paghat wrote:

In article , Pam wrote:

Dave Gower wrote:

Some people have balanced informed views on gardening. Others are
eco-fanatics who really care nothing about any living creatures, only about
their egos and agendas.

Balanced, perhaps - informed, not very. The suggestion to use peat moss as an
organic fertilizer is indicative of a serious lack of information. The
nutrient
value of peat moss is nil.

As my understanding of the process comes much more from reading gardening
literature than by a deeper understanding of molecular science, I could
well have some of it wrong. But I'm fairly certain that even an "inert"
organic enrichment such as peat, by encouraging the healthful organisms
that produce nitrogen, ARE in fact adequate "fertilizers" in organically
balanced lawns, because the issue is not how well it functions as a
fertilizer, but how well it functions encouraging microorganisms that
produce nutrients of varioius kinds, bacterial release of nitrogen,
symboitoc fungal release of other plant-accessible nutrients, & so on.

I understand the point you are making and I think it is more a matter of semantics
rather a difference of opinion. The term "fertilizer" is typically used to refer to
an outside source of plant nutrient requirements - other than those found naturally
occurring in the soil - and usually one which offers a ready supply of one of the
big 3. As I understand your interpretation, peat, while it has virtually no
remaining nitrogen content, would qualify as a fertilizer because it certainly makes
the environment more hospitable to those organisms which generate nitrogen as a
byproduct of their existence and thus provide this necessary plant nutrient.

One can reasonably argue that all organic soil amendments can be looked at in this
fashion - all offer some, typically very limited nutrient value. Their true value is
in their ability to improve soil fertility and tilth by providing organic matter and
thus hosting increased populations of soil organisms, increasing pore space and
improving drainage. While peat may have no significant nutrient value - less than 1%
nitrogen, no phosphorus and minimal potassium - the same can be said of composted
hog, cow, poultry or steer manure. Christopher Starbuck was right on in his
statement that peat is equally as good as steer manure for soil enrichment, but
neither one does much in the way of providing supplemental nutrients, specially the
nitrogen which most turf soils lack. Personally, I'd find peat less efficient than
composted manure as an organic lawn topdressing because of its difficulty in
rewetting once it has dried out, the slowness with which it further decomposes and
its tendency to decrease soil pH, something which further defeats the purpose of
growing a healthy lawn.



Your commentary below I quite admired.

-paghat the ratgirl

Thank you.
pam - gardengal