V
vonforne
Alaska Fish Emulsions. OMRI (purchased) it has one of the highest content of heavy metals.
is just one I mentioned.
V
What are 'True Organics' and 'Pseudo Organics' and what are the pros & cons of each?
- Thread starter VerdantGreen
- Start date
Alaska Fish Emulsions. OMRI (purchased) it has one of the highest content of heavy metals.
is just one I mentioned.
V
I'd just like to point out that the 50 liters minimum of soil volume as a critical mass mentioned by Vonforne is not written in stone. It is based on an educated estimate and who knows...?....it may be possible to maintain a living soil with less volume. The beginning to this is to view the soil as being as alive as the plant, thereby passing life to the plant, rather than just a medium which holds up the plant.
Trichgnomes
Member
Organic is a buzzword, pure and simple. It is sold at the grocery store, at the hydro store, at agway, etc. It is perpetuating a lot of the bullshit that continues to flood both the cannabis market as well as the grocery store. This type of growing is based on a linear thinking model, which clearly does not work. If any of you have read anything on Systems Thinking, and systems dynamic models, you know what I mean.
Jack, I think you mentioned something in another thread about a adding different category, going on Jaykush's "natural." Biological seems like a very accurate term, but is quite a misunderstood word to the major public. Natural works well, but one has to take into account the different worldview in which each of us have, and natural means different things to different individuals. I like biological because we are indeed employing a dynamic biological system, mirroring ecological conditions to the best we know how. That is empirical, and there is no denying it.
I concur. To me true organic soil requires mother nature. Once you put your plant in a container, under bulbs, and start shortening the flower cycle you are then trying to reproduce mother natures ideals, and you are psuedo. It then takes a good bit of technique/learned skill to get the plant to finish up as they would naturally outdoor in organic soil under the sun.. Just my opinion.. I have no disdain being considered pseudo organicTrue organics is outdoor cultivation.Mother Nature breaks down particles by rain, wind, temperature, microbial action. Mother Nature provides the natural sunlight with which to help the plant fix carbon from the natural outdoor environment, Mother Nature provides the microherd, including grubs, worms, etc.
"True" organics is called outdoor growing.
All the rest is "pseudo" organics. So anyone growing indoors is a "pseudo" organic grower. No escaping that fact IMO.
It is what it is..
Last edited:
optic sizzle
Member
organics - define it for yourself if you want to use the word, and be prepared to explain what it means every time you meet someone new.
a lexicographical deficiency has been identified, and conflicts are happening that will eventually narrow the definition of the word until it is useful. at present, it has little use in actual communication, other than relaying something vague about one's intentions. it has even less internal use. compare striking your breast and saying "organic" to doing the same and saying "courage!". yet many people define themselves with this word, and wonder why they are always offended by others.
so identify your values, set them as a standard, and stick by them. also, enjoy the semantic debate, it's neat! but don't take it personal. (ha! 10 years a go I had to say "don't take it personally". see, language changes!)
a lexicographical deficiency has been identified, and conflicts are happening that will eventually narrow the definition of the word until it is useful. at present, it has little use in actual communication, other than relaying something vague about one's intentions. it has even less internal use. compare striking your breast and saying "organic" to doing the same and saying "courage!". yet many people define themselves with this word, and wonder why they are always offended by others.
so identify your values, set them as a standard, and stick by them. also, enjoy the semantic debate, it's neat! but don't take it personal. (ha! 10 years a go I had to say "don't take it personally". see, language changes!)
man! why does it have to be the one bottle of nutes i even own?
Glad to see someone introduced the term "biological" which more clearly indicates the grow method is based on living organisms
sounds kinda like the voice of apathy (no offense) but, i like to keep these things as far removed as possible. More and more it would seem like getting true w/ organics would involve liffestyle changes and some very discriminating product choices (even things not "for" the garden)
optic sizzle
Member
You could stop buying products altogether...
or the voice of experience?
so many grey areas in organics. so many different takes. we need to make sure that defending our own corners doesnt detract from the big picture.
Organic – from something living – such as bonemeal or compost. This classification doesn’t really give any guarantee against contamination or pollution. Eg Chicken manure is organic, but that doesn’t mean that the chickens that produced the manure were farmed organically.
Organic farming – this does give some guarantee that whatever it is will be ‘clean’ but have you ever tried to get manure from an organic farm? – that stuff is like rocking horse sh1t because they tend to keep it all for themselves
Organic - as part of the ecology and sustainability ideal – which I see cited many times on this thread – this can be in conflict with best practices because, taking food as an example, I would always choose non-organic produce that was fresh and local over certified organic produce flown halfway round the world. Peat is organic but usually harvested unsustainably, as is most bat and some bird guano. Are you selling the planet down the river for the sake of your organic weed?
Again, under lights = Glass house + throwing stones
Organic - as in ‘as close to nature as possible’ again mentioned quite a few times. Imo however, and as mentioned earlier in the thread, productive gardening is not mimicking nature, at least in the performance we expect out of our crops.
thanks again to everyone who has weighed in so far.
V.
I stayed away from this thread because of all the reasons you just mentioned Verdant....IMO it's a delicate issue. I think most of the people here mean well and try to do what's right in the collective sense of the term "organic". I'm sure everyone's finished product is better than chemi!!!! ....and I'd be stoked to try.
sure V - no argument
i just like to keep those things to a minimum
just the way he expressed it sounded like the verge of breakdown or something (like oh no it's just everywhere why bother)
i m just tryin to advocate doin the best one can in spite of the prevalence
i just like to keep those things to a minimum
just the way he expressed it sounded like the verge of breakdown or something (like oh no it's just everywhere why bother)
i m just tryin to advocate doin the best one can in spite of the prevalence
optic sizzle
Member
Verdant you missed a big one: organic - behaving as an organism, I.e. More than a sum of its parts.
Organic: a loose social affiliation giving rise to a sense of identity distinct from and definitely better than "not organic".
You have successfully shown that using this word causes problems. The meaning is vague for all, yet precise for each speaker. The acrimony is not Arising from personal failings, but rather structural ones.
Isn't a big, vague word that carries so much moral and social weight just a recipe for disaster?
So burn is not apathetic, he is solving the problem by preventing anyone from identifying with the word. And he is right to do so. It's good leadership.
Stop defining organics, stop using it as an identity, and the problem ends for you. The only thing you lose is false convenience.
Manure- I don't know about your country but in mine it's a pollutant in most cases. Nasty stuff, and the problem is too many damn cows.
Organic: a loose social affiliation giving rise to a sense of identity distinct from and definitely better than "not organic".
You have successfully shown that using this word causes problems. The meaning is vague for all, yet precise for each speaker. The acrimony is not Arising from personal failings, but rather structural ones.
Isn't a big, vague word that carries so much moral and social weight just a recipe for disaster?
So burn is not apathetic, he is solving the problem by preventing anyone from identifying with the word. And he is right to do so. It's good leadership.
Stop defining organics, stop using it as an identity, and the problem ends for you. The only thing you lose is false convenience.
Manure- I don't know about your country but in mine it's a pollutant in most cases. Nasty stuff, and the problem is too many damn cows.
J
*Journeyman*
That's ridiculous."True" organics is called outdoor growing.
All the rest is "pseudo" organics. So anyone growing indoors is a "pseudo" organic grower.
Trichgnomes
Member
Exactly. The reason organic certification is in place is because we live in a global economy. If we know the people we are buying products from and/or foraging for ingredients in our region, then it would not be necessary. I know plenty of farmers who are not certified organic because they are honest people that have a loyal customer base, so feel no need to pay someone money out of their pocket to deem it "organic." And their growing methods are far more sustainable than a lot of the "organic" produce found at grocery stores. I'm not saying all local farmers are on the level, so just because it is "local" in the grocery store, that doesn't make it better necessarily, IMO. What it comes down to--whether it is choosing a growing methodology, eating, living consciously in general-- is being informed.
I would have to respectfully disagree with this point. I think we are just looking at natural ecosystems in a different way. Most forests are far more productive than the most productive farm/garden, however the production objective is different. Obviously gardening is different then ecology, but ecology is what taught us to garden, and we are far from finished being taught. Humans have altered the course of cannabis (and countless other plants) through extensive breeding for traits that never would have existed without our intervention, but that does not mean we cannot learn from the Gaia. I always had the vibe that most people here had the goal/objective to maintain a healthy biological system, hence the nature analogy.
optic sizzle
Member
Nice post trich!
To wit: the idea of altering nature is not wrong, it's the idea of supplanting it that's wrong.
Can anyone solve this:
Organic is to blank as open is to closed.
To wit: the idea of altering nature is not wrong, it's the idea of supplanting it that's wrong.
Can anyone solve this:
Organic is to blank as open is to closed.
indeed - the absolute best way is to grow your own if thats an option
I would have to respectfully disagree with this point. I think we are just looking at natural ecosystems in a different way. Most forests are far more productive than the most productive farm/garden, however the production objective is different. Obviously gardening is different then ecology, but ecology is what taught us to garden, and we are far from finished being taught. Humans have altered the course of cannabis (and countless other plants) through extensive breeding for traits that never would have existed without our intervention, but that does not mean we cannot learn from the Gaia. I always had the vibe that most people here had the goal/objective to maintain a healthy biological system, hence the nature analogy.
i can see what you are saying, their are similarities, but i would say an equivalent analogy would be to compare a lawnmower with a racing car - one uses a lot more fuel and is expected to move a lor faster than the other
V.
optic sizzle
Member
Verdant your analogy creates no real distinction.
You can't keep nature out. Pesticides don't keep nature out. It isn't possible. They merely trade short term gains By the top mammals against long term losses by those same mammals (us). But nature is a constant, never a casualty. She does not care about sustainability. She merely applies her ruthless law in all cases.
Sustainable means you can live with it long-term. Organic means you make use of natural systems so that your ecosystem feeds you as it sustains itself and does not change too fast.
No, growing weed or brassicas is not like a racecar, and grasslands are not like trucks. Take away the excess fertilizer, build the soil as an organic whole, and you will do fine. Does nature require uniformly applied poop to grow wild cabbage? This is simply step 2 in the order of sucession, nothing special or difficult to find in nature. Maybe you go to step 3, with more fungi - like the nightshades prefer. Step 1, where most growers keep their gardens, is fit for weeds - very bacteria dominated, experiencing booms and busts of nitrogen salts (periodically hungry looking plants that need flushing to be decent smoke - people who grow this way can actually read the plant), and if you want to grow in it, you have to constantly fertilize with manure, leading to more bacteria, more N booms and busts, and more manure.
If nutrients are a limiting factor in nature, why does biomass follow fresh liquid water? Look at the earth from above. You can tell which areas get more water without ever seeing lakes or rivers. But can you tell from above that the soil in the amazon can be almost toxic?
I will do this only once, verdant: I urge you to read the new edition of teaming with microbes with me. Then, give dr inghams method a try in your yard and in your house. If it works, start doing it with your clients. You will thank me for suggesting it.
You can't keep nature out. Pesticides don't keep nature out. It isn't possible. They merely trade short term gains By the top mammals against long term losses by those same mammals (us). But nature is a constant, never a casualty. She does not care about sustainability. She merely applies her ruthless law in all cases.
Sustainable means you can live with it long-term. Organic means you make use of natural systems so that your ecosystem feeds you as it sustains itself and does not change too fast.
No, growing weed or brassicas is not like a racecar, and grasslands are not like trucks. Take away the excess fertilizer, build the soil as an organic whole, and you will do fine. Does nature require uniformly applied poop to grow wild cabbage? This is simply step 2 in the order of sucession, nothing special or difficult to find in nature. Maybe you go to step 3, with more fungi - like the nightshades prefer. Step 1, where most growers keep their gardens, is fit for weeds - very bacteria dominated, experiencing booms and busts of nitrogen salts (periodically hungry looking plants that need flushing to be decent smoke - people who grow this way can actually read the plant), and if you want to grow in it, you have to constantly fertilize with manure, leading to more bacteria, more N booms and busts, and more manure.
If nutrients are a limiting factor in nature, why does biomass follow fresh liquid water? Look at the earth from above. You can tell which areas get more water without ever seeing lakes or rivers. But can you tell from above that the soil in the amazon can be almost toxic?
I will do this only once, verdant: I urge you to read the new edition of teaming with microbes with me. Then, give dr inghams method a try in your yard and in your house. If it works, start doing it with your clients. You will thank me for suggesting it.
lol, i was actually going to use the cabbage family to illustrate my own argument.
your assertion is made out of idealism rather than experience im afraid. you go and plant a cauliflower in the limestone habitat or chalk cliffs that support wild cabbage and i guarantee that you will not be eating any cauli come autumn/spring. cauliflower, like cannabis, is a gross feeder, whilst chalky soils are almost invariably nutrient poor.
i stand by my lawnmower/racing car analogy. organic farming is nature with a turbo fitted. it doesnt rain compost tea in nature, and the applications of worm manure (why is it called compost anyway
) in growing are far in excess of what the natural activity of worms will supply in nature. i say this with the confidence of someone that is quite a long way down the road towards self sufficiency for myself and my family.potatoes? - dont get me started on how much food they need
V.
The reason 'compost' is used in vermicompost is that the end result is close to humus or compost and not like other manures.
