How many applications do you do

[NattyLawn]

Originally Posted by Smallaxe

I recognize that , that is what it is supposed to be all about, but in reality, it has no more understanding of how microbes live in the soil environments than the synthetic fertilizer crowd... the Sumagreen discussion convinced me that understanding microbes is about a superficial and understanding sunshine...
If you have something to offer in regards to Long Term benefits of CT,,,I'd like to hear it... but as it stands right now those microbes will die and their dead bodies, feed the grass... no long term nutrient cycling is even discussed...
Same ol' cliches of "Proper Irrigation and Cultural Practices" that the synthetic people use... That's a generic cliche that has no real meaning,,, but that is all we hear....

Prove me wrong... I would love to be proven wrong so that we can move beyond superficial, soils 101 mentality...

One aspect that newbies to organics find difficult to understand is there is no cookie cutter definition on how many apps are needed per site per year. You may have a new construction lawn that might need "full program" and one that may need 3 applications. Each site should be treated like its own ecosystem, not like everyone else's. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule with things like budget constraints, or customers that want the best looking lawn at all times, regardless of what you recommend to them. You have to learn to adapt and play with the cards your dealt.

[Smallaxe]

Originally Posted by NattyLawn

One aspect that newbies to organics find difficult to understand is there is no cookie cutter definition on how many apps are needed per site per year. You may have a new construction lawn that might need "full program" and one that may need 3 applications. Each site should be treated like its own ecosystem, not like everyone else's. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule with things like budget constraints, or customers that want the best looking lawn at all times, regardless of what you recommend to them. You have to learn to adapt and play with the cards your dealt.

I'm not trying to be offensive so I hope you don't take it that way...

My main concern about what newbies or anyone else understands is what soils do for microbes and what microbes do for soils... you have given us a very typical example of how "Learning About Organic Soil Care" goes...
and you tell me what we've learned from this instruction...
"...no cookie cutter definition on how many apps..."
"... full program... "
"... its own eco system... "
"... learn to adapt ..."

Right now,,, we have no definition in order to judge how many apps,,, of what to use in those apps and why we should chose these particular ingredients for those apps...
No definition of a "Full Program" and why i it Full and on which soils will it work on...
No definition of the Good Eco-system and/or definition of a bad eco-system... How do we tell the difference and what can we do to change it...
Adaptation from What,,, to What???

My complaint about Organics in the New Millenium is that it is just faith in products that automatically do some magic stuff once you figure out the correct number of apps for your particular situation... Soil science is not magic stuff and soils can be built, tilth can be improved and roots can thrive... only question is,,, How's that Done???

Again I hope this helps everyone to understand that "Organics" requires an understanding of the soils and the Food Web book doesn't seem to allow people to manage structure and tilth very effectively...

[phasthound]

Originally Posted by Smallaxe

I recognize that , that is what it is supposed to be all about, but in reality, it has no more understanding of how microbes live in the soil environments than the synthetic fertilizer crowd... the Sumagreen discussion convinced me that understanding microbes is about a superficial and understanding sunshine...
If you have something to offer in regards to Long Term benefits of CT,,,I'd like to hear it... but as it stands right now those microbes will die and their dead bodies, feed the grass... no long term nutrient cycling is even discussed...
Same ol' cliches of "Proper Irrigation and Cultural Practices" that the synthetic people use... That's a generic cliche that has no real meaning,,, but that is all we hear....

Prove me wrong... I would love to be proven wrong so that we can move beyond superficial, soils 101 mentality...

It's been explained several times on these forums how active compost tea and some of the bottled microbial products are important tools to improve nutrient availability on demand of the plant rather than a calendar timed application of synthetic fertilizer, fight diseases and improve drought tolerance while reducing pesticide usage and nutrient runoff. I've made no claims that these are miracle cures which replace sound cultural practices. There is no one time fix when managing turf, it's an ongoing process whether it is biological or chemical.

When using chemicals, the cultural practices are not as important because then it is possible to grow grass even on concrete, but there are health and environmental consequences. Cultural practices become more important when working to improve soil health and being able to grow healthy turf with less detrimental inputs. Adding the appropriate microbiology will over time improve the soil and over time less applications are required.

It's unfortunate that you are unable to understand the difference between a biologically active system and a chemical approach. There is nothing superficial about understanding soil microbiology. There is much to learn and it is rather complicated. Science is just barely scratching the surface.

I would rather not participate in circular arguments. If you wish to learn more find a way to take some classes from people who have used these methods successfully. Since you're in Wisconsin, I suggest you visit http://www.greaterearthorganics.com/ and call the owner Bob Posthuma. Have an in depth conversation with him regarding the successes he has seen. I hate to type.

[Smallaxe]

Originally Posted by phasthound

It's been explained several times on these forums how active compost tea and some of the bottled microbial products are important tools to improve nutrient availability on demand of the plant rather than a calendar timed application of synthetic fertilizer, fight diseases and improve drought tolerance while reducing pesticide usage and nutrient runoff. I've made no claims that these are miracle cures which replace sound cultural practices. There is no one time fix when managing turf, it's an ongoing process whether it is biological or chemical.

When using chemicals, the cultural practices are not as important because then it is possible to grow grass even on concrete, but there are health and environmental consequences. Cultural practices become more important when working to improve soil health and being able to grow healthy turf with less detrimental inputs. Adding the appropriate microbiology will over time improve the soil and over time less applications are required.

It's unfortunate that you are unable to understand the difference between a biologically active system and a chemical approach. There is nothing superficial about understanding soil microbiology. There is much to learn and it is rather complicated. Science is just barely scratching the surface.

I would rather not participate in circular arguments. If you wish to learn more find a way to take some classes from people who have used these methods successfully. Since you're in Wisconsin, I suggest you visit http://www.greaterearthorganics.com/ and call the owner Bob Posthuma. Have an in depth conversation with him regarding the successes he has seen. I hate to type.

Plz, don't take this personally... but this is NOT really about you product line... this is ONLY about soil health... Soil Health, and the Cultural Practices being meaningless terms in these discussions...

You like to say that this has been spoken of many times before... but may I say that :
"... When using chemicals, the cultural practices are not as important because then it is possible to grow grass even on concrete, but there are health and environmental consequences. Cultural practices become more important when working to improve soil health and being able to grow healthy turf with less detrimental inputs. Adding the appropriate microbiology will over time improve the soil and over time less applications are required. ... " tells us nothing of the habitat between beneficial microbes and pathogenic microbes...

It is speech that is often referred to by those who can see diversion from the "Real Issue" as ,,, you guessed it,,, Diversionary Tactics...
My point is,,, and will continue to be,,, that what youtry to call educating the listener is nothing more than empty platitudes using meaningless cliches...
Again,,, I'm not trying to be offensive,,, so plz don't tell me that I can't understand the difference between healthy/synthetic soils... "Synthetics are NOTeven at issue here... Microbial Habitat(whether beneficial or pathogenic) is the ONLY issue here...

So - What's the difference???

[phasthound]

Originally Posted by Smallaxe

Plz, don't take this personally... but this is NOT really about you product line... this is ONLY about soil health... Soil Health, and the Cultural Practices being meaningless terms in these discussions...

You like to say that this has been spoken of many times before... but may I say that :
"... When using chemicals, the cultural practices are not as important because then it is possible to grow grass even on concrete, but there are health and environmental consequences. Cultural practices become more important when working to improve soil health and being able to grow healthy turf with less detrimental inputs. Adding the appropriate microbiology will over time improve the soil and over time less applications are required. ... " tells us nothing of the habitat between beneficial microbes and pathogenic microbes...

It is speech that is often referred to by those who can see diversion from the "Real Issue" as ,,, you guessed it,,, Diversionary Tactics...
My point is,,, and will continue to be,,, that what youtry to call educating the listener is nothing more than empty platitudes using meaningless cliches...
Again,,, I'm not trying to be offensive,,, so plz don't tell me that I can't understand the difference between healthy/synthetic soils... "Synthetics are NOTeven at issue here... Microbial Habitat(whether beneficial or pathogenic) is the ONLY issue here...

So - What's the difference???

i don't take it personally at all and I'm not talking about my product line. It's unfortunate that you believe I am being diversionary.

I just spent the last week in intensive classes on organic land care. To try and sum that up by typing a few paragraphs is beyond my capability. Nor do i have the desire to spend as much time on forums these days. But here's a few hints to microbial habitats: generally beneficials prefer aerobic conditions and pathgens prefer anaerobic; plants tend to feed exhudates to benficials however this process is reduced when plant recieve synthetic nutrients.

If you are truly trying to understand any subject in depth you must do your own research and come to your own conclusion rather than just posting to forums. As I mentioned you have a great local source in Bob Posthuma who can speak to your questions in depth. Have you called him yet?

Some info here on microbial nutrient cycling.
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805216...13_excerpt.pdf

And you may want to sign on to this.
http://www.apsnet.org/members/apslea...Code=SOILMICRO

[turfmd101]

"KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID"

FULL PROGRAM = Continual adaptation in a forever changing micro climate.

GOOD ECO - SYSTEM = continual adaptation to accomplish self function.

FULL PROGRAM + GOOD ECO SYSTEM = ORGANIC.

JMO.
Posted via Mobile Device