Spikes and Layers?

[ixnay007]

There are different ways of utilizing a living soil. Some like Gascan remix their soil periodically, whereas I have prefered (yes laziness has something to do with it) building a larger body of soil and mixing it only once and then just topdress and plant for at least several years.

With the layer method, is it re-layered prior to each new planting? If so is there a logic to this?

Lasagna gardens are just top dressed like you do, as the decomposition continues the piles descends, and you add a couple more layers on top.. re-amending they call it in here.

Wait, are we talking about lasagna gardening, or this guy's layers and spikes method? I'm not even high and I can't keep track..

 

[jerry111165]

Jeez folks, I'm not defending the method, I'm just trying to find a common ground with nature

I'm well aware of the zone of death around high nitrogen deposits, I was just trying to point out that "spikes" do seem to happen out there..

They DO happen - and nothing grows in those spots for quite awhile until these "hot spots" diminish after composting & decomposition takes place. That alone should tell you that these hot spots aren't a good thing.

Guys (or girls) that write these "stoner science" magazine articles are just looking for a gimmick to try and seller ate themselves from the everyday average gardener, and unfortunately, some folks end up taking thier word for it and before you know it, more people end up doing it because "everybody else is doing it, so it must be right" .

Kinda like Flushing...

J

 

[Amber Trich]

i dont necessarily think anyone is trying to make a bunch of money on this technique... i read all about it for free online and never bought anything..

what the rev promotes is so close to what gascan does, but then he pokes a whole and adds some more amendment like a vertical topdress...


its still usuing all organic materials, we should be able to discuss it here constructively without feeling attacked with post after post of slander and really just a bunch of nothing

the heckling in this thread is kind of ridiculous. helpful thoughtful comments are great but so much nothing has been said here trying to discourage people from a method that has been very successful for many.

why? because people dont like rev? so what, some of us do, and we are telling you we tried it, and the methods do work. we read about it for free, now we would like to discuess it. not everyone has to use the same style.

seriously. i would love to hear real info about why this is counterproductive because ive seen it work over and over so just saying its stupid is not convincing to me

 

[Scrappy4]

seriously. i would love to hear real info about why this is counterproductive because ive seen it work over and over so just saying its stupid is not convincing to me

Me too, but were on 80 some posts and not a lick of science supporting spikes or layers. I agree with Jerry on this, accepted wisdom, is not science......scrappy

 

[SeaMaiden]

Wurd.... incompetence is rampant and spreading faster than a slime mold.

put some hydrozyme on that.

Actually, I was going to suggest putting some aloe on it.

i dont necessarily think anyone is trying to make a bunch of money on this technique... i read all about it for free online and never bought anything..

what the rev promotes is so close to what gascan does, but then he pokes a whole and adds some more amendment like a vertical topdress...


its still usuing all organic materials, we should be able to discuss it here constructively without feeling attacked with post after post of slander and really just a bunch of nothing

the heckling in this thread is kind of ridiculous. helpful thoughtful comments are great but so much nothing has been said here trying to discourage people from a method that has been very successful for many.

why? because people dont like rev? so what, some of us do, and we are telling you we tried it, and the methods do work. we read about it for free, now we would like to discuess it. not everyone has to use the same style.

seriously. i would love to hear real info about why this is counterproductive because ive seen it work over and over so just saying its stupid is not convincing to me

I have to put bells on that, in large part because I am reminded of SO MANY fishpeople I've known who do things the 'wrong' way, who break all the rules, yet have fish thriving and breeding, often species that are unknown to breed in captivity. Yet they're doin' it wrong according to the wisdom *and* the science!

No one should be made to feel as though they're being ridiculed or made defensive for trying to discuss an idea. Denigration, who needs it?

 

[h.h.]

About Fukuoka. He didn't use "prepared" compost. Using green manures, he did everything a little bit more natural, choosing to direct, rather than to interfere.
Basically layers of top dressing. It's all compost in the end

At first I thought the soil would improve quickly if I brought ferns and rotting tree trunks I found in the forest and buried them, but the experiment was a failure, mainly because it took too much work to bury enough material to make a significant difference.
---might have eventually helped improve the soil, but it required a lot of labor for very little result.

Fukuoka , Masanobu (2012-05-14). Sowing Seeds in the Desert: Natural Farming, Global Restoration, and Ultimate Food Security (Kindle Locations 1563-1564). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 

[h.h.]

In Howard’s conception, the philosophy of mimicking natural processes precedes the science of understanding them.

Pollan, Michael (2006-04-11). The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals (p. 150). Penguin Group. Kindle Edition.

 

[ixnay007]

They DO happen - and nothing grows in those spots for quite awhile until these "hot spots" diminish after composting & decomposition takes place. That alone should tell you that these hot spots aren't a good thing.

Guys (or girls) that write these "stoner science" magazine articles are just looking for a gimmick to try and seller ate themselves from the everyday average gardener, and unfortunately, some folks end up taking thier word for it and before you know it, more people end up doing it because "everybody else is doing it, so it must be right" .

Kinda like Flushing...

J

Yeah, but I haven't seen anyone suggesting sticking a dead fish down the hole, it tends to be nutrients which are further along the decomposition scale (I could probably find a better word than scale) than a dead animal.

So, the first question, does something similar happen in nature, the answer seems to be yes. The second, is it worth imitating, seems to be a lot less clear..

 

[Microbeman]

About Fukuoka. He didn't use "prepared" compost. Using green manures, he did everything a little bit more natural, choosing to direct, rather than to interfere.
Basically layers of top dressing. It's all compost in the end




Fukuoka , Masanobu (2012-05-14). Sowing Seeds in the Desert: Natural Farming, Global Restoration, and Ultimate Food Security (Kindle Locations 1563-1564). Chelsea Green Publishing. Kindle Edition.

And your point....?

 

[supermanlives]

spikes work. you can also just put some ferts in a tiny hole under your dripper. is it the best method . no prob not but it gets the job done.when i had earthboxes i ran a strip of ferts on top of soil as per directions. worked just fine

 

[Microbeman]

Amber; I thought I was doing as you suggested. I think I have asked the usual questions for a constructive discussion(?)

People can be happy using a growing method and get good results. There is nothing wrong with that, especially if one knows/believes they are using materials which are not harmful to the earth.

I did just that for a few years with soluble fertilizers and even believed all the stuff about P in bloom and N withdrawal and then I graduated to organic fertilizers and was happy with that, until I realized there were soluble nutrients slipped in there sometimes.

The method of growing may be stellar, it may be based on living soil. From my angle, I'm just trying to see where that basis originates, if it does. When we were onslaughted by the Kyle 'veganics' method using a particular brand organic fertilizer, upon examination even the OMRI site said it was not wholly 'organic' and warned to only use it in certain circumstances.

On the money thing, is there not a book titled after (or before) the method? Are there brands of fertilizers recommended? Do they advertise in the same publication?
I honestly don't know. I'm just asking.

 

[SeaMaiden]

Yeah, but I haven't seen anyone suggesting sticking a dead fish down the hole, it tends to be nutrients which are further along the decomposition scale (I could probably find a better word than scale) than a dead animal.

I have!

So, the first question, does something similar happen in nature, the answer seems to be yes. The second, is it worth imitating, seems to be a lot less clear..

That is an excellent question. Do I want to imitate volcanic explosions...? Maybe for a science project, but not for growing anything. That is but one example I can immediately think of.

 

[ClackamasCootz]

>>chuckle<<

"Division of Labor"

 

[spurrsbrotha]

Could the solubility of the fertilizers used be the qualifier/quantifier of whether one is utilizing a living soil growing technique?

 

[Gascanastan]

Try running 10k and managing up to 30 types and then tell me if 'spikes and layers' makes sense....and do this non-stop cycle after cycle with the same quality product coming out every time from your sativa's,indica's and your hybrids....then I'll take it seriously...until then it's a bunch of BS to me. Over and out!

Many of you raise good points...even the ones I don't really agree with. Reality is reality though.....science is science...experience is wisdom.....so reality pays the bills in my hood.

 

[h.h.]

And your point....?

Compost, vermicompost, chop and drop. it's all virtually the same thing given time and an active soil.
Vertical compost can help break up hard compacted soil, but as Fukuoka found with buried compost, it's a lot of effort for small reward.

 

[jerry111165]

And it would never work in a no till system like I run.

Either way, whatever makes ya happy.

 

[ixnay007]

I have!

Yeah, usually at the bottom of a hole, not digging one at one side of your plant and sticking a fish in there (forget predators, my animals would be there digging in a matter of minutes)..

That is an excellent question. Do I want to imitate volcanic explosions...? Maybe for a science project, but not for growing anything. That is but one example I can immediately think of.

Actually a potato gun full of volcanic dust would be a great way to re-mineralize your garden

 

[Amber Trich]

actually i have done the fish in the hole thing outside.. buried deep the bears wont bother it, and it does work! like the native americans!

native americans used spikes! ..well maybe they were layers


Microbeman.. your posts have all been awesome! very helpful and thought provoking, thank you.
on the money thing-- there is a book coming out some day. no specific nutrients brands are recommended.

i mean fukuoka and holzer jeavons they all have books, they arent sell outs but they are making money on their particular style of gardening..

holzer's style of gardening isnt really natural either if youre calling spikes and layers unnatural.

Try running 10k and managing up to 30 types and then tell me if 'spikes and layers' makes sense....and do this non-stop cycle after cycle with the same quality product coming out every time from your sativa's,indica's and your hybrids....then I'll take it seriously...until then it's a bunch of BS to me. Over and out!

its been done.

 

[SeaMaiden]

Amber, you make excellent points. I don't begrudge anyone making a living by telling people how they do things. I've done it for free, perhaps for too long, I don't know.

If I have learned anything in my years working with various organisms, including those that people think are plants but are not, including those that are photosynthetic and are not, vertebrates, invertebrates, you name it, but the point is that if I've learned anything, it's that the science cannot replace the art of husbandry. Simple as that, there seems to be something in the 'feel' of things that science often doesn't seem to be able to quantify or capture.

Don't get me wrong, I fucking LOVE science. I want to understand what's happening and why, not just that it is happening. But these concepts and means are not quite interchangeable.