Register free!


Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-17-2014, 08:28 PM
Ric's Avatar
Ric Ric is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: S W Florida
Posts: 11,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
The senator said ďIf you put fertilizer on your land, youíre part of the problem.Ē Watch this video from the University of Minnesota (bordering Iowa) and listen to Dr. Horganís words at the end of the video.

University Research Dispels Fertilizer Myth

He says:


If we donít get the word out about the benefits of lawn fertilization and if we donít back it up by making responsible applications, our industry is going to be regulated out of existence and the environment will be no better off.
The U of Fla put out a similar study about the benefits of Fertilizing and the problems related to not fertilizing. However the Tree Hugging Granola Nuts some how know more than the PhD's of U of F. Therefore we have Fertilizer Black Outs.

.
__________________
.

"TG doesn't give a rats ass about being "Responsible" as long as sales/production quotas are met. That's it in a nutshell. A recipe for disaster IMO." Ted Putnam 2/28/14

You can lead a Donkey to water but you can't make the Jackass Drink

"As Americans you have the right to be stupid." John Kerry

"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.Ē John Wayne.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-17-2014, 09:23 PM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 778
I know what you mean about the regulatory climate in FL. I have been asked to speak at many stakeholder meetings and city council or county commission meetings about the subject. I have even been screamed at and called a 'manatee killer' by the children our industry's opponents trot our to these meetings.

A lot of times, even the science doesn't convince some people. Maybe the best argument I heard at one meeting was a guy who stood up and told the commission how many people he employed, how much money they gave to local charities, and how many volunteer hours they all put in for the community. When one of the commissioners asked why this guy hadn't been at more of the meetings or why more of his friends in the industry weren't at the meetings, he said that they all had jobs to do and people to pay, so they didn't have time to attend meetings.

This wowed the commission and turned two opposition votes into votes for the turf industry.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-18-2014, 07:35 PM
americanlawn's Avatar
americanlawn americanlawn is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: midwest
Posts: 5,681
Jack Hatch is a liberal uninformed jerk! Iowa is extremely fortunate to have a governor like Terry Branstad (former Iowa farmer). And don't worry about Terry, cuz he ain't no liberal. We've known him for years, and we trust him 110%.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Proud subscriber of TURF Magazine. (thanks Ron)
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-20-2014, 08:04 PM
twomancrew twomancrew is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: East, IA
Posts: 949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. ISU reported that the highest fertilizer amount applied to a row crop in IA during 2013 was an average of 186#N/A and it was applied to corn crops in fields that were previously planted to corn. Farmers who grew corn in IA in 2013 in fields that were previously planted in soybean averaged 150#N/A applied. These are not theoretical numbers or calculations -- these are ISU reported averages of what was actually applied.

Soybeans are going to be a different story, since they're legumes and can fix some of the N needed for the crop on their own. The presence of extra N at the wrong time can reduce nodulation and reduce yield. ISU reported that in 2013, the average IA farmer aiming for the highest yield (100+ bu/A) applied only 30-40#N/A to his soybean crop. Kansas State says that a single application of 20#N/A in a season can increase yields. Most Midwestern universities recommend that no additional fertilizer at all be used on soybeans.

If you read the crop nutrient recommendations, they are very specific on using soil tests to determine nutrient needs and timing. It's all very regimented. The regulators look at that and say that the farmers are doing a great job of using technology to time their apps and determine the rate. They look at turf and perennial crops and don't see the same proactive approach, but they also don't understand the difference in the two. If turf guys were to do the same thing that crops guys do, we would be testing soil and grass clippings at regular intervals multiple times through the year and we would be accounting for soil N mineralization and clipping return to the soil. Since most guys on here can't seem to handle converting ounces of herbicide per gal on spray mix to ai/A, I don't think this idea will pick up much steam on this board.

As for your comment about annual crops, there's nothing that says that just the growth cycle plays any role in nutrient removal. You mention hay, but aren't most hay types perennial? Alfalfa, clover, timothy, orchargrass, fescues, bermudagrass are all common hay components and are all perennials.

The bottom line is that we're growing something that is viewed by regulators and lawmakers as a cosmetic or luxury crop, while farmers are seen (ad rightly so) as growing necessary food and fiber crops. To be viewed with the same respect as the farm guys, we need to show how important our crop is to protecting the environment and we need to show the regulators and lawmakers that we can be every bit as responsible and data-driven with our management as the crop guys.
I can't imagine seeing 100+ bu beans in a field. That just don't happen. 50 is great and 60 will have all the neighbors coming over when the picker runs. IDK where you are coming up with this info.
__________________
[/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-04-2014, 06:47 PM
recycledsole recycledsole is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MD
Posts: 2,105
Hey guys TONS of fertilizers and herbicides are in the drinking water and food. Its not a good .thing. Its a cancer causing thing. Whether or not politicians speak about it, it is a health issue for all living beings and the environment.
As for farm yields, growing impotent seeds in impotent soil cant produce potent food. Soils are treated every year with poisons, and chemical fertilizers, this results in depleted soil. What is needed its organic soil enrichment. Eat something that had been grown in real organic soil that isn't treated with man made things and you will feel and taste the difference
Posted via Mobile Device

Last edited by recycledsole; 09-04-2014 at 06:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-04-2014, 08:35 PM
twomancrew twomancrew is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: East, IA
Posts: 949
I appreciate your comment and you are certainly free to eat whatever you choose. It is not news anymore that organic and heirloom grown foods are less nutritious and not always "better" tasting. Milk is the only thing organic I know of that is superior to standard production milk. I can say without hesitation that it tastes way different and I enjoy it. I still don't buy it because of the cost.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/ab...46650210436262
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddr...hdog-says.html

As far as fert goes the only thing making something organic is the presence of carbon. That's it. So go melt some urea and add a carbon source like sugar and you have organic urea.
__________________
[/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-05-2014, 12:14 AM
FdLLawnMan's Avatar
FdLLawnMan FdLLawnMan is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: East Central WI
Posts: 1,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by recycledsole View Post
Hey guys TONS of fertilizers and herbicides are in the drinking water and food. Its not a good .thing. Its a cancer causing thing. Whether or not politicians speak about it, it is a health issue for all living beings and the environment.
As for farm yields, growing impotent seeds in impotent soil cant produce potent food. Soils are treated every year with poisons, and chemical fertilizers, this results in depleted soil. What is needed its organic soil enrichment. Eat something that had been grown in real organic soil that isn't treated with man made things and you will feel and taste the difference
Posted via Mobile Device
And you base this on what, your emotion. There is no difference in foods wether they are grown organically or not. The world would starve without modern agricultural methods, that is a fact.
__________________
Mike I
Mike's Total Lawn Care

I love my country, but mistrust my government, and the government doesn't create jobs, it just takes my money and gives it to other people or groups it thinks it can bribe.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-05-2014, 07:48 AM
recycledsole recycledsole is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MD
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by FdLLawnMan View Post
And you base this on what, your emotion. There is no difference in foods wether they are grown organically or not. The world would starve without modern agricultural methods, that is a fact.
Where is the emotion? How is emotion influencing the words I typed? There is most certainly a huge difference. You do not eat pesticides and herbicides on organic food. It tastes a lot better. If the soil is potent, you receive much more energy from the food. Those are facts. Go to giant and buy a factory farmed watermelon. There is no taste. Now, go to a organic store and buy a local, FRESH harvested (when it is ripe) watermelon. There is a world of difference.
I am 110% sure that there is no need at all for modern farming methods. More organic smaller farms are the way to go. Its sad to think that anyone endorses the idea of feeding dead cows to cows (who don't eat animals) injecting them with chemicals and antibiotics, torturing them, then thinking that this is going to be healthy. Then you have these disease outbreaks. Sorry modern farming is a destructive practice.
__________________
"When we finally tire of searching for happiness outside, we sit quietly and analyze and realize that true and lasting happiness can never come from outside. It can't come because it simply is. You are Happiness personified. You are that Supreme Bliss. You are that Joy. You are the image of happiness. God is the one who is always happy, and you are the image of God." - Satchitananda
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-05-2014, 07:57 AM
recycledsole recycledsole is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MD
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by twomancrew View Post
I appreciate your comment and you are certainly free to eat whatever you choose. It is not news anymore that organic and heirloom grown foods are less nutritious and not always "better" tasting. Milk is the only thing organic I know of that is superior to standard production milk. I can say without hesitation that it tastes way different and I enjoy it. I still don't buy it because of the cost.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/ab...46650210436262
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddr...hdog-says.html

As far as fert goes the only thing making something organic is the presence of carbon. That's it. So go melt some urea and add a carbon source like sugar and you have organic urea.
Thanks for your thoughtful and civilized response. It is good when people can disagree and still be coherent. I don't agree that organic/ heirloom less potent foods.
I agree about free choice. The problem is that when you pollute, you're not polluting just your water or your air, it affects others around you who do not necessarily make those choices. I am glad they will be regulated. In my state they are being regulated. Because the Chesapeake bay is FILLED with TONS AND TONS of herbicides and fertilizers, creating dead zones, impotent, or mutated creatures. Not that it will be completely effective, you know how corrupt government people are and how they have a lot of conflicting interests meaning, they will still find ways for their pesticide dealing buddies to make there sales. Actually a lot of times, the government people ARE the pesticide dealers. see this page.

http://www.whale.to/a/monsanto_revolving_door.html

it gives you an idea of how many Monsanto workers are in the government, and allow them to behave immorally and illegally, when they receive the bribe.



Nature is a gift, we should take care of it and keep it clean. Whatever your choice may you guys experience health, happiness and a clean environment.
__________________
"When we finally tire of searching for happiness outside, we sit quietly and analyze and realize that true and lasting happiness can never come from outside. It can't come because it simply is. You are Happiness personified. You are that Supreme Bliss. You are that Joy. You are the image of happiness. God is the one who is always happy, and you are the image of God." - Satchitananda
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-05-2014, 08:57 AM
twomancrew twomancrew is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: East, IA
Posts: 949
I see professionals go to work for the gov. all the time it seems. I feel a little funny about it too but both sides want to hire the best people they can. That means the same people get moved around between public and private sectors. I don't doubt there is some funny business going on at times.

I started this thread, I don't wanna kill it. Keeps me civil
__________________
[/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:11 AM.

Page generated in 0.11541 seconds with 10 queries