Returning Fertility to the Farm

Most all farm produce — meat, fiber, vegetables and grain — is sent into the cities where it is processed and consumed and eventually ends up in some form of garbage or sludge. A small amount may be composted and used in gardens or the landscape in urban areas. Little, if any, makes it back to the farm from whence it came, where it is most needed and where it belongs. Somehow, with the invention of modem farm chemicals, our human logic (or was it greed?) told us it was no longer worth the effort to recycle the organic materials back to the land. Most industry and agricultural universities jumped on this chemical bandwagon. But there were a few people that understood natural soil fertility and warned of the dangers of wasting and not recycling.

Instead of consulting Nature to see what she recommended, we used human brilliance and the organic-versus-chemical feud started. The guilty are on both sides. Neither the chemical nor the organic supporters are willing to ask Nature’s approval of the other method. Everyone benefits when our food producing soils are improved. There have been and still are many tax-supported programs to help farmers. Some have been questionable. An incentive for the farmer to increase the organic content of the soil would be the most sensible approach. The farmer could grow cover crops instead of cash crops or he could spread compost if he wanted to keep the fields in production while he built the organic content. Another incentive that would be good for the farmer and benefit everyone is to pay for quality rather than quantity of production. The farmer who is well-compensated for high-quality produce will be more able to maintain high organic matter in his soil.

If compost is so needed on farm acres, why am I selling and promoting compost in the cities? Because that is where most of the voters live. When they see the excellent results of using compost in the landscape and on the vegetable garden and taste the quality of compost-grown produce, they will be convinced. When they realize that compost reduces the need for irrigation and pesticides, the city folks will better understand agriculture. It is their vote that will encourage lawmakers to enact laws for a sound ecology. Until the consumer understands and demands fertile soils and healthy foods, it will be hard to change our wasteful practices.

Valuing What Is Valuable

To Nature, compost is extremely valuable. Returning organic materials back to the soil is a must if quality of life is to continue. We, however, as supposedly intelligent creatures, have continually devalued compost. First by saying, “We need to compost the organics because they are filling up our limited landfill space too fast.” More value was put on the hole in the ground than on the food the soil dearly needed. Then after a few cities learned to save the landfill space by composting, they devalued it still further by giving it away or selling it too cheap. Anything free or sold for very little is given just that value-very little. With the very low value put on compost, private composters have little interest, which drops a still greater burden on the cities and their valuable holes.

Cities should use as much of their compost on their own properties as possible, usually they will not have enough. It sets a good example to citizens. The citizens equally share in the value of water, fertilizer and pesticide savings. And tax money is not used to compete with private enterprise. This practice also encourages the private composting and mulching industry-another good thing for the economy of the community.

An Uphill Battle

Nature is crying for help. Compost could be her rescue. Except for a few, our Land Grant Universities have mostly ignored her. I gave a presentation to a dairy group on the value and long term benefits of spreading manure on agricultural soils. The speaker who followed me was an agriculture Ph.D. His first words from the podium were, “Gentlemen, we have to face it. If you have to haul manure across the road or more than a mile or two, it isn’t worth the effort. It only has 20 pounds of Nitrogen per ton.”

On another occasion a wealthy man attended a presentation I gave and ordered a 60 cubic yard load of compost. Before we had a chance to deliver, he called and canceled. He said his County Ag. agent told him compost would bring in diseases, insects and all kinds of pests. He also said the nitrates would keep the trees green too long in the fall and then they would freeze. These two college educated gentlemen should have studied more in Nature instead of in the classroom. They would have a better education.

One of my employees, an ex-pro ball player, has three children who also excel in sports. He approached their school and suggested they spread compost on their ball fields. Not only would they save water and fertilizer, but the turf would be thicker and softer, which could also help prevent injuries. He was rejected with, “Oh no, our students would get disease and infections from compost.” I fail to see their logic, especially since they apply all types of toxic pesticides and chemicals to the turf for those kids to play in. These are not isolated incidences. We have experienced this ignorance many times and so have other composters and organic growers.

We have since spent a few thousand dollars with a well-respected microbiologists on testing. He found no disease causing organisms in the compost. To some this research still wasn’t convincing. There seems to be a mindset, that anything dead, or of animal residue is awful and it should be disposed of at a dump that is not near their back yard. The research also discovered that 27% of the isolates were insect pathogens, and another 18% of the isolates were important in the bioremediation of environmental pollutants. Compost tea is now being used to help control the imported fire ant and also being used as a fungicide.

Bioremediation is nothing more than selective composting. If given enough time the microbes in a well-constructed compost pile can disassemble any toxin man has put together. Compost should be used on athletic fields and on any lawn where children play, especially if toxic pesticides have been used there in the past. Compost will help clean up the damage that has been done in the past through the use of toxic chemicals. Our kids are in much more danger from them than they are from good, clean soil

Because the testing proved there were no harmful pathogens in the compost, we have finally seen it used on two football fields. The results are so good other athletic directors are requesting compost for their playing fields.

We have since ended up with a bonus in our sales pitch. The teams that play on the two football fields we composted both won the state championships of 1995 class 5A.

The Judge

A Master Designer created Mother Nature and authored the natural laws. We had no part in making, designing or enacting a single rule. We are only part of Nature. We cannot change, alter or break any of the laws without causing harm to ourselves.

Everything in Nature (even what we call waste) is designed to be perfect and has a purpose. We are the highest beings on earth, so everything on earth was designed to be of service and aid to us. If we studied from this approach we would learn things, make discoveries and see things otherwise blocked from view.

The future of a livable existence on earth hinges on our knowing and obeying the natural laws. If we allow the environment to rule and Mother Nature to judge, our existence on earth could only improve.

We too were designed to be perfect … except the Master Designer gave us free will.

Greed, envy and jealousy-all traits of human free will-seem to influence public policy, sway bureaucracy, and taint our written laws. They even decide where to place sewer plants, landfills and the compost operations demanded by Nature to recycle the huge amounts of waste we create. Placing these entities could be the easiest decision to make if geology and environment were studied and Nature was given first consideration and allowed to rule.

True, no one wants these sites in their backyard, but we all create waste and it has to go someplace. Moving these sites too far creates pollution from vehicle wear and exhaust. Noise, dust, traffic and strong odors are also created in proportion to distance material has to be transported.

Those who live near sites should somehow be compensated. I think cutting property taxes to the degree of nuisances being tolerated would be fair compensation. All other citizens (who also create waste) but who do not have the nuisance should pick up the difference.

When Nature points to the location to place these entities, politics should not be able to overrule.

The Garden-Ville Method — Lessons in Nature