In article ,
---Pete--- wrote:
On 9 Jul 2003 17:05:01 GMT, (Frank Miles) wrote:
I'd be cautious about using Ironite on vegies. It has been discovered that
at least one of their products contains high levels of arsenic and lead.
The state of Washington has now passed a few weak laws on proper labeling
on fertilizers, but most don't have to say what those "inert ingredients"
are, nor where they come from (Ironite was using mining wastes IIRC).

Some farmers have lost use of their lands because the heavy metal toxicities
have become too great.

You can look up some articles on it from the Seattle Times, or perhaps:
http://www.envirolaw.org/poison.html

Sorry for the bad news.
-------
Frank, thanks for the heads up.

I went to the Ironite site and found their answer to these
allegations.... http://www.ironite.com/toxicological.htm
What's not clear to me is if the Ironite company has done
anything different to reduce the levels of lead & arsenic .

The article you sited above is dated July 2002 so I'm wondering
what was the final outcome of that case. Needs more research.

Question.. If the Ironite company continues to distribute their
product with high levels of lead and arsenic, then I'd want to
find another product that contains micro nutrients we can
feel safe adding to our vegi gardens. Any other products
available?

Yes, it did seem old.

The Seattle Times (which is clearly not a radical paper -- far from it)
commissioned an independent laboratory to evaluate the heavy metal content
of a variety of commercial fertilizers. The lab found numerous cases
(including some major brand-name products) where heavy metal content was
substantial. IIRC Duff Wilson, the reporter who uncovered this, wrote a book
about it.

What happened when this became more widely known was, in retrospect at least,
fairly predictable. Bills were introduced into the Wa state legislature,
where they drew intense lobbying by the affected industries. Here in the west,
at least, mining industries are big business. They were _legally_ dumping
toxic waste into the open arms of the fertilizer companies, who were selling
it as part of their fertilizer products. At the national (US) level, this
regulatory loophole in EPA regulations has been closed, but only after a
6-month delay after regulations are published in the Federal Register.
Don't know if they've been published yet, though the law was passed/amended
in mid-2002.

Ironite claims that the arsenic and lead are in forms that are not
"biologically available". Maybe that is true -- now. But with unknown
chemical reactions over decades, personally I'm not willing to gamble my
family's health that these won't be converted by some microorganism to some
form that would be absorbed by some vegetable. In most states, there is
no requirement to publish heavy metal content on fertilizers. Their assertion
is not necessarily true, given that at least some farmers who have used
some of these products over a period of years have suffered substantial losses
as their fields -- now far less productive -- now test very high for heavy
metals.

Until/unless fertilizer companies list source materials, or provide chemical
content assays, my personal choice is to avoid them, even on my lawn. I
encourage others to do the same, hoping that some day more fertilizer
companies will see the wisdom in behaving in an honorable fashion.

-frank
--

In article ,
Joanne wrote:

I'm not so sure about that. Road salt has caused a sectionof my
flower garden to be very difficult to grow "anything" in (may have
found a solution this year, a great big 3 foot planter covering the
area).


While I realize you are wanting this area for edibles, rugosas tolerate
road salt extremely well (they like to grow near salt-water too). Some
varieties do produce substantial hips for rosehip tea.

In article ,
(Frank Miles) wrote:

In article ,
---Pete--- wrote:
On 9 Jul 2003 17:05:01 GMT, (Frank Miles) wrote:
I'd be cautious about using Ironite on vegies. It has been discovered that
at least one of their products contains high levels of arsenic and lead.
The state of Washington has now passed a few weak laws on proper labeling
on fertilizers, but most don't have to say what those "inert ingredients"
are, nor where they come from (Ironite was using mining wastes IIRC).

Some farmers have lost use of their lands because the heavy metal
toxicities
have become too great.

You can look up some articles on it from the Seattle Times, or perhaps:
http://www.envirolaw.org/poison.html

Sorry for the bad news.
-------
Frank, thanks for the heads up.

I went to the Ironite site and found their answer to these
allegations.... http://www.ironite.com/toxicological.htm
What's not clear to me is if the Ironite company has done
anything different to reduce the levels of lead & arsenic .

The article you sited above is dated July 2002 so I'm wondering
what was the final outcome of that case. Needs more research.

Question.. If the Ironite company continues to distribute their
product with high levels of lead and arsenic, then I'd want to
find another product that contains micro nutrients we can
feel safe adding to our vegi gardens. Any other products
available?

Yes, it did seem old.

The Seattle Times (which is clearly not a radical paper -- far from it)
commissioned an independent laboratory to evaluate the heavy metal content
of a variety of commercial fertilizers. The lab found numerous cases
(including some major brand-name products) where heavy metal content was
substantial. IIRC Duff Wilson, the reporter who uncovered this, wrote a book
about it.

What happened when this became more widely known was, in retrospect at least,
fairly predictable. Bills were introduced into the Wa state legislature,
where they drew intense lobbying by the affected industries. Here in the
west,
at least, mining industries are big business. They were _legally_ dumping
toxic waste into the open arms of the fertilizer companies, who were selling
it as part of their fertilizer products. At the national (US) level, this
regulatory loophole in EPA regulations has been closed, but only after a
6-month delay after regulations are published in the Federal Register.
Don't know if they've been published yet, though the law was passed/amended
in mid-2002.

Ironite claims that the arsenic and lead are in forms that are not
"biologically available". Maybe that is true -- now. But with unknown
chemical reactions over decades, personally I'm not willing to gamble my
family's health that these won't be converted by some microorganism to some
form that would be absorbed by some vegetable. In most states, there is
no requirement to publish heavy metal content on fertilizers. Their
assertion
is not necessarily true, given that at least some farmers who have used
some of these products over a period of years have suffered substantial
losses
as their fields -- now far less productive -- now test very high for heavy
metals.

Until/unless fertilizer companies list source materials, or provide chemical
content assays, my personal choice is to avoid them, even on my lawn. I
encourage others to do the same, hoping that some day more fertilizer
companies will see the wisdom in behaving in an honorable fashion.

-frank
--


Valuable information, thank you!

Well I use a fertilizer product made by a company called Fertile Earth. It's
a liquid fertilizer distributed through a hose end mixing sprayer (or with
an adapter they sell that can tap into your drip hose or sprinkler system).
It can also be mixed into a watering can for your bucket tomatoes. I've read
all the materials I could find from the company prior to using it. It's used
in a number of commercial farms and facilities and has significant case
studies backing it done by a number of universities around the country. It's
considered "Earth-friendly" and has been approved for use on certified
organic farms. It's a naturally derived fertilizer made by bacteria the
company cultivates. Sorta like a manure tea compound by much richer in
concentration. They then add something they call BioNatra which is best
described as "soil food". This additive is designed to increase the natural
biological (bacterial) activity in the soil. It does not contain any live
bacteria but rather contains substances that encourage them to grow and
multiply. These bacteria then increase the natural fertility of the soil by
breaking down organic compounds, helping to balance Ph levels, and making
the minerals already found in your soil more available to your plants. They
go in great detail in the white papers available on thier website describing
what "healthy soil" is and how it can benefit your garden to improve the
overall health of your soil rather than just fertilizing it. It IS a
fertilizer but a rather mild one, since it is meant to improve the soil by
unlocking minerals and nutrients already bound up by unavailable for a
variety of reasons.

For anyone with a large scale garden it could probubly be a bit expensive.
Myself I only have a 21x15 ft garden space I use for vegatables. A bottle of
the vegatable mix runs around 15 dollars and I will probubly need 2 bottles
to get through the entire growing season here (Zone 6B). Still if you would
like to read more you can go to:
http://www.fertileearth.com/Shop/Con...iew_page/learn

Check it out I love this stuff. I am getting some phenominal yields from my
tomato plants with this stuff. You can buy the vegatable formula at:
http://www.fertileearth.com/Shop/Con...0/vpcsid/0/SFV
/28351


"Noydb" wrote in message
...
Stephen Younge wrote:

At the beginning of this season, I purchased some "Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5. I was wondering if this would be suitable for
my
tomatoes, some of which are in 20" pots and some of which are in the
ground. I used the recommended amount at planting time (late May), and
I'm
getting ready to add a little more in the next few days.

I've seen some messages on this newsgroup that suggest calcium is
important for tomatoes. The Sta-Green fertilizer has no calcium -- it
has
nitrogen, phosphate, potash, boron, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum,
and zinc. Will this do the trick, or should I use something in addition?
I've heard too much nitrogen can hinder fruit production.

Any feedback would be appreciated.

Stephen Younge
Boulder, CO

Lack of calcium and / or uneven watering will cause this problem. I have
handled it for years by pushing food-grade calcium supplement tablets
about
1" into the ground at planting time. (I use 3 per tomato / pepper plant).
They dissolve fairly quickly and leaching takes them into the root zone
over the season. So far, so good for the past several years.

Of course, this does nothing about the water situation. For that I use
Tyvek
tube weep irrigation. One pint per foot per day from the tyvek seems to do
the trick.

BIll
--
Zone 5b (Detroit, MI)
I do not post my address to news groups.

"Stephen Younge" wrote in message
news:4HrOa.2327$OZ2.943@rwcrnsc54...
At the beginning of this season, I purchased some "Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5. I was wondering if this would be suitable for my
tomatoes, some of which are in 20" pots and some of which are in the
ground.
I used the recommended amount at planting time (late May), and I'm getting
ready to add a little more in the next few days.

12-10-5 is wrong for maters. 5-20-20 is more like it. Miracle Grow is fine
at first to get the plants started. After that, they need very little
nitrogen. Vigaro would be fine if it is not heavy on nitrogen. It has a lot
of trace minerals.
--
73 de Bob NS9G

Phaedrine Stonebridge wrote:

In article ,
Joanne wrote:



I'm not so sure about that. Road salt has caused a sectionof my
flower garden to be very difficult to grow "anything" in (may have
found a solution this year, a great big 3 foot planter covering the
area).




While I realize you are wanting this area for edibles, rugosas tolerate
road salt extremely well (they like to grow near salt-water too). Some
varieties do produce substantial hips for rosehip tea.

There is a mis- understanding. The poster said about calcium chloride
which they use to melt ice on the road. It is not rock salt (sodium
chloride) The calcium chloride it usually small round white balls. It is
usually sold to be yard and concrete safe, unlike road salt. I may be
wrong but pure calcium chloride contains no salt like road salt.

"NS9G" wrote in message news:ymzPa.34891$Ph3.2981@sccrnsc04...
"Stephen Younge" wrote in message
news:4HrOa.2327$OZ2.943@rwcrnsc54...
At the beginning of this season, I purchased some "Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5. I was wondering if this would be suitable for my
tomatoes, some of which are in 20" pots and some of which are in the
ground.
I used the recommended amount at planting time (late May), and I'm getting
ready to add a little more in the next few days.

12-10-5 is wrong for maters. 5-20-20 is more like it. Miracle Grow is fine
at first to get the plants started. After that, they need very little
nitrogen. Vigaro would be fine if it is not heavy on nitrogen. It has a lot
of trace minerals.

Correct. You get that profile with wood chips, with some wood ash
(which will contribute Ca and K in much higher doses than Tums) thrown
in in for pH balancing and some manure or kitchen scraps for N.
Basically, what I do. I don't know what BER is.

In article , Brian
wrote:

Phaedrine Stonebridge wrote:

In article ,
Joanne wrote:



I'm not so sure about that. Road salt has caused a sectionof my
flower garden to be very difficult to grow "anything" in (may have
found a solution this year, a great big 3 foot planter covering the
area).




While I realize you are wanting this area for edibles, rugosas tolerate
road salt extremely well (they like to grow near salt-water too). Some
varieties do produce substantial hips for rosehip tea.

There is a mis- understanding. The poster said about calcium chloride
which they use to melt ice on the road. It is not rock salt (sodium
chloride) The calcium chloride it usually small round white balls. It is
usually sold to be yard and concrete safe, unlike road salt. I may be
wrong but pure calcium chloride contains no salt like road salt.


OIC

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 04:23:28 GMT, "Stephen Younge"
wrote:

"Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5.
Abstract: A market exists for organically grown, fresh- and
processing-market tomatoes. Although information
on conventional tomato practices is available from many sources,
comprehensive information on organic
cultivation practices is difficult to find. Organic tomato production
differs from conventional production
primarily in soil fertility, weed, insect, and disease management.
These are the focus of this publication, with
special emphasis on fresh market tomatoes.
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/tomato.pdf
In Nigeria, tomatoes yielded 44
and 42 T/A when swine manure
or poultry manure was applied at
9 T/A. Tomatoes yielded 37 and
42 T/A on fields treated with
sewage sludge or rabbit manure
applied at 18 T/A. Organic
manures performed better than
NPK treatments, which yielded
only 31 T/A (15).

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 14:39:34 GMT, Brian wrote:
There is a mis- understanding. The poster said about calcium chloride
which they use to melt ice on the road. It is not rock salt (sodium
chloride) The calcium chloride it usually small round white balls. It is
usually sold to be yard and concrete safe, unlike road salt. I may be
wrong but pure calcium chloride contains no salt like road salt.
-----
Good points Brian. I did some searching and found 2 good articles
on the topic of "Road Salts". Calcium Chloride and Sodium Chloride
are both considered as road salts. Sodium Chloride would definitely
not be good for use in the garden and Calcium Chloride use in the
garden would be questionable.

Personally, I think egg shells or egg shell water is safest way to go.
I put all my eggshells in my compost bin and use that to amend
the soil.

To learn more about Calcium Chloride and
road salts, here's 2 good articles

Road Salt Named Toxic to Environment...
http://perc.ca/PEN/2002-02/s-boddy.html

Road Salt -- What is it?
http://radburn.rutgers.edu/andrews/p.../pdfs/salt.htm

---pete---

AT wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 04:23:28 GMT, "Stephen Younge"
wrote:

"Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5.
Abstract: A market exists for organically grown, fresh- and
processing-market tomatoes. Although information
on conventional tomato practices is available from many sources,
comprehensive information on organic
cultivation practices is difficult to find. Organic tomato production
differs from conventional production
primarily in soil fertility, weed, insect, and disease management.
These are the focus of this publication, with
special emphasis on fresh market tomatoes.
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/tomato.pdf
In Nigeria, tomatoes yielded 44
and 42 T/A when swine manure
or poultry manure was applied at
9 T/A. Tomatoes yielded 37 and
42 T/A on fields treated with
sewage sludge or rabbit manure
applied at 18 T/A. Organic
manures performed better than
NPK treatments, which yielded
only 31 T/A (15).

Where the heck do you get that much rabbit poop?
--
Zone 5b (Detroit, MI)
I do not post my address to news groups.

AT wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 04:23:28 GMT, "Stephen Younge"
wrote:

"Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5.
Abstract: A market exists for organically grown, fresh- and
processing-market tomatoes. Although information
on conventional tomato practices is available from many sources,
comprehensive information on organic
cultivation practices is difficult to find. Organic tomato production
differs from conventional production
primarily in soil fertility, weed, insect, and disease management.
These are the focus of this publication, with
special emphasis on fresh market tomatoes.
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/tomato.pdf

Interesting to me is this:
"Researchers in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina investigated a
vegetable production system using winter cover crops and various rates of
nitrogen over a four year period. In all locations, cover crops produced
higher yields and better quality tomatoes and other vegetables than applied
nitrogen."

This would seem to conflict with the "any form of N is fine" approach.
--
Zone 5b (Detroit, MI)
I do not post my address to news groups.

Brian said:

There is a mis- understanding. The poster said about calcium chloride
which they use to melt ice on the road. It is not rock salt (sodium
chloride) The calcium chloride it usually small round white balls. It is
usually sold to be yard and concrete safe, unlike road salt. I may be
wrong but pure calcium chloride contains no salt like road salt.


Calcium chloride would technically be 'a' salt which is sometimes
used on roads, but it contains no sodium chloride (which is a completely
different salt.)

To be pendantic...

Compounds of elements from periodic table group VIIA (the halogens, or
'salt-makers') with metalic or non-metalic elements or simple compounds
are salts. The most noteworthy halogens are fluorine, chlorine, bromine,
and iodine. Halogens are highly reactive and do not naturally occur in
elemental form.

Sodium chloride is a salt (in the vernacular, it's THE salt). It's mineral form
is halite (typically referred to as 'rock salt') which can be mined from large
deposits (the proverbial salt mines). It's only use in the garden is for controlling
weeds and disease in asparagus plantings, though this use is controversial.
(Asparagus is naturally tolerant to sodium chloride, just like the rugosa roses
mentioned earlier in the thread.)

Calcium chloride is a salt. Calcium chloride is more expensive than sodium
chloride because it is manufactured rather than mined. It is effective at lower
temperatures than sodium chloride and it is somewhat less damaging to
road surfaces and structures (there is a new liquid application method which
might make it substantially less destructive) . Calcium chloride could possibly
be useful in the garden as an emergency source of calcium.

Rather out of place in the middle of July, an article about the various sorts of salts
and chemicals used for pavement deicing (with a list of salt-tolerant trees and
shrubs):

http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/horticulture/g1121.htm
--
Pat in Plymouth MI

Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(attributed to Don Marti)

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:22:49 -0400, Noydb
wrote:

This would seem to conflict with the "any form of N is fine" approach.



proven wrong time and time again!!

Good old compost even if it is from a bag. Add some eggshells, a
banana peel, and keep a fish tank for homemade "fish emulsion". Every
2 weeks, I clean my tanks and pour the water onto my potted plants.
My babies did very well except that I have fusarium wilt on several
tomato plants. Not sure how I got it, but it's there. Luckily I have
some resistant varieties too so it's not all lost. The eggshells are
for calcium to prevent blossom end rot and the banana has potassium.
Also excellent for rose bushes. Mine bloom quicker when I stick a
peel under the soil around the plants.

I make a small heep of grass clippings, leaves, newspaper shreds,
apple peels (son hates those), strawberry tops, pine needles, rabbit
droppings (with tree shavings), and whatever plant scraps I can get
out there. Just keep piling it up on the ground where you want to
plant next year. The worms will take care of it. Get a shovel after
a month or two and dig into the pile. Toss it around a little. Next
year you will have a nice compost area to plant in. I have "Bush
Goliath" tomatoes in last year's pile and they are the only plants
that are still green and have not got the wilts. They have tons of
fruit while the rest of my friends have no tomatoes and just vines
what few haven't got the wilts. My bunnies love to nibble the plants
and they haven't destroyed them yet. In fact, they nap under these
nice bushy tomato plants. The other plants aren't so lush but they
are also in pots and I used bagged compost from WalMart. Not nearly
so good as the homemade stuff.

Carla




"Stephen Younge" wrote in message news:4HrOa.2327$OZ2.943@rwcrnsc54...
At the beginning of this season, I purchased some "Sta-Green Tomato &
Vegetable Food", 12-10-5. I was wondering if this would be suitable for my
tomatoes, some of which are in 20" pots and some of which are in the ground.
I used the recommended amount at planting time (late May), and I'm getting
ready to add a little more in the next few days.

I've seen some messages on this newsgroup that suggest calcium is important
for tomatoes. The Sta-Green fertilizer has no calcium -- it has nitrogen,
phosphate, potash, boron, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, and zinc.
Will this do the trick, or should I use something in addition? I've heard
too much nitrogen can hinder fruit production.

Any feedback would be appreciated.

Stephen Younge
Boulder, CO