----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 5:33 AM Subject: Re: Gary Zimmer, Jerry Brunetti on the OZ/NZ "Three-Up Tour"
> send me your "albrecht" soil tests....and quite a bit of interesting talk can > be had, but the report can not tell you much about soil stucture. Your right -Two cents from downunder - I reckon structure has much more to do with live critters than chemistry - also believe that our soil amendment programs should be focussed on encouraging beneficial soil life to the maximum rather than on 'correcting' soil chemistry > > Even with excellent calcium and magnesium....I often find soils with very > poor structure. Have taken thousands of soil samples...my self, and watched > the correlation between crops performance and the analysis. How good is that correlation? do you see the difficult to explain results? ie: good crops on out of balance soils and poor performances on occasions from some of the perfect paddocks? > Here is a riddle for you...I have soils with 9-15% "humus" as listed by > perrry ag lab/Kinsey, yet (some) of these soils are "infertile". Why? plenty of choices here: #humus contains large percentage of 'raw' material going through active decomposition = temporary tieup of nutrients specially trace elements #the large amount of humus and extra soil water has diluted the nutrient level - traces again #where did the 'humus' come from originally , you could have all sorts of im balances , wood chips, straw, (high potassium) , feedlot manure -high in potassium and sodium salts. many possibilities. lets hear some more Cheers Lloyd Charles
