> According to this book organics is
> mostly about adding organic material to the soil.
Since in many cases this is highly effective, for those who are not too
interested in ecology, it may be a sufficient point of view.
> This sounds like chemical gardening with an organic name. In
> organic gardening the soil is full of life that interacts
> with both plants and mulch. The chemicals are there but they
> are not the prime focus.
....
> Organic soils are not about chemicals, they are about life.
For sure. But anybody anxious to justify a method seems compelled to
point out that the concerns of "chemical" agriculture are not left out
either. So nutrient holding, soil aggregates, water retention benefits,
aeration, permeability, etc, etc. Ecology is something too complex for
the stereotypical engineer/chemist mentality. The non-steroetypical
ones can "get it" but it defies the simplifications which myuch of those
fields thrive on, so many reject it.
> jeff (wondering if people think organics is avoiding pesticides?)
It includes that, I think, but isn't "about" that.
It's defensive.
Much of the public conversation (like on the internet) seems to be
driven by attacks on organic farming/gardening/agriculture/philosophy,
and appears skewed as a result.
Those who are not involved in some kind of fruitless debate about it are
much less shallow in conversation about organic methods.
--
Loren Muldowney
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
