|
|
Post by nathan125 on Apr 1, 2012 12:56:52 GMT -5
i don't own a very good tiller. i have a ryobi tiller attatchment for my weed eater, lucky if i get 1 1/2 inches soil tilled. it's not very powerful. so by that fact i don't till much. i till the crop rows by hand with a garden claw and hoe and just do the best i can. i don;t rotate crops very often.
|
|
|
|
Post by olddog on Apr 2, 2012 8:12:35 GMT -5
What about using the deep-rooted weeds to break up the soil for you? Doesnt crop rotation effectively do the same thing as tilling? or burning the residue? or just tilling very lightly, 1/2"deep, only on the crops that require that, such as brassicas? There is something that really bothers me about double-digging, just havent figured out what it is. I did read that a good amount of the carbon is found much deeper in the soil than they previously thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Lofthouse on Apr 2, 2012 8:59:18 GMT -5
There is something that really bothers me about double-digging, just havent figured out what it is. The tremendous amount of labor involved is too much for me. |
|
|
|
Post by ottawagardener on Apr 2, 2012 9:27:55 GMT -5
Farmer's around here use fodder radish to 'till' and break up the heavy clay. They also till of course.
I don't till and top dress all my amendments. Digging happens when I make new beds, harvest or plant. I did try double digging a small bed last year just to see the difference. It was the least vital bed in the whole lot and I found the process not just tedious but the double trenching wasn't working very well. Hard to say why the growth was less vigorous though. The soil around here is sharply drained with only the top 10 inches (at most) containing good organic matter. The other beds in this new garden were created by piling the sod overtop of the rows to create swale paths which were filled in with woody debris. They were then either covered with organic matter: compost/leaf litter etc... or mulched with plastic to kill off sod and heat beds. They all produced much better so it was probably the fact that the good loamy soil was effectively doubled in height compared to the double dug bed. This whole garden is about 60-70 feet in diameter (because of terrain, it's semi-circular around an outcropping) so it's not a huge area to work with either.
|
|
|
|
Post by olddog on Apr 2, 2012 9:58:32 GMT -5
Joseph,
you are so right! lol, too much labor for me, too.
Ottawa,
the way you garden just reinforces my ideas about it, I have been thinking along those same lines, but you have actually put it into practice. Neat!
|
|
|
|
Post by trixtrax on Apr 2, 2012 16:20:06 GMT -5
It is tremendous labor. I once did a 17x100ft greenhouse via the John Jeavons double-digging method. It was.. a lot of work. It was worth it, the fertility was amazing then on out. But, then again I don't farm there anymore since I don't live close by, so it was wasted work. And, the back sure did feel it. I think what it comes down to is making sure that the top section of the soil is fertile and high in humus, fertilizing anything below that is a waste of time since it will just wash down farther and be harder to reach by anything but perennials.
|
|
|
|
Post by trixtrax on Apr 2, 2012 16:23:01 GMT -5
Deep rooted perennials, mulching with the "chinese bruising technique" of weeds growing right in place - constant accretion of organic matter, organic fertilizer, and time achieves the same results, IMHO
|
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Apr 2, 2012 21:46:28 GMT -5
I think what it comes down to is making sure that the top section of the soil is fertile and high in humus, fertilizing anything below that is a waste of time since it will just wash down farther and be harder to reach by anything but perennials. You might change your mind when you find out just where the roots grow on most garden vegetables. www.soilandhealth.org/01aglibrary/010137veg.roots/010137toc.htmlMartin |
|
|
|
Post by turtleheart on Apr 3, 2012 6:25:59 GMT -5
the majority of available nutrients for the plants is from the skin of the soil, the place where the life of the soil is unlocking the fertility in active decomposition. if you have a clay soil and till the skin of life into the clay underneath, you will be breaking the nutrient cycle, and killing over 98% of the life in your dirt.
|
|
bertiefox
gardener
There's always tomorrow!
Posts: 236
|
Post by bertiefox on Apr 3, 2012 6:40:10 GMT -5
While the argument about all the fertility being in the top few millimetres of soil is absolutely right, and the best argument for the 'no dig' method, ten years of no dig experience on heavy clay here seems to tell me that it doesn't work for quite a few things which need to get roots down into the subsoil for moisture. For example, many summer brassicas just root into the top layer which dries out very rapidly and their roots can't penetrate the 'pan' beneath. Most of the irrigation serves to dampen the top layer which acts like a sponge and prevents moisture passing through. I am using beds that are never walked on, but even so, I am finding the soil seems to get harder every year, except for that top fertile layer. Perhaps I should try growing more deeply rooted things like the Japanese radish, but for many things I find a deeply dug bed gives much better results, especially if top dressed with a fertile mulch. I wish it wasn't like that, but it seems to be the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by turtleheart on Apr 3, 2012 6:52:52 GMT -5
i broadcast my brassica seeds into the wild grasses and herbs i have here. they dont need my help and get through my earth without issue considering its not deadened or hardened by compaction or tilling. i have hundreds of large leaved brassica plants emerge from wild cultures in several locations. i gave up on transplanting most things. i assure you i have clay. it is heavy. there is sandstone in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by turtleheart on Apr 3, 2012 6:55:14 GMT -5
my soil wasnt always clay on top. it used to have 2 foot litter layer and 8 feet of black humus topsoil. now since there has been 400 years of clear cuts and tilling (dutch, french, english and american), there is no topsoil left at all, except the thin skin that forms. if it is tilled i am left with dead clay with rocks in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by turtleheart on Apr 3, 2012 7:07:17 GMT -5
over 90% of the native herbaceous species have gone extinct here because of humans tilling and earthworms tilling. there are areas less damaged by the worms and tillers in turtle island which retain more native herbaceous species.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Lofthouse on Apr 3, 2012 8:58:43 GMT -5
I don't have sympathy for the plants that have gone extinct because of earthworms... The story is told that the earthworms are an invasive species that is consuming the forest... Because 10 thousand years ago when the glaciers retreated, all the earthworms had been frozen or drowned: Therefor earthworms are an invasive species, and we all know that invasive is evil. The problem with the invasive is evil approach in this case is that all species of plants growing in the area that were covered by the glaciers are likewise evil because they invaded after the glaciers melted, and I think that I don't care if an evil earthworm eats an evil plant. Perhaps the earthworms are less evil because they are eating evil.
|
|
|
|
Post by turtleheart on Apr 3, 2012 9:05:56 GMT -5
ecological fallout might not bother you but i am concerned about being able to eat and breath.
|
|
