Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Organic Gardening
Does anyone know if Rhizopon rooting products and Hortus IBA Water Soluble
Salts are compatable with organic gardening? Helen |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
If you grow ANY thing other than metal, rock, cement, you are growing
something that's ORGANIC. So use whatever you want. -- SIAR www.starlords.org Telescope Buyers FAQ http://home.inreach.com/starlord "HPBudlong" wrote in message ... Does anyone know if Rhizopon rooting products and Hortus IBA Water Soluble Salts are compatable with organic gardening? Helen |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
starlord wrote:
If you grow ANY thing other than metal, rock, cement, you are growing something that's ORGANIC. So use whatever you want. You might be interested in my http://www.rossde.com/garden/garden_organic.html. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that complies with Web standards. See http://www.mozilla.org/. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I know already all the things that they say must be done to call it Organic,
but that term is the must MIS-USED term there is. It is real simple, if anything has living cells in it, it is ORGANIC. Rocks, Metals, Crystals, stuff like that are NON-organic. So unless someone has figured out how to plant a seed and grow a Steel I beam, then all living things on Earth fall into the class of being Organic. -- SIAR www.starlords.org Telescope Buyers FAQ http://home.inreach.com/starlord "David Ross" wrote in message ... starlord wrote: If you grow ANY thing other than metal, rock, cement, you are growing something that's ORGANIC. So use whatever you want. You might be interested in my http://www.rossde.com/garden/garden_organic.html. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that complies with Web standards. See http://www.mozilla.org/. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"starlord" wrote in
: I know already all the things that they say must be done to call it Organic, but that term is the must MIS-USED term there is. It is real simple, if anything has living cells in it, it is ORGANIC. Rocks, Metals, Crystals, stuff like that are NON-organic. So unless someone has figured out how to plant a seed and grow a Steel I beam, then all living things on Earth fall into the class of being Organic. Just because one uses a definition that you are not accustomed to does not mean the term is misused. The intended meaning may very well be misunderstood by you and others who insist on assuming the definition they are familar with, but not misused. http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dicti...va=organic&x=0 &y=0 On the other hand, there are plenty of hucksters and profiteers who will not hesitate to pass off any fruit or vegetable as organic under your definition. Troll food: there are plenty of bacteria that can 'eat' various ores with no carbon content and crap out a refined product. There are also simple self replicating machines in research labs. Lastly, it is possible to grow a steel I-beam. You just need to use a suitable definition of 'seed'. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"starlord" wrote in
: I know already all the things that they say must be done to call it Organic, but that term is the must MIS-USED term there is. It is real simple, if anything has living cells in it, it is ORGANIC. Rocks, Metals, Crystals, stuff like that are NON-organic. So unless someone has figured out how to plant a seed and grow a Steel I beam, then all living things on Earth fall into the class of being Organic. my, aren't you being obtuse while i do agree to some extent that having to label non- chemically treated produce & livestock as "organic" is somewhat silly, how else does one differentiate it from the chemically treated? do you have a better solution? lee |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I see the high priced "Organic" goods in the viggie area of the ONE local
supermarket in the desert town I live in get thrown out after it's 2nd day while the 'treated' goods sell at good rates. To me that says a lot more. With the cost of goods going up, people look for bargins, just as I do, and when I look at a bag of normal oranges going for a price I can afford, and the so called Organic ones are more than 2 times the price and don't even 'look' as good, they end up sitting there for a day or two and then get thrown away. I've seen the organic goods go down in numbers too, and it's funny when I see some of the OG'ic stuff in plastic bags sitting right next to the same companies normal goods and the price sticks out like a blazing sign. -- SIAR www.starlords.org Telescope Buyers FAQ http://home.inreach.com/starlord "enigma" wrote in message . .. "starlord" wrote in : I know already all the things that they say must be done to call it Organic, but that term is the must MIS-USED term there is. It is real simple, if anything has living cells in it, it is ORGANIC. Rocks, Metals, Crystals, stuff like that are NON-organic. So unless someone has figured out how to plant a seed and grow a Steel I beam, then all living things on Earth fall into the class of being Organic. my, aren't you being obtuse while i do agree to some extent that having to label non- chemically treated produce & livestock as "organic" is somewhat silly, how else does one differentiate it from the chemically treated? do you have a better solution? lee |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The term Organic, when applied to food, has a legal meaning in the
United States which has been defined by the USDA, effective in October 2001. Before that, it had a fairly loose meaning, being defined by different states in different ways. Roughly, the meaning is that the food was grown without using any harmful products (as defined by some committee) and using practices which do not harm the environment (much). The term organic, in the chemical sense, has a separate meaning, and is used only by chemists and biologists. In a sense, it could be called jargon. (OK, the term applied to food could be called jargon also.) rant We need a term to describe food that satisfies some peoples desires to (1) keep themselves safe from unsafe residues on food and/or (2) preserve the environment to the extent possible. Without such a term, consumers have no basis for comparing two competing brands other than price and appearance (and perhaps past history or publicity). The term Organic filled that need until the USDA defined it. Now produce cannot be legally called organic unless it has been grown on a certified farm. The basis for this action was the desire of the organic food consuming community for some uniformity of standards so that the term organic would not be applied to food that did not deserve it. Since there are significant costs to certification, many growers can no longer call their produce organic, since it is not economically feasible. You have the choice of becoming certified and raising the price of food to cover certification costs, or selling non-organic food. The USDA estimates that the cost of paperwork for certification of a small farm is $500, and the fees for certification are an additional $500 (and up). Some cost sharing is available, but not on a permanent basis, so costs of organic food will rise just due to the bureacracy. Since you object to the term organic, and since I feel there is a need for a term to cover food previously called organic, I invite readers to come up with a new term to describe food that is grown using all the organic practices except certification. I feel the term "natural" is not really useable, since all food that is grown on a farm could be called a natural product. (Also, note that in a strict sense, the practices used in farming [plowing, cultivation, etc.] are not found in nature [separating all human activities from "nature" {implying that humans are not a part of nature}], so that farming itself could be called an unnatural practice. However, that leaves everyone who eats food out in the cold.) The term "sustainable" has possibilities, but not everyone knows what it means (if in fact it means anything). Public education will be required to use this term in a meaningful way. /rant starlord wrote: I know already all the things that they say must be done to call it Organic, but that term is the must MIS-USED term there is. It is real simple, if anything has living cells in it, it is ORGANIC. Rocks, Metals, Crystals, stuff like that are NON-organic. So unless someone has figured out how to plant a seed and grow a Steel I beam, then all living things on Earth fall into the class of being Organic. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:46:04 -0500, dps
wrote: The term Organic, when applied to food, has a legal meaning in the United States which has been defined by the USDA, effective in October 2001. Before that, it had a fairly loose meaning, being defined by different states in different ways. Roughly, the meaning is that the food was grown without using any harmful products (as defined by some committee) and using practices which do not harm the environment (much). The term organic, in the chemical sense, has a separate meaning, and is used only by chemists and biologists. In a sense, it could be called jargon. (OK, the term applied to food could be called jargon also.) rant We need a term to describe food that satisfies some peoples desires to (1) keep themselves safe from unsafe residues on food and/or (2) preserve the environment to the extent possible. Without such a term, consumers have no basis for comparing two competing brands other than price and appearance (and perhaps past history or publicity). The term Organic filled that need until the USDA defined it. Now produce cannot be legally called organic unless it has been grown on a certified farm. The basis for this action was the desire of the organic food consuming community for some uniformity of standards so that the term organic would not be applied to food that did not deserve it. Since there are significant costs to certification, many growers can no longer call their produce organic, since it is not economically feasible. You have the choice of becoming certified and raising the price of food to cover certification costs, or selling non-organic food. The USDA estimates that the cost of paperwork for certification of a small farm is $500, and the fees for certification are an additional $500 (and up). Some cost sharing is available, but not on a permanent basis, so costs of organic food will rise just due to the bureacracy. Since you object to the term organic, and since I feel there is a need for a term to cover food previously called organic, I invite readers to come up with a new term to describe food that is grown using all the organic practices except certification. I feel the term "natural" is not really useable, since all food that is grown on a farm could be called a natural product. (Also, note that in a strict sense, the practices used in farming [plowing, cultivation, etc.] are not found in nature [separating all human activities from "nature" {implying that humans are not a part of nature}], so that farming itself could be called an unnatural practice. However, that leaves everyone who eats food out in the cold.) The term "sustainable" has possibilities, but not everyone knows what it means (if in fact it means anything). Public education will be required to use this term in a meaningful way. How about IRiObICAC? It Really is Organic but I Cannot Afford Certification. he he. John |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
HPBudlong wrote: Does anyone know if Rhizopon rooting products and Hortus IBA Water Soluble Salts are compatable with organic gardening? Helen Auxins The most frequently employed auxins are IAA, IBA, NAA and 2,4-D. IAA, a naturally occurring auxin is added in concentration of 0.01-10 mg/l. The synthetic and relatively more active auxins (IBA, NAA and 2,4-D) are used at the concentration of 0.001-10 mg/l. Other auxins which may be used in plant tissue culture include 2,4,5-T and 4-CPA. The most effective auxin of callus proliferation for most cultures is 2,4-D, but unfortunately it strongly suppresses organogenesis and should not be used in experiments involving root and shoot initiation . Auxins generally cause: cell elongation and swelling of tissues, cell division (callus formation) and the formation of adventitious roots; the inhibition of adventitious axillary shoot formation, and often embryogenesis in suspension culture. With low auxin concentration, adventitious root formation predominates, whereas with high auxin concentration, root formation fails to occur and callus formation takes place. Because Rhizopan is a trademark and the active ingredient is IBA, I would think it unlikely that either product would meet the criteria for "organic" gardening. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Billy - organic vs non-organic info needed | Gardening | |||
Organic vs. Non-organic | Gardening | |||
Organic vs. Non-organic | Edible Gardening | |||
organic, non-organic and taste... | Edible Gardening | |||
Organic/non-organic fertilisers | United Kingdom |