Organics, All or Nothing?

[Tim Wilson]

Originally Posted by jalderfer63

I have been using a bridge product on my lawn 15 years.My lawn has been the best lawn on my street.It has always been thick and green using a bridge product.I had a Beagle that went out on this lawn for over 16 years.The beagle did pass in 2010.I just think that a bridge product is the way to go.

This is your choice and I'm not saying that using a combination does not work. It just is not organics and pure organics is just as good to better, some of which depends on your personal outlook. For me, besides being better for life, organics is way cheaper. I have two 16 year old Great Danes; amazingly still alive; they don't eat dog food.

[starry night]

Originally Posted by jalderfer63

I have been using a bridge product on my lawn 15 years.My lawn has been the best lawn on my street.It has always been thick and green using a bridge product.I had a Beagle that went out on this lawn for over 16 years.The beagle did pass in 2010.I just think that a bridge product is the way to go.

I'm not trying to be contrary but....... you could also have thick and green with all-synthetic or all-organic.

[dKoester]

And this is true. But.....................................which one will hold its water longer in a drought? Which one will ward off pest better? I know!

[Kiril]

Originally Posted by JDUtah

For those that are listening without the history of me, Tim, and Kiril I am one of those guys that believes BOTH things can be good. Kiril and Tim are of the mindset that organics only are good and synthetics are bad.

Not true. I have stated on numerous occasions that I support bridge programs as a means to an end .... the end being complete (or at least nearly so) removal of synthetics from landscape maintenance programs. That said, while I don't have a problem with very light chemical use from time to time, I do NOT support permanent bridge programs (like yours) in a typical landscape.

Originally Posted by JDUtah

The funny part is, with all of their professed knowledge they fail to admit that regardless of how it is produce (by man or microbe) plant nutrients are IONS that dissolve in water.

For the record, not all plant nutrients are salts (ex. carbon, oxygen), nor do all mineral nutrients necessarily come from the soil, even if that is the predominant reservoir..

Originally Posted by JDUtah

The difference is, microbes can also produce and excrete enzymes that turn rock and carbon molecules into these ions. Plants can't.

Also not true, see biological weathering.

Originally Posted by JDUtah

Kiril wants some academic documentation. Fine. I will quote from a plant physiology book that he has promoted several times on this forum. Plant Physiology Fourth Addition Tiaz & Zeiger starting on page 84.

It states...


Mineral nutrients are also called IONS. Which are also called salt based fertilizers. Whay the heck would a microbe compete FOR an ion if it doesn't want/need it?

What does any of this have to do with microbes producing ions or the impacts of synthetic fertilizers on soils and soil biological communities? Furthermore, your assumption that all microbes can/do consume mineral salts (regardless of the source) is ignorant at best.

What is your point in quoting these passages? Neither Tim nor I have stated anything that contradicts what you have quoted. If this is the biology lesson you indicated Tim and I needed, you fell way short.

The issue here (and has always been) is your ignorant stance that chemical fertilizers cannot cause damage to soils (all inclusive) .... and your grossly over simplified and incorrect statement that salts don't kill microbes (therefore chemical fertilizers do not) is merely a display of your ignorance. It is irrelevant if some microbes use the very same ions in their biological processes .... that was never an issue here ... well except that you are trying to make it one. The issue with respect to soils (in general) is with short circuiting biological processes that build soils, reducing biological community diversity, excessive salt accumulation, and soil acidification, etc.... All of these can have wide ranging negative impacts on soil fertility and biology and plant health/yield.

I have posted numerous journal publications that demonstrate chemical fertilizers and pesticides can in fact lead to a net negative impact on soil biology, biological communities, and soil fertility. Nothing you have presented here, or in any other thread, disproves these studies. You have erected a straw man here, and like all straw men, they have no life or substance.

[Smallaxe]

Originally Posted by aclane2000

I'm intending on doing more organic lawn care for my mowing clients and I've heard that it should be an all or nothing thing. The reasoning is that synthetic fertilizers kill the biology in the soil, while the whole purpose of Organic style lawn care is to boost and nurture life in the soil and they will, in turn, nurture the plant life.

Even if I'm using a slow release fertilizer should I still expect that it's harming the good stuff in the soil? Is there a certain element in fertilizers that does the damage and I just need watch out for it? Is there a happy medium between all natural and synthetic?

Thanks in advance for any advice!

So has the question been answered?
Is 'salt' from synthetic ferts, killing the microherd, and must be stopped immediately or we all die, from the earth imploding on itself?
What other 'Chicken Little paranoia', can we thow out there to make organics king?
Why do synthetic ferts work in the real world, but not on this forum?

I don't knowthat anyone learns anything, except that nobody can agree on it...

[Tim Wilson]

Why do synthetic ferts work in the real world, but not on this forum?

Huh? Have you been reading?

[dKoester]

Ok, I know where I stand on the issue. So somebody post some literature on the harmful effects of salt on microbial life forms. (This should be related to turf not marshes)

[JDUtah]

Originally Posted by Kiril

Furthermore, your assumption that all microbes can/do consume mineral salts (regardless of the source) is ignorant at best.

I NEVER said that all microbes consume mineral salts. That is an assumption you made.

The same problem goes the other way. When people say that salt fertilizers kill microbes they tend to assume this means all microbes. And simply it is very very UN-TRUE.

The above is the only problem I have in this whole debate.

[JDUtah]

Originally Posted by Kiril

The issue here (and has always been) is your ignorant stance that chemical fertilizers cannot cause damage to soils (all inclusive) ....

Tell me Kiril, when have I EVER stated this? (Man you assume way too much.

and your grossly over simplified and incorrect statement that salts don't kill microbes (therefore chemical fertilizers do not) is merely a display of your ignorance.

Actually the incorrect statement began with "salts do kill microbes"

It is irrelevant if some microbes use the very same ions in their biological processes .... that was never an issue here ... well except that you are trying to make it one.

Actually it is a critical component. And I dare say much more than "some microbes" use these basic building blocks.

The issue with respect to soils (in general) is with short circuiting biological processes that build soils, reducing biological community diversity, excessive salt accumulation, and soil acidification, etc.... All of these can have wide ranging negative impacts on soil fertility and biology and plant health/yield.

I agree with this statement when read literally and standing on its own. YAY we agree on something!!

[Smallaxe]

Originally Posted by Tim Wilson

Huh? Have you been reading?

OK, synthetic ferts are damaging and unsustainable then... Word it however you want, that is the message that comes from this thread.

No practical advice for the fella, who wants to communicate good reasons to his client that a switch over is going to do him good.

That's what I've been reading!!.

Arguements about nit-picking details of soil chemistry, doesn't cut it with the client standing on his nice green lawn, while you are giving him advice on doing it better...

We talk about 'safer' and 'greener', never 'better'...