been on a buildup program they may have adequate levels to for a few seasons.

But why would a farm cut out fert due to cost and then add expensive ammendments? How much ammendments do they add per acre and what is the cost?

There wouldn't be anough ammendments to add for millions and millions of corn acres. What would we use? And if it did become a common practice that would make a demand and shortage...and that means more price increase.

Again...very interested in seeing your data!

Thanks,
RC

billy blade
01-17-2009, 09:13 AM
lets see it!

I have proven data that shows increase in yield , when Organics are used and synthetics are reduced.... I would be glade to share this information....Many of you are stuck in the past...stuck on using synthetic...there is a whole new wave of crop production comming , if you intend to compete you will need to part of it. the US government will enforce these regulations on farmers with in the next for years....look at how many states are banning the use of certian fertilizers for home & garden, Florida, has voweed to be the leader in fertilizer reduction.

Look On line at seaweed and Humic Acid ....do your home work. I will post result from test here shortly......

Kiril
01-17-2009, 09:15 AM
I think it is around Witchita! No embarassment here!

https://www.soils.org/sssagloss/index.php

topsoil (i) The layer of soil moved in cultivation. Frequently designated as the Ap layer or Ap horizon. See also surface soil. (ii) Presumably fertile soil material used to topdress roadbanks, gardens, and lawns.

surface soil The uppermost part of the soil, ordinarily moved in tillage, or its equivalent in uncultivated soils and ranging in depth from 7 to 25 cm. Frequently designated as the plow layer, the surface layer, the Ap layer, or the Ap horizon. See also topsoil.


Should I continue Rod? Here is a soil survey from Reno County in Kansas, next county over from Sedgwick county (North-West).

http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Manuscripts/KS155/0/Reno_KS.pdf

Find me a 10 foot deep Ap horizon in that report. :rolleyes:

Want to step out on that limb a little further? Oh wait, that's right, it already broke under the weight of your massive ego.

YOU ARE THE ONE THAT STATED IT ONLY TAKES 1/8" OF OM MATTER TO RAISE OM 1% IN THE SOIL!

Did I now. Your reading comprehension skills are on par with a 4th grader.

Please show me where I stated that.

phasthound
01-17-2009, 09:18 AM
Holy Cow Barry, your gonna get into this?

Dont confuse the argument. Soil depth I am sure varies between corn crops and sod crops. And I am sure that some people would not even consider raising sod farming.

But then again I think somebody needs to throw some gas on this fire, I think it might be even more fun to watch.

No, mine was not a leading question, I just wanted to know the depth. When I lived in that area, I just loved driving through the back roads looking at all that black dirt and smelling the onions.

NattyLawn
01-17-2009, 09:37 AM
I thought there was some kind of mistake when I saw this thread jumped 6 pages overnight....Guess not...

Kiril
01-17-2009, 09:51 AM
I have never in my life seen anything so stupid!

You mean like this?

It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%! Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

We raise good crops for what we have...but nothing like the boys out West with 10' of topsoil.

There are no commercial farms out here spreading ammendments or using organics!


but then ....................


I definitly don't think I am a great base of info or always perfect...but if I state something it can always be backed up! That's a fact, Jack!

I can't stand it when people state totally wrong info!

I am not trying to be a jerk here...but please have your facts before posting! You are just shooting from the hip like you did the other day in the RENOVATION forum and you are getting yourself pretty deep!

Kiril
01-17-2009, 10:00 AM
Kiril,

Just curious, can you find the depth of topsoil for Pine Island, NY? It's the deepest I've ever seen.

Pick a soil from the attachment.

NattyLawn
01-17-2009, 10:05 AM
You mean like this?








but then ....................


Thanks Kiril, for doing the dirty work. Sifting through his bs is nauseating and I really didn't want to take the time to do it. I'm sure his next post will shift the blame back to me somehow...

Kiril
01-17-2009, 10:15 AM
Thanks Kiril, for doing the dirty work. Sifting through his bs is nauseating and I really didn't want to take the time to do it. I'm sure his next post will shift the blame back to me somehow...

To be perfectly honest, I wouldn't have even bothered if Rod weren't such an azz to anyone who disagrees with him. His positions are clearly politically motivated, and he labels anyone who practices "organics" as a liberal hippy or a tree hugger, even when he himself uses sustainable practices. :rolleyes:

Furthermore he relentlessly hounds posters that disagree with him if their posts don't jive with what he believes. I figured it was time someone give him a taste of his own medicine.

Real Green
01-17-2009, 10:59 AM
Holy crap! Good morning. I thought this was a joke to see the thread jumped 7 pages. This has been one of the greatest threads in a long time. So much information. Thanks to all.

And I will say something. I speak to Rodney personally all the time on a weekly basis. He and I have had disagreements, but he has always been respectful of my opionion or whatever emperical data I have presented. Although I have not spoken to you all personally, I can't say the same for some of you others invovled in this thread.

Let the flaming begin.

treegal1
01-17-2009, 11:14 AM
wow...........

ted putnam
01-17-2009, 12:16 PM
wow...........

...that about sums it up.

muddstopper
01-17-2009, 12:18 PM
Do you know how much material it takes to raise OM 1%? You better look it up!


To think that you only have to use crop residues or organic materials to raise organic matter is the soil is stupid anyways. You can raise organic matter much faster farming microbes than you ever will trying to apply compost and manures. Testing with bio stimulants have shown as much as 3% OM increases in one growing season, this with only 1gal of product to 10acres of soil. I dont consider one gal per 10 acres as a lot of material. I believe the cost was about $50+/- for a gal. So the cost certainly isnt prohibitive.

Another question I have for Rob is, if weeds are becomeing more resistant to herbicides, and its totaly necessary that you have weed free fields in order to grow productive crops. What are we going to do when the weeds become roundup resistant in your roundup resistant corn?

Facts are and remain, you can raise a better yeilding/ better quality corn crop, using less fertilizer and water imputs, if the soil between the corn rows is covered with a legume type sod. Drought is not a shortage of rainfall, but a shortage of water management practices. Water is loss thru evaporation of open soils between the rows of your crops. With this water loss, you also lose valuable nutrients, including carbon in the form of Co2. Covering the rows middles with a legume sod will lower evaporation of moisture, and provide nutrients to the growing corn, thus increaseing water availablity as well as nutrient absorbsion. Futher, the increased root mass of the legumes will improve the soil structure so that any rain fall is able to perculate down into the soil instead of running off to the lower ends of the field. The increased rootmass will also contribute to the increased soil organic matter to depths far greater than the 6 inch sampleing depth usually taken with a soil probe. This increase SOM will over time build top soils instead of using up the nutrient levels in the soil and decreaseing the amount of top soil on a given field. The mining of nutrients from our soil is what is decreaseing topsoil levels on our farms. You remove massive amounts of minerals every time you harvest your crops. The only way to replace the lost topsoil is to replace the removed nutrients. You can genetictly modify all the corn types you want to, but you will never replace your loss topsoil using that method. Instead you will continue to grow crops with lower nutrient content form nutrient poor soils. Insect damage will continue to occur and even worsen simply because the nutrient deficient corn wont be able to produce the naturally occuring immunity enzymes necessary to prevent infectin. Enzymes are produced by protiens, your geneticly modified cron is deficeint in protiens, but high in starches. Starches create sugars which attract pest. Your type of science is barking up the wrong tree. Instead of trying to increase yeilds by growing more crops on poorer soils, We need to be trying to grow better quality crops by increaseing the soil fertility levels. The relationship between crop quality and health are already well documented, instead of wasteing your time trying to prove you are so right, when you just cant seem to see how wrong you actually are, would be better spent reseaching soil fertilty instead of geneticly modified crops.

treegal1
01-17-2009, 12:42 PM
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/323/5911/240

http://www.prisonplanet.com/no-need-for-condoms-%E2%80%93-ge-corn-can-do-the-job.html

http://www.thepatrioticvanguard.com/article.php3?id_article=3584

http://www.hindu.com/2008/12/22/stories/2008122251850300.htm

http://extension.usu.edu/files/factsheets/indirect.pdf

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:18 PM
Thanks Kiril, for doing the dirty work. Sifting through his bs is nauseating and I really didn't want to take the time to do it. I'm sure his next post will shift the blame back to me somehow...

At the end of the day....I think this is all Natty's fault!

Really do! :laugh:

rcreech
01-17-2009, 01:30 PM
Do you know how much material it takes to raise OM 1%? You better look it up!


To think that you only have to use crop residues or organic materials to raise organic matter is the soil is stupid anyways. You can raise organic matter much faster farming microbes than you ever will trying to apply compost and manures. Testing with bio stimulants have shown as much as 3% OM increases in one growing season, this with only 1gal of product to 10acres of soil. I dont consider one gal per 10 acres as a lot of material. I believe the cost was about $50+/- for a gal. So the cost certainly isnt prohibitive.

Another question I have for Rob is, if weeds are becomeing more resistant to herbicides, and its totaly necessary that you have weed free fields in order to grow productive crops. What are we going to do when the weeds become roundup resistant in your roundup resistant corn?

Facts are and remain, you can raise a better yeilding/ better quality corn crop, using less fertilizer and water imputs, if the soil between the corn rows is covered with a legume type sod. Drought is not a shortage of rainfall, but a shortage of water management practices. Water is loss thru evaporation of open soils between the rows of your crops. With this water loss, you also lose valuable nutrients, including carbon in the form of Co2. Covering the rows middles with a legume sod will lower evaporation of moisture, and provide nutrients to the growing corn, thus increaseing water availablity as well as nutrient absorbsion. Futher, the increased root mass of the legumes will improve the soil structure so that any rain fall is able to perculate down into the soil instead of running off to the lower ends of the field. The increased rootmass will also contribute to the increased soil organic matter to depths far greater than the 6 inch sampleing depth usually taken with a soil probe. This increase SOM will over time build top soils instead of using up the nutrient levels in the soil and decreaseing the amount of top soil on a given field. The mining of nutrients from our soil is what is decreaseing topsoil levels on our farms. You remove massive amounts of minerals every time you harvest your crops. The only way to replace the lost topsoil is to replace the removed nutrients. You can genetictly modify all the corn types you want to, but you will never replace your loss topsoil using that method. Instead you will continue to grow crops with lower nutrient content form nutrient poor soils. Insect damage will continue to occur and even worsen simply because the nutrient deficient corn wont be able to produce the naturally occuring immunity enzymes necessary to prevent infectin. Enzymes are produced by protiens, your geneticly modified cron is deficeint in protiens, but high in starches. Starches create sugars which attract pest. Your type of science is barking up the wrong tree. Instead of trying to increase yeilds by growing more crops on poorer soils, We need to be trying to grow better quality crops by increaseing the soil fertility levels. The relationship between crop quality and health are already well documented, instead of wasteing your time trying to prove you are so right, when you just cant seem to see how wrong you actually are, would be better spent reseaching soil fertilty instead of geneticly modified crops.

Boy...I must say that I disagee with alot of what you stated..but this is getting so old!

Kiril and Natty must have PM'd all their buddies to come over! WOW!

I am not fighting facts on here...I am just fighting numbers! I am ok with that!

You can have the best soils in the world (just as they do out west) but if you have insect pressure it doesn't matter!

I feel like a broken record here sometimes.

It reminds me of my favorite African Proverb: He who listens understands!

If the corn market didn't require GMO's then we wouldn't use them. We are paying Monsanto and Syngenta SERIOUS premiums, and if we didn't get a return we wouldn't use them!

As far as weed resistance...we are and have been seeing it for some time. I think we now have atleast 9 weeds on the gly tol list.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.

WEED CONTROL is a must in corn. The key to resistance as stated is mixing up weed control options.

Your sod between the corn or any legume will not work! It would compete with the corn in a bad way for both nutrients and moisture! I like the legume idea a little from N fixation...but you it takes VERY LITTLE weed pressure to knock yields down hard!

The corn we a selling today is BOTH Roundup Ready and Liberty. There are many other products in the line coming out. One is called Optimum GAT which meand glyphsate and ALS tolerant. We also have 2,4D corn and beans coming out in the next 3-4 years.

Kiril
01-17-2009, 01:46 PM
Kiril and Natty must have PM'd all their buddies to come over! WOW!

Thanks Rod, but I need no help.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.

3) Play Dr. Frankenstein and see if we can really **** the ecosystem
4) Drop a nuke on the field to kill all the mutant weeds

We also have 2,4D corn and beans coming out in the next 3-4 years.

Long live corporate America and their insatiable thirst for high profit margins regardless of the costs. http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb121.gif

muddstopper
01-17-2009, 02:08 PM
It reminds me of my favorite African Proverb: He who listens understands!
Heres another proverb for you. God gave you two ears and only one mouth for a very good reason, you are supposed to listen twice as hard as you speak
If the corn market didn't require GMO's then we wouldn't use them. We are paying Monsanto and Syngenta SERIOUS premiums, and if we didn't get a return we wouldn't use them!

The corn market is now looking at ethanol production. You can produce more ethanol from corn with higher starch content than you can corn with higher protien content. You GM corn has a higher starch content than our food source corn which sould have a higher protien content. You economic of higher yields are what is polluting our food supply. Yes, you are growing larger yeild, but the nutrinet content is lower than on the lower yeilding farms. Humans need more protien in their diets than they need starch. If you dont believe that fact, just look around at all the fat people in any crowd.

As far as weed resistance...we are and have been seeing it for some time. I think we now have atleast 9 weeds on the gly tol list.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.

Wrong, the best thing you can do is improve your soils fertiltity levels to promote a better quality crop that can compete with the weeds.

WEED CONTROL is a must in corn. The key to resistance as stated is mixing up weed control options.

Your sod between the corn or any legume will not work! It would compete with the corn in a bad way for both nutrients and moisture! I like the legume idea a little from N fixation...but you it takes VERY LITTLE weed pressure to knock yields down hard!

Only on farms that practice what you preach

The corn we a selling today is BOTH Roundup Ready and Liberty. There are many other products in the line coming out. One is called Optimum GAT which meand glyphsate and ALS tolerant. We also have 2,4D corn and beans coming out in the next 3-4 years.

Yep! and we have increases in every kind of human ailment you can think of. This fact alone should motivate you to move in another direction in your farming practices.

ted putnam
01-17-2009, 02:21 PM
this will be my first season in full time applications, & i am looking for advice on set ups for my truck. i purchased a used skid sprayer already, have plenty of spyker spreaders, & looking into gettting a permagreen (haven't decided on new or used yet). i've been looking at some of the post with pictures to see how others are laying out there trucks. any input will be appreciated.

Topdog. I use a 14ft tandem axle trailer with a gate on the back and a side loading gate. The 300 gal skid is centered over the axles and this leaves enough room for the side loading portion to accomodate my PG, King Quad with Fimco sprayer or whatever other equipment I need for the days work. I had the trailer custom built with a tongue tool box that I can store a selection of needed supplies in. I just load the back of my truck with necessary bagged products for the day. Many don't like the idea of using a trailer because of percieved "hassle". However, I've found that it is very handy and versatile. It also allows me to unhook and use my "undedicated" truck for personal use. I also have a truck that has the skid installed in the truck bed but find it sometimes limits me and the truck. I hope this information is useful to you and will give you some things to think about. That is, if you are LUCKY enough to find it while wading through all the other "INFO" posted in your thread that others have stolen... Good Luck

phasthound
01-17-2009, 02:22 PM
Rod,
You really are ignoring a lot of good science. Denying it will not make it go away.

I'll agree with you that for the past 50 years, the corporate farming industry has made gains in crop production. But the cost has been high and is not sustainable. 50 years is a blip and those methods are starting to crash.

DUSTYCEDAR
01-17-2009, 03:00 PM
Hummm.....................

Smallaxe
01-17-2009, 03:05 PM
Yep! and we have increases in every kind of human ailment you can think of. This fact alone should motivate you to move in another direction in your farming practices.

There have been hybrids along the way, but GMOs are fairly recent. Most of the health problems , IMHO, has been the modifications in the food -after - it has left the field.

We remove certain nutrients to increase shelf life, of course, but the biggest perversion of all - That I avoid like the plague - is: Hydrogenated Oils.

Let's be careful of an apples/oranges arguement.

There was a big boost for production when we discovered that we could make soybeans "Roundup Ready"!! Then, when we did the same for corn, the floodgates were opened.

I certainly agree that the nutrient value of Grocery Store food has diminished, over the past 50 - 60 years.
At the same time, in another venue, it can produce : ' Greener grass and ethanol'. It is a matter of priorities more than anything.

The Midwestern cornbelt is extraordinary, in regards to it soils. [10 feet deep is not an exageration] Some areas are even compared to 'Terra Preta'. So I believe water and NPK management is key -until- we discover an optimum strategy for a more sustainable use for the 'Good Land' we have.
Because in truth -- most of us are sitting on inadequate soils, to say the least. :)

muddstopper
01-17-2009, 03:57 PM
There have been hybrids along the way, but GMOs are fairly recent. Most of the health problems , IMHO, has been the modifications in the food -after - it has left the field.

We remove certain nutrients to increase shelf life, of course, but the biggest perversion of all - That I avoid like the plague - is: Hydrogenated Oils.

Let's be careful of an apples/oranges arguement.

There was a big boost for production when we discovered that we could make soybeans "Roundup Ready"!! Then, when we did the same for corn, the floodgates were opened.

I certainly agree that the nutrient value of Grocery Store food has diminished, over the past 50 - 60 years.
At the same time, in another venue, it can produce : ' Greener grass and ethanol'. It is a matter of priorities more than anything.

The Midwestern cornbelt is extraordinary, in regards to it soils. [10 feet deep is not an exageration] Some areas are even compared to 'Terra Preta'. So I believe water and NPK management is key -until- we discover an optimum strategy for a more sustainable use for the 'Good Land' we have.
Because in truth -- most of us are sitting on inadequate soils, to say the least. :)

Cant argue with your statements. Lots of additives are put in our foods during processing. If one would just stop and think for a minute, if all those food perservatives can keep the food from rotting before it is deliverd to our homes, what effect can we expect to our health for consumeing all those preservatives. To keep the food from rotting, you have to kill the microbes. The same posions that kill the microbes can kill us to. We just keep polluting our food sources and expect to get healthier?

treegal1
01-17-2009, 04:05 PM
GMO's giving pollution a life of its own!!!!!!!!!!

greendoctor
01-17-2009, 04:16 PM
In other words, vegetables and grains grown in this fashion are not health sustaining. Something I have known for quite some time. The most radical transformation to my health occurred when I became a carnivore. I avoid eating grains and the majority of my diet is fresh white or red meats. Before anyone says anything about my heart, my cholesterol levels are under 200 and my blood pressure is 130/80.

treegal1
01-17-2009, 04:25 PM
Eskimos eat raw fat and live plenty long don't they.

if it come out of a bag, box or can/jar from a store its more than likely not going to be that great for you!!! whole foods and raw foods are a key to health in my book, that and a colorful variety of different foods.

greendoctor
01-17-2009, 04:37 PM
I do not listen to the USDA or the AMA when it comes to a healthy diet. Their agenda is fine if you want to end up fat, crippled and sick. I believe in whole foods and by that, I do not mean vegetarian. http://www.westonaprice.org/

If I try to eat "healthy" I develop problems with hypoglycemia, migraine, IBS, etc and I lose weight. Something I do not need to do, because the weight loss is from muscle wasting.

Mr. Nice
01-17-2009, 04:48 PM
YUM! love that BT corn, does the body good?

Lets not forget the fact that these microbiologist working for these chem companies are not trying to reduce any body from using more chem's by making these GMO crops. And in the end it will make the use of chem's more needed because certain insects will acquire resistance to BT possibly?

It's just another way to monopolize the world seed stock/food supply and probably in the end will wined up contaminating many other other non GMO crops with their traits through pollination so they can sue the S#!T out of anybody knowingly or unaware they are growing these cross pollinated plants to the point they will have to buy NEW seeds from them every year or start with fresh non GMO seeds from a clean source in stead of their own harvested seed. That way they are in COMPLETE control of the worlds food supply and the methods use to produce it.$$$$$$ got to pay to play folk's

But maybe I'm wrong and these big money chem companies have our best interest's in mind?;)

topdog
01-17-2009, 04:55 PM
thanks Ted.* I think I am gonna go the trailer route also.* JDL quoted me like 900 bucks for the reese hitch trailer.

greendoctor
01-17-2009, 04:56 PM
Corn is one of the grains I must avoid. That includes anything made with HFCS(high fructose corn syrup). corn cereals, corn meal. I can eat sweet corn, because it is less tinkered with than grain corn. I love tortillas, but do better if it is a flour tortilla.

treegal1
01-17-2009, 05:19 PM
vegans taste great also, are they whole foods???

yes corn flour is not the greatest, but, I have been using what I refer to as bird seed flour and it rocks, something in the way of 25 grains and seeds, it even bakes bread ok with a little extra yeast

HFCS(high fructose control syrup)

greendoctor
01-17-2009, 05:34 PM
I have never seen a healthy vegan. I know some personally and they are fat and sick. I do not think I am celiac, but grains of any kind have never agreed with me. For a long time, the only starch I could eat was potato. Now, it is ok for me to have small amounts of rice and white flour.

ted putnam
01-17-2009, 05:53 PM
thanks Ted.* I think I am gonna go the trailer route also.* JDL quoted me like 900 bucks for the reese hitch trailer.

Any time.:) PM me if I can do anything else. I'm done here.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 08:04 PM
Mudd,

When dealing with todays hybrids you are dealing with two seperate things! You must keep this in mind as I think you are confusing them.

1) Plant genetics
2) Plant traits

The plant genetics is what determined by a cross between two parents. This is what determines the plants characteristics such as yeild, standability, drought tolerance, disease tolerance and grain quality ect. The plant genetics has nothing to do with GMO's. Every genetic type starts out as Non GMO and once the genetics is selected for the hybrid the TRAITS are bred into it.

The plant traits now are 100% GMO. They have nothing to do with plant characteristics. It is solely the insect and herbicide protection for the plant.

If you were to plant the exact same hybrid as a GMO and Non GMO...you will see the same exact plant it is just the GMO corn has insect protection. On the corn that is Non GMO this is where you will see a lot of root feeding, lodging, and yield loss.

SO...remember your beef would be with todays genetics...not GMO's when it comes to the starch content!

To be totally honest I don't really care what the starch content vs. protien content is. I don't get paid for anything but yield!

When we select the genetics for our farms, we don't have a clue what the protein vs. starch content is. It is not an issue for us to have to worry about.

Remember we are trying to run a business here, so yield is very important!

They do have certain hybrids that are higher in starch that are better for the ethanol industry, but farmers will tell you that if the ethanol plants are not going to pay a premium for starch they aren't going to raise it.

There are very few hybrids in our line up (Becks) that are specific for ethanol. We are just not there yet!

rcreech
01-17-2009, 08:13 PM
Rod,
You really are ignoring a lot of good science. Denying it will not make it go away.

I'll agree with you that for the past 50 years, the corporate farming industry has made gains in crop production. But the cost has been high and is not sustainable. 50 years is a blip and those methods are starting to crash.


Barry,

What "good science" am I missing from this thread?

Remember what I said along time ago in the thread.

It may sound really good from the guys here on Lawn Site (that don't farm btw)...but it has to work, be effecient and make me money!

rcreech
01-17-2009, 08:41 PM
YUM! love that BT corn, does the body good?

Lets not forget the fact that these microbiologist working for these chem companies are not trying to reduce any body from using more chem's by making these GMO crops. And in the end it will make the use of chem's more needed because certain insects will acquire resistance to BT possibly?

It's just another way to monopolize the world seed stock/food supply and probably in the end will wined up contaminating many other other non GMO crops with their traits through pollination so they can sue the S#!T out of anybody knowingly or unaware they are growing these cross pollinated plants to the point they will have to buy NEW seeds from them every year or start with fresh non GMO seeds from a clean source in stead of their own harvested seed. That way they are in COMPLETE control of the worlds food supply and the methods use to produce it.$$$$$$ got to pay to play folk's

But maybe I'm wrong and these big money chem companies have our best interest's in mind?;)

This shows me how much you know about corn!

WE HAVE NEVER PLANTED OUR OWN HARVESTED CORN. THIS IS WHAT THEY USED TO DO IN THE 1930's AND HYBIRDIZATION IS WHAT CHANGED THE INDUSTRY!

YOU HAVE TO PLANT A HYBRID TO GET YIELD! :laugh: ONCE A CORN PLANT HAS BEEN SELF POLINATED IT LOSES IT CROSS.


WOW DUDE...NOW THIS IS FUNNY!

I HOPE EVERYONE ON HERE (OTHER THEN THE ORGANIC GUYS SEES WHAT I AM DEALING WITH). A BUNCH OF ORGANIC GUYS THAT THINK THEY KNOW HOW TO RAISE CORN. :laugh:

THIS IS TOO FUN!!!!!!!

rcreech
01-17-2009, 08:57 PM
I stated:

As far as weed resistance...we are and have been seeing it for some time. I think we now have atleast 9 weeds on the gly tol list.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.
______________________________________________________________

Mudd you stated:
Wrong, the best thing you can do is improve your soils fertiltity levels to promote a better quality crop that can compete with the weeds.


So you are telling me I am wrong? This is elementry when it comes to weed resistance!

We already have good fertility so what do you mean? Better crop quality that can compete with weeds?

Do you realize that this is not turf?

Weed conrol and fertility are totally different in corn vs turf!

We plant corn on 30" spacings. It takes corn anywhere from 7-20 days normally to germinate and then another 4-6 weeks to get a crop canopy (crop closure).

How will better fertility help the crop compete with weed control when the corn is 4" tall and it has 30" or bare ground between it?

This is why we need herbicides!

The best weed control in corn is crop closure...but we HAVE to keep it clean until then!

I can't believe how much crazy stuff I am hearing on here!

I guess this just shows me how much people are getting away from the farm. Kids in school today thinks cheese grows in the ground...and you guys are just about as far off with your corn comments.

I am amazed to say the least by some of your ideas! :rolleyes:


What you say on here may sound great in your mind and it might sound like it would work to you...but trust me, we are doing an awesome job out here! This country does a great job as we have the best ag producers/science in the world!

greendoctor
01-17-2009, 09:21 PM
Gly is one of the politically correct herbicides. I can show you what happens when it is the only product used for weed control. The non crop and right of way areas in Hawaii have been taken over by glyphosate resistant vegetation. This happened in the 10 years the DOA regulated 2,4-D and triazine herbicides out of existence here.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.

That is going to be hard when the environmentalists decide to make it impractical to use other herbicides. In another time, atrazine was used at rates that worked and 2,4-D was widely accepted. Now, both of those are in the crosshairs of the chemical nazis. All that is left is mostly ALS inhibitors; sulfurons, imidazolines, and sulams(flumetsulam, penoxulam, etc.

On the other hand, sloppy application that does not get total coverage of weeds and/or using less than the full rate of a herbicide encourages resistance. That is true no matter what MOA is being applied. I also watch for any individual weeds not killed by an application and do whatever it takes to kill it before it goes to seed. Because that right there is the prototype resistant specimen.

muddstopper
01-17-2009, 09:42 PM
I stated:

As far as weed resistance...we are and have been seeing it for some time. I think we now have atleast 9 weeds on the gly tol list.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.
______________________________________________________________

Mudd you stated:
Wrong, the best thing you can do is improve your soils fertiltity levels to promote a better quality crop that can compete with the weeds.


So you are telling me I am wrong? This is elementry when it comes to weed resistance!

We already have good fertility so what do you mean? Better crop quality that can compete with weeds?

Do you realize that this is not turf?

Weed conrol and fertility are totally different in corn vs turf!

We plant corn on 30" spacings. It takes corn anywhere from 7-20 days normally to germinate and then another 4-6 weeks to get a crop canopy (crop closure).

How will better fertility help the crop compete with weed control when the corn is 4" tall and it has 30" or bare ground between it?

This is why we need herbicides!

The best weed control in corn is crop closure...but we HAVE to keep it clean until then!

I can't believe how much crazy stuff I am hearing on here!

I guess this just shows me how much people are getting away from the farm. Kids in school today thinks cheese grows in the ground...and you guys are just about as far off with your corn comments.

I am amazed to say the least by some of your ideas! :rolleyes:


What you say on here may sound great in your mind and it might sound like it would work to you...but trust me, we are doing an awesome job out here! This country does a great job as we have the best ag producers/science in the world!

Rob, we have been down this road before. You believe what you have been taught by a bunch of fertilizer/chemical company research and it has nothing to do with soil fertility or how to improve it. You wouldnt know a fertile soil if you where buried in it. Lets just end this discussion here and agree to disagree. When you get your corn yields up to the 200bu per acre I obtained this year, and your protein levels reach 10%, come back and we can talk somemore.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 09:56 PM
Rob, we have been down this road before. You believe what you have been taught by a bunch of fertilizer/chemical company research and it has nothing to do with soil fertility or how to improve it. You wouldnt know a fertile soil if you where buried in it. Lets just end this discussion here and agree to disagree. When you get your corn yields up to the 200bu per acre I obtained this year, and your protein levels reach 10%, come back and we can talk somemore.


:laugh:

That's what I thought!

Now that is funny!

DO YOU FARM MUDD? Never heard you say this before and by your comments and suggestions I know you don't...yet you state "When you get our corn yields up to the 200 bu per corn that you obtained this year"

Heck NO I am not going to agree to disagree, because you don't know crap about corn.

Do you not understand that different areas of the US have different production goals. It all has to do with soils, climate, rainfall, and many other factors.

Our yearly avg in this part of OH is around 140-50 bu/ac. Some years we can hit in the 180-200 and some years we are in the 110-140's. Very few areas in the US have a 200 bu avg. The avg for the whole country is 153 bu/ac.

This year we have a HORRIBLE drought and still raised 140 bu corn! That is awesome!

You say when I get MY yields up to YOURS...then I could say your yields suck and you need to get YOUR up to where Illinois is which is 280 bu.

You don't have a clue and look like a fish out of water talking about corn! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

rcreech
01-17-2009, 10:15 PM
Crop yields have NOT increased ....Far from it, Farmers are buying less synthetic fert due to price increasing. less synthetic fert ,less yield that Sir is a FACT.

I have plenty of test trial Data in Both categories.:waving:

Still waiting on you "trial data"!

This is the third time I have asked to see it!

Hope this in independent data and not something you are typing in a Excel spreadsheet as we speak! :laugh:

rcreech
01-17-2009, 10:20 PM
Gly is one of the politically correct herbicides. I can show you what happens when it is the only product used for weed control. The non crop and right of way areas in Hawaii have been taken over by glyphosate resistant vegetation. This happened in the 10 years the DOA regulated 2,4-D and triazine herbicides out of existence here.

The best things one can do it:
1) Go out with a lethal dose
2) Shitch AI or modes of action each year.

That is going to be hard when the environmentalists decide to make it impractical to use other herbicides. In another time, atrazine was used at rates that worked and 2,4-D was widely accepted. Now, both of those are in the crosshairs of the chemical nazis. All that is left is mostly ALS inhibitors; sulfurons, imidazolines, and sulams(flumetsulam, penoxulam, etc.

On the other hand, sloppy application that does not get total coverage of weeds and/or using less than the full rate of a herbicide encourages resistance. That is true no matter what MOA is being applied. I also watch for any individual weeds not killed by an application and do whatever it takes to kill it before it goes to seed. Because that right there is the prototype resistant specimen.

Green Doc,

Lets not look over other areas with the same issues of resistance!

Doctors see the same issues over time using meds! Weed resistance isn't as big of an issue right now as it could be in the future.

The key is to educate the farmer and let them know how to keep it from happening in the future!

It is survival of the fittest and nature will always prevail!

We just have to try and stay atleast one step ahead of it!

We are seeing some resistance with a few weeds (mostly atz and gly) but they are very limited!

Having a couple new chemistries in the last couple years has been a great help and have a few more on the way! :)

Mr. Nice
01-17-2009, 10:30 PM
rceech,

Im not here to split hairs, no need to get all work up about it?

Can you tell me where the bt trait was acquired for corn?

Are their any other plants on earth that carry that gene?

I know exactly what it means to grow a F1 hybrid.

Are there no corn grower's any where in the US growing pure lines or that harvest or breed their own seeds?

Do you know if it's true if Bt corn can cross pollinate another non gmo corn crop?

Do you know if the farmer using his own harvested seeds can get sued if that gene shows up on the seen with out him knowing?

muddstopper
01-17-2009, 10:47 PM
Rod, you have never heard me say I do lawn care either. In fact you dont know anything about what I do or have done. I dont plant hundreds of acres, but I have been growing corn and other crops for 40+years starting as a child. We'll let that go at that.

As for your 140 bu acre yield. I have been looking over the yield data for Preble and Montgomery County and saw lots of yields that where greater than 140bu per acre. I guess it rained everywhere but where your field is. Maybe you should check out how your neighbors farm and see what they are doing different than you before patting yourself on the back for your less than adverage 140bu yield. Lots of difference in grossing $700 acre and $450 per acre. That $250 difference could buy a lot of the correct soil amendments. I'm starting to believe I have plowed more corn with a mule than you have with a tractor.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 10:47 PM
rceech,

Im not here to split hairs, no need to get all work up about it?

Can you tell me where the bt trait was acquired for corn?
NO...but when it first come out about 10 years ago I maybe could have. Sure you can find this info on the internet somewhere.

Are their any other plants on earth that carry that gene?
Don't know, not really sure...but Bt is actually natural but can't remember the origin for corn

I know exactly what it means to grow a F1 hybrid.

Are there no corn grower's any where in the US growing pure lines or that harvest or breed their own seeds?
Yes...they are called seed producers. They raise it, grade it, size it, package it and sell it. Farmers couldn't afford to raise their own seed. There is a skill to it and serious knowledge is needed. I know absolutly NOTHING about raising seed corn and I was born on the farm and have farmed my whole life. Just to put this into perspective..I have had financial interest for about the last 6 years in our family farm. When I started farming a bag of corn was about $56. Today the best stuff you can buy is over $300. Funny thing is, we can make more money planting $300 corn then we did when buying $56 corn. Traits and genetics pay!

Do you know if it's true if Bt corn can cross pollinate another non gmo corn crop? Sure can! Growers have to be careful ONLY when they are selling their corn and getting a NON GMO premium. If they are not getting a premium for NON GMO then it doesn't matter. Corn pollen can travel up to 1 mile!

Do you know if the farmer using his own harvested seeds can get sued if that gene shows up on the seen with out him knowing?

This isn't an issue with corn as cross pollenation wouldn't show up in the leaf tissue only the grain...but it IS an issue with soybeans. If a guys saves his beans and plants "bin run seed", he can get his crop destroyed, pays a big fine and can lose the farm if bad enough. The genetic companies (Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow etc) are paying around 2.1 million a day combined for triats so they don't take kindly to seed piracy! They can do leaf tests in the field.

muddstopper
01-17-2009, 11:06 PM
I did a quick search on Ill corn yields. Found one farm with 270bu, one 260 bu and the next closest was 226bu. Didnt check them all so 280bu per acre could be possible, but the state adverage was 208bu. With the high yields and low adverage, there must be more than a few that farm the same way you do. My buddy about 18 miles from me grew 283bu on 300 acres, but hes been building his soil a few more years than I have.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 11:08 PM
As for your 140 bu acre yield. I have been looking over the yield data for Preble and Montgomery County and saw lots of yields that where greater than 140bu per acre. I guess it rained everywhere but where your field is. Maybe you should check out how your neighbors farm and see what they are doing different than you before patting yourself on the back for your less than adverage 140bu yield. Lots of difference in grossing $700 acre and $450 per acre. That $250 difference could buy a lot of the correct soil amendments. I'm starting to believe I have plowed more corn with a mule than you have with a tractor.


So your county is the same from North to South and East to West and all your soils are the same.

You said yourself you raised 200 bu corn in your very first post that your neighbor got a 280 bu avg on 300 acres...and you only got 200, so what is the difference?

:laugh: Got ya there didn't I buddy! Look back at what you posted!!!!! :laugh: YEEEE HAAAAAA!


140 bu/ac was my FARM AVG. Our yields ranged from 120-180 depending on where the farm was! Unfortunalty I didn't have enought 180 bu corn though! Everyone in our county seen this!

I bet you wasn't looking at farm avg's...because I know the farm avg for Preble Co wasn't even close to that. I will check now..but I would say 140-150 MAX.

The big thing this year was farm placment as we would get a few little showers here and there. You could literally see where half the field got rain and the other half didn't. HUGE yield differences within the same field!

There were guys around that were even less then 140 bu avg this year. Butler Co just south of me has a lot of corn in the low 100's and their beans were in the teens! This doesn't mean they are bad farmers...just no rain!

The old saying is..."it takes rain to make grain"...and it was our limiting factor this year!


I sell seed all over my county and several other surrounding counties.

I know my county like the back of my hand!

Nice try though! I actually sell seed and work and do a lot of agronomy support on the side if you are trying to insinuate I don't know what I am doing or something!

Plus..I don't know anyone who uses any ammendments so why else would you expect all yields to be the same. Of course it is rainfall and soils for the most part!

greendoctor
01-17-2009, 11:11 PM
Green Doc,

Lets not look over other areas with the same issues of resistance!

Doctors see the same issues over time using meds! Weed resistance isn't as big of an issue right now as it could be in the future.

The key is to educate the farmer and let them know how to keep it from happening in the future!

It is survival of the fittest and nature will always prevail!

We just have to try and stay atleast one step ahead of it!

We are seeing some resistance with a few weeds (mostly atz and gly) but they are very limited!

Having a couple new chemistries in the last couple years has been a great help and have a few more on the way! :)

My point is that the environmental lobby has not been very helpful in the fight against pest resistance. Instead of stepping out of issues that they have no knowledge and stake in, they are mandating policy that goes against effective pest management. I do not believe their targeting chemistries for a ban is helpful, for instance. Before we blame the chemical companies for removing products, many of their decisions to do so were because it was not worth it for them to fight to keep a product on the market. The next time 2,4-D is sitting court at the environmentalist's tribunal, I expect to lose it.

One of the reasons why you are seeing resistance to atz is that less than effective rates are mandated by the EPA. In another time, up to 5 lb/A was allowed in corn. It is my understanding that no more than 2 lb is allowed per year. Don't know what to say about gly, but the planting of RoundUp ready crops helps select for resistant weeds via widespread use and RR crops are not tolerant of more than low rates. In IVM, the dependence on sulfonlyurea and imidazoline chemistries creates the same danger. The classic chemistries of bromacil(Hyvar), triazines and diuron are considered politically incorrect. Just because something has a certain effect in test animals does not mean it does the same thing in humans. For one thing, you and I both know test animals are force fed pesticides at a level short of one that causes acute toxicity. I do not plan on having a 2,4-D cocktail or some steak seasoned with atrazine anytime soon.

rcreech
01-17-2009, 11:17 PM
As for your 140 bu acre yield. I have been looking over the yield data for Preble and Montgomery County and saw lots of yields that where greater than 140bu per acre. I guess it rained everywhere but where your field is. Maybe you should check out how your neighbors farm and see what they are doing different than you before patting yourself on the back for your less than adverage 140bu yield. Lots of difference in grossing $700 acre and $450 per acre. That $250 difference could buy a lot of the correct soil amendments. I'm starting to believe I have plowed more corn with a mule than you have with a tractor.


Oh yeah...just to make you look like a fool a little more.

How are you trying to calculate my gross income/acre without know my selling price? :dizzy:

Plus you are saying that the yield difference in my county farmers adding soil ammendments. Nobody around here adds any ammendments! That is just the difference in soils and rainfall.

You are off the rocker man! :laugh:

I actually made more money/acre this year then I ever have...even with the higher inputs and avg yield!

I didn't sell at the high ($7) by any means..but my overall avg was awesome!

SpreadNSpray
01-17-2009, 11:19 PM
All this talk about corn and beans and farms... Has got me thinking about bow hunt'n deer! You boys let me know if I can help "increase your yields" the "organic/sustainable way." I'll come over and wack some deer for ya, free of charge!

ted putnam
01-17-2009, 11:30 PM
All this talk about corn and beans and farms... Has got me thinking about bow hunt'n deer! You boys let me know if I can help "increase your yields" the "organic/sustainable way." I'll come over and wack some deer for ya, free of charge!

Twaaaaang-----> Fwakkk! :laugh: Great minds think alike!

Kiril
01-18-2009, 02:28 AM
Still waiting on you "trial data"!

This is the third time I have asked to see it!

And I am still waiting on the answers to my questions .... but we all know how long I will wait for those ....... :rolleyes: Don't talk **** if you can't back up your own crap.


1) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 6" depth?

2) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 4" depth?

3) How much OM do I need to add to 1 hectare to raise the OM 1% at a 1/8" depth?

Please show your work, cause I am really interested in seeing how you can do this without knowing the volume of soil you are working with.

Oh, and BTW, you can assume your source of OM is 100% organic matter. Don't want to stress your brain too much.


Oh yea, and I am STILL waiting on that location for the 10 feet of topsoil you claim is in Kansas.

muddstopper
01-18-2009, 10:05 AM
Oh yeah...just to make you look like a fool a little more.

How are you trying to calculate my gross income/acre without know my selling price? :dizzy:

Plus you are saying that the yield difference in my county farmers adding soil ammendments. Nobody around here adds any ammendments! That is just the difference in soils and rainfall.

You are off the rocker man! :laugh:

I actually made more money/acre this year then I ever have...even with the higher inputs and avg yield!

I didn't sell at the high ($7) by any means..but my overall avg was awesome!

Just using the base price of $3.50bu. But at $7 per bu, you can just double that $250 per acre you lost and estimate your lost income potential at $500 per acre. Why dont you give the name of your farm and I can look up the exact yield data. Or is it really your farm and your crop you are talking about.

By the way, I also found a farm in NC that produced 290bu peracre with zero fertilizer imputs on a corn/soybean rotation, so exceptional high yields arent just limited to Ill. It seems the only exception to high yields is your farm. Oh wait, I forgot, it doesnt ever rain where your at and your the only person in Ohio that has poor soils.

muddstopper
01-18-2009, 10:29 AM
So your county is the same from North to South and East to West and all your soils are the same.

You said yourself you raised 200 bu corn in your very first post that your neighbor got a 280 bu avg on 300 acres...and you only got 200, so what is the difference?

!

I guess you didnt read the post directly above this one that you made that stated that he has been buildig his soil longer than I have. You see Rod, when you wear a soil out with years of negecting fertility management, you cant replace those lost fertility properties over nite by just dumping on a load of fertilizer. Nature didnt give us fertile soils overnite, it took thousands of years to produce enough root acid soluible nutrients out of the base rock the soil is located on. Your goal, and you are the one that made this statement, is yields and not fertility management. You even admitted that you and nobody around you even used any soil amendmend to grow their crops. Now, if you can take off 140 bu of corn, which equates to about 140lb N as well as approx 75lbs P and another 70lbs or so of sulfur, Not to mention the other primary and secondary nutrients, and you arenot replaceing any of what you are taking off, just how long do you think that soil is going to produce. Consider that 140 bu of corn probably weighed in at 50-60lb per bushel, with your so called drought I estimate more on the lower side of that 50-60 lb per bu, then you removed approx 7000lbs of minerals from the soil. Where is this supposed to come from. If it aint there, and you dont put it there, your yields will continue to suffer and will never reach their full potential. And please dont tell me your weights didnt reach 50lb per bu, or even try to stretch the weights the other direction. If you do, you had better be prepared to show your weight tickets.

Do yourself a favor and let this thread drop. You are loseing badly.

rcreech
01-18-2009, 11:40 AM
I guess you didnt read the post directly above this one that you made that stated that he has been buildig his soil longer than I have. You see Rod, when you wear a soil out with years of negecting fertility management, you cant replace those lost fertility properties over nite by just dumping on a load of fertilizer. Nature didnt give us fertile soils overnite, it took thousands of years to produce enough root acid soluible nutrients out of the base rock the soil is located on. Your goal, and you are the one that made this statement, is yields and not fertility management. You even admitted that you and nobody around you even used any soil amendmend to grow their crops. Now, if you can take off 140 bu of corn, which equates to about 140lb N as well as approx 75lbs P and another 70lbs or so of sulfur, Not to mention the other primary and secondary nutrients, and you arenot replaceing any of what you are taking off, just how long do you think that soil is going to produce. Consider that 140 bu of corn probably weighed in at 50-60lb per bushel, with your so called drought I estimate more on the lower side of that 50-60 lb per bu, then you removed approx 7000lbs of minerals from the soil. Where is this supposed to come from. If it aint there, and you dont put it there, your yields will continue to suffer and will never reach their full potential. And please dont tell me your weights didnt reach 50lb per bu, or even try to stretch the weights the other direction. If you do, you had better be prepared to show your weight tickets.

Do yourself a favor and let this thread drop. You are loseing badly.


I am not losing anything! :laugh:

QUESTION: What herbicide program are you using? What are you using as your N source? What kind of seed are you using (Co and variety)?

If you are getting 200 bu corn this is a few questions I was pondering!

I had already posted before I seen you posted your yields again. You just knew I was going to catch that so you posted!

My yields are right in line with my County! How do you expect me to raise 200 bu corn every year when nobody in our state can do that?

How can you expect to compare your yields (don't even know where you live) to mine. I can't even compare my yields to the Co North of me. They get 170-220 bu corn every year! You are not even in my state and want to compare and boast about your yields! Get a life!

That is like the people in Texas making fun of us because we don't have as much oil as they do. You just have to do the best you can with the best you got!

As stated previously...I am not ashamed of our yields at all. The US avg is 153 and I was just slightly below that going through a drought.

Are you that stupid?

If you want to see where I live...go into West Alexandria OH and I live on Bantas Creek Rd. I farm with my Dad (Terry and June Creech) and he and my mom owns 350 acres. We then rent an 80 acre farm also.

Google my address and you will find our farms. They are all within 4-5 miles of my house!

Look it up. You can't even see my farm yields as I haven't even reported them to the ASCS office yet, but why would I lie about 140 bu avg? If I was going to lie I would tell you my farm avg was higher....not lower! :dizzy: How many people would brag about an avg crop!:laugh:

You are such an idiot! Think about it!

I don't care to see your farm...but what state are you in?

Show me the site you looked at as I would like to see what yields you are looking at for Preble Co.

I think you are the one that needs to stop! I can play all day long in the corn field!!!!!!

rcreech
01-18-2009, 11:57 AM
I guess you didnt read the post directly above this one that you made that stated that he has been buildig his soil longer than I have. You see Rod, when you wear a soil out with years of negecting fertility management, you cant replace those lost fertility properties over nite by just dumping on a load of fertilizer. Nature didnt give us fertile soils overnite, it took thousands of years to produce enough root acid soluible nutrients out of the base rock the soil is located on. Your goal, and you are the one that made this statement, is yields and not fertility management. You even admitted that you and nobody around you even used any soil amendmend to grow their crops. Now, if you can take off 140 bu of corn, which equates to about 140lb N as well as approx 75lbs P and another 70lbs or so of sulfur, Not to mention the other primary and secondary nutrients, and you arenot replaceing any of what you are taking off, just how long do you think that soil is going to produce. Consider that 140 bu of corn probably weighed in at 50-60lb per bushel, with your so called drought I estimate more on the lower side of that 50-60 lb per bu, then you removed approx 7000lbs of minerals from the soil. Where is this supposed to come from. If it aint there, and you dont put it there, your yields will continue to suffer and will never reach their full potential. And please dont tell me your weights didnt reach 50lb per bu, or even try to stretch the weights the other direction. If you do, you had better be prepared to show your weight tickets.

Do yourself a favor and let this thread drop. You are loseing badly.


Mis-statement right there! If we remove 7000# of total grain as you say...are you saying that is all mineal? Thats what you said above!!! That is toally wrong my friend!!!!

#1,corn is not all mineral now is it? If so, how would it benefit ethanol. You need to think before you post...but since you don't have a clue what you are talking about I guess it doens't matter if you would think about it!


You have moisture of (15+%) and then you have the startchs, protein and fat etc!

I am confused by what you say!

What you don't realize is that our crops do not suffer! We are INCREASING EVERY YEAR!

The only limiting factor we have every year is rain.

Our TW was actually not too bad this year. 56-58 mostly! But TW isn't accoutned for when figuring crop removal by nutrients by Tri Stater Fert recs!

You are figuring your nutrient removal by total weight?

That is crazy considering corn is usually 15-18% moisture, so you better refigure your numbers!

Don't know where you got your crop removal numbers...as they are way too high!

I figure .37/bu on phos and .27/bu on K.

This is straight from the Tri-State Fertilizler recs put together by Ohio State, Purdue and Michigan State.

Most look at crop removal and then replace what is taken off (crop removal program) or one can do crop removal plus a build up if needed.

Pretty simple really!

rcreech
01-18-2009, 12:06 PM
And I am still waiting on the answers to my questions .... but we all know how long I will wait for those ....... :rolleyes: Don't talk **** if you can't back up your own crap.

I already explained myself on this! Plus there is nothing even realistic about your question! You don't pull samples at 1% and there in no such ammendment that is 100%!

Oh yea, and I am STILL waiting on that location for the 10 feet of topsoil you claim is in Kansas.

Read the post dude!

I told you it was around Witchita. What more do you want me to say?

Do you want address's or something!!!

Kiril
01-18-2009, 12:17 PM
Read the post dude!

I told you it was around Witchita. What more do you want me to say?

Read the post dude!

https://www.soils.org/sssagloss/index.php

topsoil (i) The layer of soil moved in cultivation. Frequently designated as the Ap layer or Ap horizon. See also surface soil. (ii) Presumably fertile soil material used to topdress roadbanks, gardens, and lawns.

surface soil The uppermost part of the soil, ordinarily moved in tillage, or its equivalent in uncultivated soils and ranging in depth from 7 to 25 cm. Frequently designated as the plow layer, the surface layer, the Ap layer, or the Ap horizon. See also topsoil.


Should I continue Rod? Here is a soil survey from Reno County in Kansas, next county over from Sedgwick county (North-West).

http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Manuscripts/KS155/0/Reno_KS.pdf

Find me a 10 foot deep Ap horizon in that report.


Want to continue playing this game Rod? We both know you "shoot from the hip" more often than not. I am willing to spend some more time picking apart your posts to demonstrate this if you want.

BTW Rod, ever heard of spell check? :rolleyes:

Still waiting on those answers for OM. Is there a reason you are avoiding answering the questions?

muddstopper
01-18-2009, 01:37 PM
Here you go Rod, http://www.monsantoperformance.com/ , Pick a state, pick a county and pick a farm and get over it. And yes the weight of the corn is made up of elements that came from your soil, If you dont replace them you have lost them and a little bit more of your soils fertility with every crop. Of course you can just keep geneticly modifying your crops so that they can produce on soils with lower availabe nutrients, but what are you going to do when you are back down to soild rock. Heck, you probably have to keep buying bigger tractors now just to pull your plow.

Anywys, I'm out of here, Hard heads make for hard lessons and I'm thru talking to a rock.

rcreech
01-18-2009, 01:42 PM
You were looking at test plot data?

:laugh:

Where do you think we put our test plots?????

It isn't on our poorest soils if that helps you out any! :laugh:

I thought you were looking at Co records!

All I can say is WOW!

rcreech
01-18-2009, 01:44 PM
Read the post dude!




Want to continue playing this game Rod? We both know you "shoot from the hip" more often than not. I am willing to spend some more time picking apart your posts to demonstrate this if you want.

BTW Rod, ever heard of spell check? :rolleyes:

Still waiting on those answers for OM. Is there a reason you are avoiding answering the questions?

Heck yes I will continue! Shoot from the hip? I hear ya!

Go ahead and try and pick me apart! Have at it...but I think mis-spelled words will be about the best thing you have come up with so far!

I never use spell check...unless an official document! Not really worried about it on here!

Kiril
01-18-2009, 01:48 PM
Heck yes I will continue! Shoot from the hip? I hear ya!

Go ahead and try and pick me apart!

Rod ol boy, you haven't even been able to defend the 3 items I have already brought up ... now you want to invite more? Fine by me.

Kiril
01-18-2009, 02:00 PM
Weed resistance isn't as big of an issue right now as it could be in the future.

You have come to this conclusion based on what information, observations in YOUR field? :hammerhead:

It certainly isn't based on the information I have posted, which clearly shows it IS a major issue NOW!


http://www.weedscience.org/ChronIncrease.gif

http://www.weedscience.org/ChronMOA.GIF

* Heap, I. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Online. Internet. January 16, 2009 . Available www.weedscience.com


Not good enough for you Rod? Let us take a look at OH, given you consider anything outside your little corner of the world insignificant.


There are currently 15 different types (known as 'biotypes') of herbicide resistant weeds in Ohio. The first herbicide resistant weed reported from Ohio is Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) with resistance to atrazine, reported in 1981. Local weed scientists estimate that there are 2,570 sites and more than 89,300 acres infested with herbicide resistant weeds in Ohio and they infest corn, and soybean. The most widespread resistant weed of Ohio is Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), which infests an estimated 10001-100000 acres and is found primarily in corn. Giant Ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), with resistance to glyphosate is the most recently discovered (2004) new type of resistant weed in Ohio.

http://www.weedscience.org/usa/state.asp?StateID=36


Rod, the flood gate is only beginning to open.

I am looking forward to a logically thought out response with credible references to support your assertion that herbicide resistant weeds are not a problem now.

rcreech
01-18-2009, 03:08 PM
You have come to this conclusion based on what information, observations in YOUR field? :hammerhead:

It certainly isn't based on the information I have posted, which clearly shows it IS a major issue NOW!




Not good enough for you Rod? Let us take a look at OH, given you consider anything outside your little corner of the world insignificant.


There are currently 15 different types (known as 'biotypes') of herbicide resistant weeds in Ohio. The first herbicide resistant weed reported from Ohio is Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) with resistance to atrazine, reported in 1981. Local weed scientists estimate that there are 2,570 sites and more than 89,300 acres infested with herbicide resistant weeds in Ohio and they infest corn, and soybean. The most widespread resistant weed of Ohio is Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), which infests an estimated 10001-100000 acres and is found primarily in corn. Giant Ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), with resistance to glyphosate is the most recently discovered (2004) new type of resistant weed in Ohio.

http://www.weedscience.org/usa/state.asp?StateID=36


Rod, the flood gate is only beginning to open.

I am looking forward to a logically thought out response with credible references to support your assertion that herbicide resistant weeds are not a problem now.


Read what i said...I said IT ISN'T AS BAD NOW AS IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE!!!!! That is saying.....IT IS GOING TO GET WORSE!!!!!!

CAN YOU READ! I KNOW WEED RESISTANCE CAN BE, AND IS A PROBLEM IN SOME PLACES!!!!!

NEXT QUESTION PLEASE!!!!! :laugh:

I can takl agronomics all day...but question if you are really worth my valuable time.

I have not said weed resistance is not an issue...I am simply stated the ways around it such as using leathal rates, switching AI's ect.

We have very little weed resistance so far...but I think with the abuse of Gly we will have a lot more in the future.

Adding new chemistries to our lineups and with new GMO's coming out we will stay ahead of the curve.

MAN...am I getting tired of repeating myself on here!

Go back as this is what I have stated all along!

I already stated there are like 9 gly tolerant weeds in OH. Good thing is...they are just in limited locations!

Currently I am not aware of any glyphosate tolerant weeds in our area of the state yet (South West corner)!

Kiril
01-18-2009, 03:42 PM
Read what i said...I said IT ISN'T AS BAD NOW AS IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE!!!!! That is saying.....IT IS GOING TO GET WORSE!!!!!!

Correct, which implies it isn't a problem now. So, instead of finding ways to solve this problem you do what? Continue to use the very products that are causing these resistant weeds in the first place? Now that is an agronomically sound decision isn't it? :hammerhead:

NEXT QUESTION PLEASE!!!!! :laugh:

How about addressing the first three B.S statements you have made Rod?
Why do you keep avoiding answering my questions here Mr. Agronomy?

It doesn't matter how you cut it...raising OM 1% is raising it 1%! Dosn't matter on depth! %OM has nothing to do with depth!

We raise good crops for what we have...but nothing like the boys out West with 10' of topsoil.

There are no commercial farms out here spreading ammendments or using organics!


Come on big shot, are you going to dance around these B.S statements you have made forever?


I have not said weed resistance is not an issue...I am simply stated the ways around it such as using leathal rates, switching AI's ect.

Yes, Rod, good approach. Lets throw more and stronger pesticides at the mutant weeds. That after all is what any good land steward would do right Rod?

I thought one of the benefits of GMO crops was reduced pesticide use, not increased. :hammerhead:

Adding new chemistries to our lineups and with new GMO's coming out we will stay ahead of the curve.

And you know with 100% certainty that these "advances" will have zero impact on the environment and consumers? Can you even make that claim now with current GMO products in use?

Barefoot James
01-18-2009, 09:08 PM
Rod,

I don't think your time is what Kiril or Muddstopper, or Natty or me is worried about. It is that you are and could be a valuable person in spreading the truth and helping to save the eventual downfall of soil, as we know it in the future. They are trying to help you see that - YES you have great value but are not able to see it – or use it.

These guys want to make sure that this act you play to on this site is exposed for what it really is and that you just come clean and come over to the light. Sounds sort of like Star Wars but your act of James Earl Jones is disturbing to say the least. I really don't see you’re your family (peoples – supporters – people that think like you) on this site planning on supporting idiotic rhetoric and Spam. Come to the light Luke you could do great things for your current clients and this sites participants and lurkers.

rcreech
01-18-2009, 10:50 PM
Here ya go Mudd!

This is on our 2008 bean crop..but corn was the same boat!

As I have stated...due to our the horrible weather we had...yields were not good for us this year! No big deal as weather is almost always our limiting factor here.

You can have everything right...but it takes rain!

http://ourohio.org/index.php?page=2007-soybean-yield

So you still expect me and my fellow Ohioians to raise 200 bu corn in this? Do you think your ammendments or whatever you do would have made it up?

Don't think so!

SpreadNSpray
01-18-2009, 11:40 PM
Any irrigating differences?

Kiril
01-18-2009, 11:58 PM
Lets explore a few more statements from Rod

The plant genetics has nothing to do with GMO's.

Explain this one Rod. A GMO (genetically modified organism) has nothing to do with genetics? You do understand the process right, or not?

Every genetic type starts out as Non GMO and once the genetics is selected for the hybrid the TRAITS are bred into it. The plant traits now are 100% GMO. They have nothing to do with plant characteristics. It is solely the insect and herbicide protection for the plant.

OK, Mr Agronomy, let us review some definitions shall we (all from Wiki since we are talking high school biology).

Biological Trait (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trait_(biology)):

A trait is a distinct variant of a phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between.

Phenotype (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype):

A phenotype is any observable characteristic or trait of an organism: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, or behavior. Phenotypes result from the expression of an organism's genes as well as the influence of environmental factors and possible interactions between the two.

Genotype (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype):

The genetic constitution of a cell, an organism, or an individual (i.e. the specific allele makeup of the individual) usually with reference to a specific character under consideration



OK, now we have some fundamental definitions to work with, so let us continue.

According to you traits have nothing to do with characteristics, correct? Furthermore, you claim all plant traits of a GMO are a direct result of GE, correct?

The plant traits now are 100% GMO. They have nothing to do with plant characteristics.

You also claim the plant genetics (genotype) is the sole determination of plant characteristics. Therefore according to you, I should be able to always determine genotype by using phenotype, or visa-versa, correct?

The plant genetics is what determined by a cross between two parents. This is what determines the plants characteristics such as yeild, standability, drought tolerance, disease tolerance and grain quality ect.

How am I doing here Rod?
Care to explain the obvious inaccuracies in your statements?
Should I go find some more examples of you "shooting from the hip"?

Oh BTW, still waiting on some valid explanation for the other B.S. statements you have made here.

dishboy
01-19-2009, 12:25 AM
Hasn't this horse died yet?

Kiril
01-19-2009, 12:32 AM
Hasn't this horse died yet?

Nope, Rod keeps inviting more.

greendoctor
01-19-2009, 12:34 AM
Its not going to die until all pesticides and chemical fertilizers are banned.:eek:

Kiril
01-19-2009, 01:31 AM
Its not going to die until all pesticides and chemical fertilizers are banned.:eek:

Oh, this has nothing to do with organic vs. synthetics. It is about Rod, and his relentless hounding and ridicule of people. When he gets put on the spot to defend his own inaccurate statements, he can't, and he goes to great lengths to avoid doing so. I guess we all know what that makes him ...... (hint: starts with an "H").

greendoctor
01-19-2009, 02:30 AM
Makes for one big pissing match. I try to stay out of this debate because I think there is too much emotion and politics on both sides. Everything I have seen on both sides is tainted by an agenda. I must say that the synthetic side is equally guilty of this. But total bans and extreme restrictions are not the way to go.

Kiril
01-19-2009, 02:44 AM
But total bans and extreme restrictions are not the way to go.

So where do you draw the line, and who makes that determination? Corporations who's only interest is in profit margin?

We keep playing hide and seek with the real issues here with respect to GMO and pesticide use. When will someone have the balls to step up and do what needs to be done?

greendoctor
01-19-2009, 03:01 AM
I will respect the findings of a body not influenced by money from either the environmental movement or the corporations. The EPA does not count because that organization changes according to how much of a hard on the appointing president has against pesticides.

In regards to GMO's I remember my final project in college entomology arguing against GMO's. I do not believe they encourage good pest management practices, mostly because of how they can foster pesticide resistance and non target effects. BT corn and cotton were the two examples I held up opposing GMO's. Now I am finding out about gly resistant weeds. In another time, I thought of 1 lb gly/A as a total killer. I now know better. In my own environment, gly resistant vegetation is all over. They are not necessarily mutants, but plants that are inherently not susceptible. The selection process and population shift occurred because gly was the only thing used. This was not entirely the applicator's fault either. Alternatives to gly were made politically incorrect. Again, politics and emotion getting in the way of science.

I believe the positions taken by both sides of this debate are not reasonable.

rcreech
01-19-2009, 07:41 AM
Lets explore a few more statements from Rod



Explain this one Rod. A GMO (genetically modified organism) has nothing to do with genetics? You do understand the process right, or not?



OK, Mr Agronomy, let us review some definitions shall we (all from Wiki since we are talking high school biology).

Biological Trait (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trait_(biology)):

A trait is a distinct variant of a phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between.

Phenotype (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype):

A phenotype is any observable characteristic or trait of an organism: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, or behavior. Phenotypes result from the expression of an organism's genes as well as the influence of environmental factors and possible interactions between the two.

Genotype (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype):

The genetic constitution of a cell, an organism, or an individual (i.e. the specific allele makeup of the individual) usually with reference to a specific character under consideration



OK, now we have some fundamental definitions to work with, so let us continue.

According to you traits have nothing to do with characteristics, correct? Furthermore, you claim all plant traits of a GMO are a direct result of GE, correct?



You also claim the plant genetics (genotype) is the sole determination of plant characteristics. Therefore according to you, I should be able to always determine genotype by using phenotype, or visa-versa, correct?



How am I doing here Rod?
Care to explain the obvious inaccuracies in your statements?
Should I go find some more examples of you "shooting from the hip"?

Oh BTW, still waiting on some valid explanation for the other B.S. statements you have made here.


What in the heck are you talking about?? :laugh:

What you have posted doesn't mean anything to me! That doesn't talk about GMO vs NON GMO!

All of our genetics start out as NON GMO and the traits are added for plant protection. You can get the same exact hybrid as GMO or NON GMO. Both plants have the same characteristics it is just the GMO has added plant protection! Adding the GMO to the plant doesn't change its characteristics!!!!!

I put it as plain and simple as it can be for corn.

You can break it down as much as you want...but I sell corn for the 6th largest seed company in the US and sell alot! And I can PROMISE you they know what they are doing!

There are two things a farmer has to look at when selecting a hybrid.

#1) Plant genetics- What type of plant do you want or are you looking for. What characteristics, such as yield, standability, TW, drydown etc.

#) Traits - this is an insertion into the plant and determines what kind of insecticide/herbidcide protection it has. Do they want cornborer and rootworm, just corn borer do they Gly torerance or Ignitr (Liberty) tolerance? Yes they are genetically altering the plant...but as they insert the gene, they are not changing the plant genetics!

EXAMPLE

5335 is a new number for us this year and it is going to be AWESOME!\
We offer it in the following:

5335 NON GMO
5335 Roundup Ready
5335 VT3 + Herculex (This means it has RR, Liberty, and cornborer and rootworm)

Plant genetics are all the same....just differnet triats! That is the fact jack!

Plant traits...and its parent genetics are two different ducks!

DO YOU GET IT YET!!!!!!

What I have stated is 100% accurate....and a person that has probably never planted an acre of corn in his life is disputing it! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

You said it yourself...you are after me! That is fine...as I can stand behind EVERYTHING I say!

Yes you can put a spin on what I say, but that is fine!

Just like I said 10' of topsoil and you break out HORIZONS!!!!

Their soils are better at 10' then our top 6"!

Use your head instead of searching on the internet for a minute if you can!


Go on beckshybrids.com or call them a 1-800-937-2325!

You seriously don't have a freakn' clue when it comes to anything about all of this!

I do this everyday and it is somewhat complicated...so how are you trying to learn it on the internet?

:laugh:

NattyLawn
01-19-2009, 09:14 AM
What in the heck are you talking about?? :laugh:

What you have posted doesn't mean anything to me! That doesn't talk about GMO vs NON GMO!

All of our genetics start out as NON GMO and the traits are added for plant protection. You can get the same exact hybrid as GMO or NON GMO. Both plants have the same characteristics it is just the GMO has added plant protection! Adding the GMO to the plant doesn't change its characteristics!!!!!

I put it as plain and simple as it can be for corn.

You can break it down as much as you want...but I sell corn for the 6th largest seed company in the US and sell alot! And I can PROMISE you they know what they are doing!

There are two things a farmer has to look at when selecting a hybrid.

#1) Plant genetics- What type of plant do you want or are you looking for. What characteristics, such as yield, standability, TW, drydown etc.

#) Traits - this is an insertion into the plant and determines what kind of insecticide/herbidcide protection it has. Do they want cornborer and rootworm, just corn borer do they Gly torerance or Ignitr (Liberty) tolerance? Yes they are genetically altering the plant...but as they insert the gene, they are not changing the plant genetics!

EXAMPLE

5335 is a new number for us this year and it is going to be AWESOME!\
We offer it in the following:

5335 NON GMO
5335 Roundup Ready
5335 VT3 + Herculex (This means it has RR, Liberty, and cornborer and rootworm)

Plant genetics are all the same....just differnet triats! That is the fact jack!

Plant traits...and its parent genetics are two different ducks!

DO YOU GET IT YET!!!!!!

What I have stated is 100% accurate....and a person that has probably never planted an acre of corn in his life is disputing it! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

You said it yourself...you are after me! That is fine...as I can stand behind EVERYTHING I say!

Yes you can put a spin on what I say, but that is fine!

Just like I said 10' of topsoil and you break out HORIZONS!!!!

Their soils are better at 10' then our top 6"!

Use your head instead of searching on the internet for a minute if you can!


Go on beckshybrids.com or call them a 1-800-937-2325!

You seriously don't have a freakn' clue when it comes to anything about all of this!

I do this everyday and it is somewhat complicated...so how are you trying to learn it on the internet?

:laugh:

I'm translating Rod's post:

I don't understand what you posted! So I must back peddle to one of my other arguments. I wanted to talk about genetics, don't understand, now it's back to GMO vs. non-GMO.

I work for the 6th largest seed distributor in the US! I must know what I'm talking about! Most salesman do, right?

Plant genetics are the same! (Insert random catch phrase here to throw people off and look smart).

What I post can be 100% backed up....by me! Why? Because I plant corn! I know all!

Everything you do is off the internet! I can't find anything on the internet! California consists of Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco. There's no farms there! I've never been there and looked at all the farms lining I5 for miles upon miles!


C'mon Rod...You don't have to have thousands of acres to have a little knowledge and common sense.

Real Green
01-19-2009, 11:23 AM
C'mon Rod...You don't have to have thousands of acres to have a little knowledge and common sense.

If that's not the pot calling the kettle black... and I mean a handful of you who treat others on this board with great disrespect. I have noticed an undeniable trend... those of you who do have a substantial knowledge in terms of organics, because that is what you apply in your program or what have you, are rather quick to treat those who do not apply organics, as though they are ignorant individuals who have no clue what they are doing or speaking of. There's no point in naming names, YOU know who YOU are. But the bottom line is this... Kiril is an educated individual (I would say booksmart from what I have gathered, there may be hands-on, but I am not aware). RCREECH is an educated individual as well (I know it's booksmart as well as hands on). You two have had a wonderful dialouge for those who have taken the time to keep up with the matters discussed. At this point... LET IT GO. End it. You two can throw jabs here and there, but in all honesty, there is no common ground and there NEVER will be. I am calling for it... I am sure others can agree with me, as this has been wonderful for those who appreciate learning.

NattyLawn
01-19-2009, 11:37 AM
If that's not the pot calling the kettle black... and I mean a handful of you who treat others on this board with great disrespect. I have noticed an undeniable trend... those of you who do have a substantial knowledge in terms of organics, because that is what you apply in your program or what have you, are rather quick to treat those who do not apply organics, as though they are ignorant individuals who have no clue what they are doing or speaking of. There's no point in naming names, YOU know who YOU are. But the bottom line is this... Kiril is an educated individual (I would say booksmart from what I have gathered, there may be hands-on, but I am not aware). RCREECH is an educated individual as well (I know it's booksmart as well as hands on). You two have had a wonderful dialouge for those who have taken the time to keep up with the matters discussed. At this point... LET IT GO. End it. You two can throw jabs here and there, but in all honesty, there is no common ground and there NEVER will be. I am calling for it... I am sure others can agree with me, as this has been wonderful for those who appreciate learning.

Great disrespect to people that don't apply organics? Huh? The only disrespect in this thread is Rod only seeing things his way. Is he entitled to that because he's a farmer? Because he's educated? Because he has hands on experience? You call him out because of the things he posts and what he posts about others when he "shoots from the hip" and claims it's 100% fact.

This thread needs to be closed....I agree 100% with that.

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:39 AM
What in the heck are you talking about?? What you have posted doesn't mean anything to me!

Exactly Rod. You have demonstrated here you don't know the difference between genotype, phenology, and traits, yet you "talk" like you do.

All of our genetics start out as NON GMO and the traits are added for plant protection.

Lets continue..................

You can get the same exact hybrid as GMO or NON GMO. Both plants have the same characteristics it is just the GMO has added plant protection!

Which is it Rod? Either a GMO has is 100% GE (genetically engineered) traits or not.

The plant traits now are 100% GMO. They have nothing to do with plant characteristics.

Also, how can you still not understand that traits are a part of the phenotype after I posted the definitions?

Biological Trait:

A trait is a distinct variant of a phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between.

Phenotype:

A phenotype is any observable characteristic or trait of an organism: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, or behavior. Phenotypes result from the expression of an organism's genes as well as the influence of environmental factors and possible interactions between the two.

Adding the GMO to the plant doesn't change its characteristics!!!!!

Really Rod. Ignoring the fact that you don't seem to understand how environmental pressure can change the phenotype, lets review what you have said in this thread because you can't even agree with your own statements.

The plant genetics is what determined by a cross between two parents. This is what determines the plants characteristics such as yeild, standability, drought tolerance, disease tolerance and grain quality ect.

but then ......

Rod on GMO with respect to drought tolerance.

2012 is when the Nitrogen managment and drought gene is coming to the market.

Rod on GMO with respect to yield and insect resistence.

But out west and even here it is VERY important to have traits (GMO corn) to keep ECB and RW from taking it out.

Rod on GMO and plant genetics.

The plant genetics has nothing to do with GMO's.

Do we need more?

I put it as plain and simple as it can be for corn.

Good for you Rod, you can copy information off a sell card, doesn't mean you have even the most rudimentary knowledge of what is going on with the plant or the process by which these GEO's are created. You just buy/sell based on the GE features of the seed.

It is quite clear you wouldn't know a phyenotypic expression if it hit you up side the head. http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb121.gif

Here Rod, let us try this again. Some definitions from one of your beloved seed producers so you might understand.

http://www.monsanto.com/biotech-gmo/asp/glossary.asp

Genetic engineering
The technique of removing, modifying or adding genes to a living organism. Also referred to as gene splicing, recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology or genetic modification.

Genetically engineered organism (GEO)
A new variety of plant produced using traditional plant breeding techniques, supplemented by the insertion of a specific beneficial gene or genes. Also referred to as genetically modified organism (GMO).

Genetic modification
The technique of removing, modifying or adding genes to a living organism via genetic engineering or other more traditional methods. Also referred to as gene splicing, recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology or genetic engineering.

Recombinant DNA technology
Procedures used to join DNA segments in a cell-free system (e.g. in a test tube outside living cells or organisms). Under appropriate conditions, a recombinant DNA molecule can be introduced into a cell and copy itself (replicate), either as an independent entity (autonomously) or as an integral part of a cellular chromosome.

Genetically modified organism (GMO)
A new variety of plant produced using traditional plant breeding techniques, supplemented by the insertion of a specific beneficial gene or genes. Also referred to as genetically engineered organism (GEO).

Variety
A group of individual plants that is uniform, stable and distinct genetically from other groups of individuals in the same species.


How about from the USGS?

http://biology.usgs.gov/genetics_genomics/glossary_g.html

genetic engineering
A process in which an organism’s genes are selectively modified, often through splicing DNA fragments from different chromosomes or species, to achieve a desired result.


Not enough for you to piece it together Rod? How about a review on how to create a transgenic plant.

http://www.cls.casa.colostate.edu/TransgenicCrops/how.html

Plant genetics are all the same....just differnet triats! That is the fact jack! Plant traits...and its parent genetics are two different ducks!

Geez, you can't even get it straight in the same sentence.

Plant traits...and its parent genetics are two different ducks!

So the "parent genetics" have nothing to do with the "child" trait? :hammerhead:

Come on Rod, can you not even attempt to understand what a biological trait is? I posted the definitions, perhaps I need some agrobacterium to insert this knowledge into your brain?

What I have stated is 100% accurate....and a person that has probably never planted an acre of corn in his life is disputing it!

Actually Rod, I have clearly demonstrated what you have posted is not even close to being accurate. Furthermore, this has nothing to do with farming corn, but instead plant breeding and biology.

You said it yourself...you are after me!

Partly yes, because you asked for it, and because some of the information you post is simply inaccurate B.S., and because you relentlessly go after people who disagree with you.

Go ahead and try and pick me apart!

And you have YET to satisfactorily answered 99% of the questions I have asked (most you just completely ignore), and you have not successfully defended any of the statements you have made.

Just like I said 10' of topsoil and you break out HORIZONS!!!!

This is your answer? Nice attempt at the misdirect buddy.
Either your information is correct or not Rod.
What is it that you say?

People may not believe this, but I am not usually confrontational...but state something that isn't correct and I will be the first to jump on and will fight it to the end! I can't stand it when people state totally wrong info!

You make the claim you can back up anything you state in almost every post, yet you have failed to do so on numerous occasions in this thread alone.

You seriously don't have a freakn' clue when it comes to anything about all of this! I do this everyday and it is somewhat complicated...so how are you trying to learn it on the internet?

That is right Rod, I learned everything from the internet. :hammerhead:

Obviously you didn't find where I posted information on my formal education did you, otherwise you most likely would have let this drop 10 pages ago. The reason why I reference internet sources is because with people like you, nothing short of that will suffice.

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:50 AM
But the bottom line is this... Kiril is an educated individual (I would say booksmart from what I have gathered, there may be hands-on, but I am not aware).

Yes, my formal education is rather extensive, and I have been in the field (hands-on) for 15 years as an adult. Combined education and field experience = 25 years. Probably not good enough for Rod, but then nothing is when it comes to issues he disagrees with.

phasthound
01-19-2009, 12:54 PM
;'l LET IT GO. End it. You two can throw jabs here and there, but in all honesty, there is no common ground and there NEVER will be. I am calling for it... I am sure others can agree with me, as this has been wonderful for those who appreciate learning.

It is unfortunate that this always turns into such a confrontation. It's like the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Nobody wins, and it gets worse for both sides.

It is more unfortunate because there really is a lot of common ground. We should be striving to find them rather than trying to fight about differences.

End it.

rcreech
01-19-2009, 06:26 PM
I am definitly going to end this...as Kiril is out to sabatage everything I say!

That is fine as I know what his agenda is and what he is trying to do!

There is a big difference between plant genetics (physical characteristics of the plant) and plant GMO traits (insect and herbicide traits) as stated previously!



You would think that since I work with this everyday that I would know something...but the internet junky is trying to prove me wrong! :laugh:


This is straight from Becks research page that is listed below!

Beck's greenhouses are dedicated to plant breeding and trait introgression providing Beck's with year-round research enabling turnaround time to be reduced on new hybrids introduced into the market.

AGAIN...CALL BECKS HYBRIDS AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT PLANT GENETICS VS. PLANT TRAITS!!!!!

http://www.beckshybrids.com/research/index.aspx

http://www.beckshybrids.com/

1-800-937-2325

If I wasn't so confident...I wouldn't tell you to call them...or infact call any seed company you want. Pioneer, Dekalb, NK, or any of them. You will learn a lot, but I expect you to post back on here that I am right!

They have people that answer the phone all day! Tell them I told you to call!

I hope you call Becks as you will find that I am 100% correct with all the info I have stated!!!!!!

This has been a great discussion and thanks for all the PM's!

RC

Kiril
01-19-2009, 06:37 PM
That is fine as I know what his agenda is and what he is trying to do!

What is that Rod, correct your misinformation?

There is a big difference between plant genetics (physical characteristics of the plant) and plant GMO traits (insect and herbicide traits) as stated previously!

I could sit you down and take you step by step through the process of creating a transgenic plant and you would still argue that what you see isn't true. The process has been posted, probably way over your head, but it is there. If you want to choose to continue to be ignorant about these topics we have discussed, that is your business.

So there we have it everyone. In the face of multiple statements in this thread that have been shown to be inaccurate, Rod is not man enough to step up and admit he was wrong, even though he insists he will when shown to be.

Finally the end. I suggest in the future you don't post statements on topics you know little about.

muddstopper
01-19-2009, 06:41 PM
Here ya go Mudd!

This is on our 2008 bean crop..but corn was the same boat!

As I have stated...due to our the horrible weather we had...yields were not good for us this year! No big deal as weather is almost always our limiting factor here.

You can have everything right...but it takes rain!

http://ourohio.org/index.php?page=2007-soybean-yield

So you still expect me and my fellow Ohioians to raise 200 bu corn in this? Do you think your ammendments or whatever you do would have made it up?

Don't think so!


Since you like to post links, heres one for you that you really should read. It just might open your eyes as to just what is really happening to your soils and your crop yeilds. Please read it before you responde

Thanks for the link James.
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/news/pub/pdf/conquest_print.pdf

Smallaxe
01-19-2009, 07:04 PM
I got smacked in the head with a phenotypic expression once.
Right in the hybrow - I mean hybrid. :laugh:

treegal1
01-19-2009, 07:40 PM
I just want to see what happens with this, sort of like plants, the stronger one wins in the end.

I planted some corn at the start of this thread, I want to see what comes in first

Barefoot James
01-19-2009, 08:23 PM
Did you nuke some corn to see what pure synthetics will do damn the starch - who cares about protein, damn the safety - focus on the profit :laugh: and then have some corn that is all myco'd up (smokin the myco) and top dressed with some grade A steer manure and then some stuff with chicken poo and seaweed.
Obviously kidding on all fronts. No one wins when - just one person does food with only profit as the only thing that matters. Sort of Wall Street with dirt - damn the people I need to make money even if the economy tanks or in this case people get fat and unhealthy. Obviously in the business for the wrong reasons may as well sell ... _________ (fill in the blank) - lots of stuff is very profitable. Really Sad:cry:

treegal1
01-19-2009, 08:47 PM
its on a no till, no machine,fire cleared(char),native myco, strip of farm we are going to give it a go, old school corn, not going for any wild yield, just some pig chow for a while.......

Kiril
01-19-2009, 10:00 PM
More information on plant genetic engineering for those who care to learn something. It may (or may not) surprise some people that I was taught how to do this (specifically protoplast culture and transformation) in school.

http://agbiosafety.unl.edu/education/summary.htm

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/2000/7/00.07.02.x.html

Here is one for TG, cause we know she likes a good controversy. ;)

http://www.icangarden.com/document.cfm?task=viewdetail&itemid=4650

treegal1
01-19-2009, 10:08 PM
Here is one for TG, cause we know she likes a good controversy. freeze free tomato's.LOLOL what do i need that for. or is there something you know and aren't sharing?? and me pay for round up ready genes, ya sure that will happen, when pigs fly and the rain come down as grape soda. thanks for the Ag soap opera, chicks need some of that................

rcreech
01-19-2009, 10:17 PM
More information on plant genetic engineering for those who care to learn something. It may (or may not) surprise some people that I was taught how to do this (specifically protoplast culture and transformation) in school.

http://agbiosafety.unl.edu/education/summary.htm

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/2000/7/00.07.02.x.html

Here is one for TG, cause we know she likes a good controversy. ;)

http://www.icangarden.com/document.cfm?task=viewdetail&itemid=4650

Good articles!

Here are two things from you yale.edu post!


1)
There are many other GMOs that have been produced and are being used for crop production at this time. There are 50 examples of genetic engineering reported by the U.S.FDA (2000). These GMOs confer resistance to pesticides, more uniform ripening, resistance to insects and viruses and improved protein content of several food crops. So why are there so many protests to genetic engineering?

What is typed in bold is what I have been saying all along! The GMO is added to the hybrid to add insect and herbicide protection! :dizzy:


2)

Some of the opposition to GMOs seems almost irrational(Fong, 2000). Two Mothers for Natural Law web articles (1999 and 2000) assume that there is something to be avoided in genetically engineered foods. They furnish a list of food products to avoid, and a source for testing DNA of food products for genetic engineering. There is no discussion or justification for what they are saying. The assumption seems to be that if it is a GMO it is bad. There may well be some problems with GMOs, such as allergic reactions, changed flavors and horizontal movement of genes, but these need to be investigated in a rational manner, not with blanket condemnations and ignorance.

treegal1
01-19-2009, 10:27 PM
great why stop there with GMO's hell lets breed humans to all be the same color and size, no birth defects??? like the sheep.

GMO's are just living pollution.

go ahead Hitler tell me it ain't so.

rcreech
01-19-2009, 10:37 PM
I will not sit here and tell tell you that GMO's are bullet proof and are the perfect fix...but they have made a great differnce in our industry. That is why 90+% of our beans and NON GMO's and corn is growing leaps and bounds every year!

What I will tell you is there is much less insecticides used today vs. 5 years ago.

Let me ask you a few questions:

What is so bad about GMO's?
Why are you so against them?
What do you think would be a better long term solution?

If you ask me are darned if we do and darned if we don't with you guys.

You guys don't want pesticides used....and now we don't and we use GMO's. Now GMO's are the devil!

If we don't use GMO's or insecticides...what is your "natural" line of defense? What would you use "naturally" to defend the crop of all the insect pressure that can decrease yields by 25-50%?

treegal1
01-19-2009, 10:50 PM
the first 3 I am not going to touch as thats a more personal deal with what I believe/know.

natural line of defense, try intercroping or lure crops. rotation past 3 crops. a natural more resistant type of corn, just one untrained example, last years Indian corn, grown as an ornament for sale, the stuff regrows with out a new hybrid every year, does not get stale compared with other dent corn that we used, and the animals love it more than any fed corn I have ever feed, oh and we got 6$ per bunch/6ears, for the ones we did sell. and the bugs and corn borer leave it all alone, well some worm humus and smoke every now and then. but it really did not take all that to grow it well. this year I got a big bag of marigolds and have planted some of those with the corn, just put the much smaller seeds into the seeder and let it rip. granted it may be more work for a more commercial seed machine to do what ours did but its low tech any ways.

Real Green
01-19-2009, 10:53 PM
Even this guy is saying enough already and he strikes me as the CORN KING!

http://blogs.keloland.com/Images/Upload/Image/Lund/corn_king.jpg

rcreech
01-19-2009, 10:57 PM
the first 3 I am not going to touch as thats a more personal deal with what I believe/know.

natural line of defense, try intercroping or lure crops. rotation past 3 crops. a natural more resistant type of corn, just one untrained example, last years Indian corn, grown as an ornament for sale, the stuff regrows with out a new hybrid every year, does not get stale compared with other dent corn that we used, and the animals love it more than any fed corn I have ever feed, oh and we got 6$ per bunch/6ears, for the ones we did sell. and the bugs and corn borer leave it all alone, well some worm humus and smoke every now and then. but it really did not take all that to grow it well. this year I got a big bag of marigolds and have planted some of those with the corn, just put the much smaller seeds into the seeder and let it rip. granted it may be more work for a more commercial seed machine to do what ours did but its low tech any ways.


So how do you expect this to work on millions of acres of corn? If we can't use synthetic fert and pesticides....how do you expect us to raise a crop and "feed the world"?

Out here in the "real world" or ag production...we have to get all we can as yield is what pays the bills.

It is going to cost most farmers this year between $500-600/acre to plant an acre of corn.

We have to maximize yield to even break even!

As stated previously...this is our business and we have to make money and right now GMO's ARE the best answer when looking at ROI!

Any farmer that says he doesn't do all he can to maximize yield is lying!

rcreech
01-19-2009, 10:59 PM
Even this guy is saying enough already and he strikes me as the CORN KING!

http://blogs.keloland.com/Images/Upload/Image/Lund/corn_king.jpg

Real Green,

I think you have gained some weight since I seen you last! Told you that T-3000 would make you add a couple pounds! :laugh:

treegal1
01-19-2009, 11:01 PM
The main concern people have is the ethical concern, and then we all have a really good reason to not trust that these foods are safe. Why? Because they are brought to us by Monsanto, which also answers the first point I addressed.

Monsanto is the company that gave the world DDT and Agent Orange. While it has been banned, Monsanto still denies that agent orange is responsible for the horrific birth defects and cancer deaths occurring to Vietnamese and US veterans of the Vietnam war(http://www.veterans.state.ny.us/faq/faqa... They also told us DDT was safe, but they didn't think of the problems of bioaccumulation and of course this toxin spread through the food chain and caused human deaths (http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/Actives/d...

Now, some thirty years after inventing the genetically modified organism, Monsanto claims that eating this stuff (GM foods have only been around for about 15-020 years) will NOT cause cancer. Now, knowing that there are substances in the world which take more than three decades to show up as cancer (eg asbestos) and we have two precedents of Monsanto not testing their products sufficiently, we are supposed to believe that they speak the truth.

Some of Monsanto's products which have been made available for human consumption have already been found to cause disease in animal models (http://www.greenpartysask.ca/GPS_Princip...

As for the ethical concern, Monsanto owns the GM seed that they sell. You will already be familiar with roundup ready canola etc, well if pollin blows into a neighbours crop and pollinates the non-GM plants, Monsanto will sue the poor farmer and drive him out of business. No joke, they have been doing this in the US (http://www.nelsonfarm.net/). They also sue farmers for not returning unplanted seed, which is traditional in farming. (http://www.organicconsumers.org/Monsanto...

But the best part is that Monsanto actually OWNS LIFE FORMS. The reason they are able to sue you if pollen from their crop blows onto yours is because they own the patent to the DNA on that organism. This is a concept so offensive to so many people, that even if GM foods turn out to be safe, they will still be opposed as Monsanto intends to collect royalties from every possible food producer they can.

I am not bad because your an idiot..............

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:04 PM
What is typed in bold is what I have been saying all along! The GMO is added to the hybrid to add insect and herbicide protection!

No it is not what you were saying Rod, furthermore it is bred with a hybrid, not added (i.e. most likely what your distributor link does).

Do we really need to rehash what you said again? You really need to sit down and think the whole process through. Pencil it out if you have to.

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:07 PM
What do you think would be a better long term solution?

The only permanent solution is population control .... just no one has the balls to admit it, plus there is no money in it either, and that would make corporations very very sad :cry: :rolleyes:

treegal1
01-19-2009, 11:10 PM
So how do you expect this to work on millions of acres of corn? If we can't use synthetic fert and pesticides....how do you expect us to raise a crop and "feed the world"?yeah sure just look at Africa and there food practices, oh yes thats the same way you farm now, isn't it???? buy the fert and rip the land up with out any regard for the soil. and then what happens, dust bowl??? Kenya??? no food???

go ahead and tell me that Cuba is starving now.

treegal1
01-19-2009, 11:13 PM
The only permanent solution is population control .... just no one has the balls to admit it, plus there is no money in it either, and that would make corporations very very sad :cry: :rolleyes:

Kiril lets make a suicide booth, like a pay phone booth that just dispatches the willing, say give away free idol tickets to all patrons.:laugh:

rcreech
01-19-2009, 11:16 PM
As for the ethical concern, Monsanto owns the GM seed that they sell. You will already be familiar with roundup ready canola etc, well if pollin blows into a neighbours crop and pollinates the non-GM plants, Monsanto will sue the poor farmer and drive him out of business. No joke, they have been doing this in the US (http://www.nelsonfarm.net/). They also sue farmers for not returning unplanted seed, which is traditional in farming. (http://www.organicconsumers.org/Monsanto...



You may want to read your article closer!

It is about beans...and this would not be an issue from pollen blowing in. This article is about seed piracy or people replanting seed from the previous year (which is against the law).

Monsanto will not and can not sue one for "polling blowing in" as they take leaf samples and test them (looking for the technology). If pollen blew in on corn for example...it wouldn't show up in the plants leaves...only the grain! And there is no issue there unless the farm with NON GMO was trying to get a premium and then it would be rejected and get no premium!

If you plant GMO seed and you have an invoice to show you paid for it you are good. If you plant "saved beans" that are GMO and don't have an invoice...Monsanto will destroy your crop, sue you and maybe even take your farm.

When farmers sign the RR agreement they know this up front. If they plant illegal they are playing with FIRE!

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:26 PM
Kiril lets make a suicide booth, like a pay phone booth that just dispatches the willing, say give away free idol tickets to all patrons.:laugh:

That would be a start! :laugh: But really, the solution to all these problems we face now is population control. Limit the number of kids allowed per family .... once they reach that number .... sterilize. Sounds harsh ... you bet ... not even sure I would support it, but it IS a permanent solution to the problem. Everyone here knows the planet cannot continue on this path .... to many damn people.

rcreech
01-19-2009, 11:27 PM
No it is not what you were saying Rod, furthermore it is bred with a hybrid, not added (i.e. most likely what your distributor link does).

Do we really need to rehash what you said again? You really need to sit down and think the whole process through. Pencil it out if you have to.

Don't care about all the geno, pheno bullcrap....what is the diffence between being bred or added? Same thing to me!

All genetics start out as a NON GMO.

That is why plant genetics and characterisitcs..... and triats are looked at seperately!!!!!

As I stated earlier:
We offer the SAME EXACT HYBRIDS which one exaple is a new hybrid called 5335 as a NON GMO and we also offer it as 5335 with Roundup or 5335XR which has hericide and insect control.

SAME EXACT HYBRIDS but some have traits and some don't. The only difference is one you can spray Roundup on and you can't the other!

SAME exact plant characteristics...on both as the only difference is one is GMO and one is a NON GMO!

AGAIN...Call BECKS! I am not worried about how they are bred! I do know it is an insertion process and that is all I care about!

I have stated you have to look at Plant genetics and GMO differently as GMO has no affect on the plants overall genetics for plant characterisits!

5335 NON GMO and yield just as much as 5335XR if no insect control!

GMO's don't make yield...they just protect the plant if a pest is present. So if a person doesn't have a pest problem...they would be ahead to plant NON GMO as they won't see the same return as someone with a lot of insect/weed pressure!

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:28 PM
Monsanto will destroy your crop, sue you and maybe even take your farm.

Long live Monsanto and their quest to control the worlds food supply. :rolleyes: Heil Monsanto.

rcreech
01-19-2009, 11:38 PM
Long live Monsanto and their quest to control the worlds food supply. :rolleyes: Heil Monsanto.

Monsanto is just one player!

You also have DOW, Syngenta and Dupont!

They all have the same agreements!

I am not personally a big fan of Monsanto myself...but they do have great products!

Kiril
01-19-2009, 11:55 PM
I have stated you have to look at Plant genetics and GMO differently as GMO has no affect on the plants overall genetics for plant characterisits!

And STILL you do not understand, and continue to contradict what you have stated. How many resources do I need to post detailing the process before you will actually sit down, read it, and UNDERSTAND IT.

This is what you have stated.

The plant genetics has nothing to do with GMO's.

If what you claim is true, then the hybrid I use to breed with my new GMO is genetically identical to the F1 hybrid I create .... right .... plant genetics has nothing to do with it.

The plant traits now are 100% GMO. They have nothing to do with plant characteristics.

Now I have a plant (according to you) that contains 100% of the GMO traits, and none of the parent.

Kiril
01-20-2009, 12:26 AM
I hesitate to post this given it is some pretty heavy reading and has potential for misunderstanding, but in the interests of learning .......

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/genotype-phenotype/

treegal1
01-20-2009, 01:17 AM
3.3 Genes and environment,,

nature Vs. nurture. or nature and nurture., maybe in another thread..........

rcreech
01-20-2009, 07:15 AM
Kiril,

How have I contradicted myself?

What is it that YOU don't understand?

Instead of sitting at your little desk and trying to make me look like I don't know what I am doing...call Becks and we can end this discussion!

You have typed for 4 pages and don't have a clue what you are saying! You can try and cover people up with all kinds of useless information and terms...but the facts are simple. At the farm gate we have two things to worry about! The plants genetics that will make yield and the traits to protect yield!

What do you disagee with on that? I want to hear what you are actually disagreeing with me on!

So whay are you trying to say I don't understand? Are you sayng that the plants characterisits of the plant change when the GMO is added?

I simply stated many pages ago that there are two thing you have to look at in the plant!

1) Plant genetics - This is the the hybrids characterisits (yield, defense package, standability, TW, moisture etc)

2) Triats - This is the GMO added to the plant for insect/herbicide protection

THE PLANTS GENETICS WHICH IS SELECTED FOR CHARACTERISTICS ARE A NON-GMO

THE TRAITS ARE GMO

If what you are saying was accurate...how could I get 5335 as a NON GMO and also get it as 5335 with traits which is a GMO? Can you answer that?

What is wrong about what I have stated?

I want to SEE!

CALL BECKS HYBRIDS TODAY AT 1-800-937-2325....PLEASE. ASK FOR DR KEVIN CAVANAUGH!!!!!

THIS GUY IS THE BEST...MAYBE YOU CAN TELL HIM WHAT HE IS DOING WRONG!!!! :laugh:

Ask him about offer the SAME EXACT GENETICS/HYRBRIDS as a NON GMO and as a GMO!!!!!

He has only done this for 25 years, so call him.

Can't wait to learn what you find!!!!!!

Seed companies look at 100,000's of new hybrids a year...and when they find a new one they like it goes into the lineup. After they have found the hybrid...this is when they add the traits to it.

How do you think they can offer a NON GMO of the same hybrid if it had triats in it at the beginning?

That is like trying to take the sugar out of a glass of coolaid! :dizzy:

rcreech
01-20-2009, 07:38 AM
Here is Beck's hybrid line up.

http://www.beckshybrids.com/products/corn/index.aspx

If you look under the first section (Round Up)...you will see 5335RR and 5335HXR.

These hybrids would be consided a GMO. They have been genetically modified to be resistant to insects and/or herbicides!

Look at the bottom under traditional corn and you will see 5335...and this is a NON GMO.

AGAIN (as stated many, many times)...the hybrids or genetics are the exact same.

If you raised these plants side by side they would look EXACTLY ALIKE because they are exactly the same plant. Only difference is one had TRAITS and one doesn't.

If there is no insect/weed pressure these plants will yield very similarly as their parent genetics are THE SAME!

I am not going to sit here and argue with you on geno schenemo bullcrap...again as I am an agronomist...not a lab geek!

But I do know know my crap about our hybrids and how they bring them to market! I could care less about the DETAILS in the lab!!!!!!

All I know is...plant genetics is #1 and selecting traits is #2!

Traits don't make yield as genetics the #1 when selecting a hybrid!

AGAIN, I know you for some reason are trying to disprove what I say and I think it is plum hilarious!

CALL BECKS...I WANT YOU TO!!!!!!

I REALLY DO!!!!

You guys tryed to call me out and thought I didn't farm and I pretty much gave you my address so you could find all our acres!!!

If you didn't find them...heck I will give the the longitude and latitudes if needed (want to get on your internet level) :laugh:

I have nothing to hide and I am straight up on EVERYTHING~!

As stated...I won't say anything I can't back up! I might not say it as geo engineered as you...but I am out here in the real world and not looking at everything through a computer screen like you are! I am not one to sit out here and pull out TEXT BOOK terms...but what I have stated is FACT!!!!!

Until you talk to someone in the industry...you need to stop and get some info. If you don't believe me, call someone else!

CALL BECKS OR ANY SEED COMPANY AND GET BACK TO ME!!!!

I am not going to discuss this any further until you have as this is such a JOKE talking to you abou this!

Kiril
01-20-2009, 08:17 AM
The plants genetics that will make yield and the traits to protect yield!

Tell me Rod, how are genetics (genes) and traits related? Answer that question please.

I want to hear what you are actually disagreeing with me on!

I think I pretty clearly spelled it out Rod, for ALL the statements in this thread made by you I have questioned.

Are you sayng that the plants characterisits of the plant change when the GMO is added?

ding ding ... Rod wins a cookie. Do you not consider drought, herbicide, or insect resistance a plant characteristic? Furthermore, the genetic makeup also changes. You see Rod, that is why I posted the definitions for genotype, phenotype, and trait so you COULD understand.

Biological Trait:

A trait is a distinct variant of a phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between.

Phenotype:

A phenotype is any observable characteristic or trait of an organism: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, or behavior. Phenotypes result from the expression of an organism's genes as well as the influence of environmental factors and possible interactions between the two.

I simply stated many pages ago that there are two thing you have to look at in the plant!

1) Plant genetics - This is the the hybrids characterisits (yield, defense package, standability, TW, moisture etc)

2) Triats - This is the GMO added to the plant for insect/herbicide protection

THE PLANTS GENETICS WHICH IS SELECTED FOR CHARACTERISTICS ARE A NON-GMO

THE TRAITS ARE GMO

Come on man, look at what you just wrote. :hammerhead:

All you have to do is compare what you just wrote to the definitions I posted to see where you are wrong. It's not rocket science Rod. The reason you don't understand is because of what you already admitted to ...

Don't care about all the geno, pheno bullcrap....what is the diffence between being bred or added? Same thing to me!

See Rod, you simply do not care to even try to understand.

If what you are saying was accurate...how could I get 5335 as a NON GMO and also get it as 5335 with traits which is a GMO?

What exactly am I saying Rod .... quote me.

What is wrong about what I have stated?

I have pointed it out numerous times ... and provided documentation to support my assertion ... can you read?

CALL BECKS HYBRIDS TODAY AT 1-800-937-2325....PLEASE. ASK FOR DR KEVIN CAVANAUGH!!!!!

You might want to follow your own advice (phone number and contact provided above). Ask your buddy over there to walk you through the creation of your retail GMO right from the beginning (i.e. DNA extraction to the retail shelf). Also make sure he explains to you the relationship between genotype, phenotype, and traits. Maybe he can dumb it down enough for you to understand since obviously the information I have posted is way over your head.

The rest of the post is ridiculous. You are so turned around and backwards it is pointless to even try to straighten you out. If you can't see where your mistake is, then you obviously are too thick or stubborn to ever see it. Go plow some fields Rod.

Smallaxe
01-20-2009, 08:29 AM
The only permanent solution is population control .... just no one has the balls to admit it, plus there is no money in it either, and that would make corporations very very sad :cry: :rolleyes:

Population control is the solution to every human problem. No people. No problem.
Kill everybody, so they don't starve?!?! How stupid is that logic. Dead either way, dah!

We have how many acres of turf in this country? Millions? We are whining about not enough food? You don't want to eat GMO grains. Then don't. Grow your own.

WWI was famous for 'Victory Gardens', in the U.S.
The Russians were famous for 'Collective Farms', that couldn't feed the population because of 'Central Management'. 90% of the Russians' food came from their version of 'Victory Gardens'. [That was what is learned in High School during the Cold War :) ]

Population Control IS the agenda of Sutainable development. Rewild America forcing 'people' into cities, where they are completely dependant on 'the man' for food, water, shelter, and clothing.

We should be independant enough to take care of ourselves. Only eat Corn Flakes from Europe :)

Kiril
01-20-2009, 08:30 AM
If you raised these plants side by side they would look EXACTLY ALIKE because they are exactly the same plant. Only difference is one had TRAITS and one doesn't.

:laugh: OK hotshot, then why don't you ask your buddy to run a DNA sequence on the two plants you claim are genetically identical so you can VISUALLY see the difference. FYI Rod, the plants are NOT exactly the same .... they are very similar ... yes .. thanks to back crossing, but they are NOT identical. If you payed attention in school you might realize that.

If there is no insect/weed pressure these plants will yield very similarly as their parent genetics are THE SAME!

:hammerhead::hammerhead::hammerhead:

The rest of your post is just you trying to rationalize something you simply cannot wrap your head around .... and I am tired of trying to help you see the light. Go talk to your friend Rod, maybe he will have more luck, or perhaps he will realize sooner than I that you just will never really understand, and give you that "close enough" answer.