Originally posted by rary
View Post
Natural fertility release may or may not be from a much smaller reserve, but the uptake is perhaps much more efficient and without the clear damage to the topsoil over sustained use demonstrated by artificial fertilisers and intensive cropping. There is no evidence of nitrate run off poisoning rivers and waterways or causing green algee from soil treated to organic methods. Does that suggest over concentration of the synthetics to obtain the minimum uptake? I have nothing scientific to add in support of my suggestion. If anyone has evidence or experience, I'd be very interested to hear.
While I seem to be doing all right with my mostly no dig and mulch a lot system, I can't claim to have done intensive trials over years or decades. For that you need people older and wiser than me (the former is getting harder - but plenty wiser). Good old Charles Dowding has an evidence based track record of his methods here in the UK. Others claim similar with thier own adaption or development of 'organic/no dig/Korean' from around the world.
It has me intreagued enough to be trying it. I think because I remember back to my youth, when I saw the effect of rotting plant material that had been laid out in rows and ploughed in under a barley crop. The ridges of taller more mature heads in the rows was obviouse for all to see. That though has haunted/informed my gardening over the last 30 years and I've turned thick clay on a building site into my lovely black rich flower beds in front of my house (and more recently a neighbours).
A good question though and one that set me off thinking, thanks.
Comment