Moved into a house a while ago and am just getting around to sending in soil
samples to see what I need to feed it with (yard with some St Augustine and
bermuda, normal suburban shrubs and trees). There are a LOT of options for
the test including:

- Routine analysis (pH, NO, P, K, Ca, Mg, S and Conductivity)
- Routine +Micronutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn)
- Routine +Micronutirents +Boron
- Routine + Detailed salinity
- Routine + micro+salinity
- Routine + micro+detailed Lime requirement
- Routine+ micro+Boron+Lime+organic matter+salinity
- Routine+texture analysis
- Routine +organic matter

This is way too many choices. I am gardening organically if it changes
anything. Anybody know what test I should get?

Thanks,
Hank Longino

I am a native plant habitat landscaper in Houston,
http://www.celestialhabitats.com
and the Master Gardeners, Master Naturalists, other landscapers, land
and ag suppliers all say to use http://www.txplant-soillab.com/. These
folks are in Edinburgh, TX and are organically oriented. You tell them
your goals and they analyze the soil and then tell you what steps you
need to take to take to achieve your goals organically. No one buy kits
off the shelf. The cost runs about $55.00 and is well worth it. I hear
their name over and over and over in the organic circle. Bob Randall
with Urban Harvest can vouch for them as well as Malcolm Beck. =


J. Kolenovsky

"news.houston.sbcglobal.net" wrote:
=

Moved into a house a while ago and am just getting around to sending in=
soil
samples to see what I need to feed it with (yard with some St Augustine=
and
bermuda, normal suburban shrubs and trees). There are a LOT of options=
for
the test including:
=

- Routine analysis (pH, NO, P, K, Ca, Mg, S and Conductivity)
- Routine +Micronutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn)
- Routine +Micronutirents +Boron
- Routine + Detailed salinity
- Routine + micro+salinity
- Routine + micro+detailed Lime requirement
- Routine+ micro+Boron+Lime+organic matter+salinity
- Routine+texture analysis
- Routine +organic matter
=

This is way too many choices. I am gardening organically if it changes=

anything. Anybody know what test I should get?
=

Thanks,
Hank Longino

-- =

J. Kolenovsky, A+, Network +, MCP
=F4=BF=F4 - http://www.celestialhabitats.com - commercial
=F4=BF=F4 - http://www.hal-pc.org/~garden/personal.html

Save your money. Unless you are growing fancy exotic plants you can, in mid to
late April put down fertilizer for your turf, which will also feed trees.
Buying compost from a reputable compost maker, like The Natural Gardener, is a
good idea. You can spread that out over the lawn area at 1/4 inch and if you
want to really do something to help the turf, aerate with a core aerator. You
can hire someone to do it very inexpensively. Leave the plugs on the lawn and
they will break down when you water or after it rains.

We have very calciferous soils in N.Central Texas. The pH is going to be
between 7.5 and 8.5. If you stick with native plants, which include trees,
shrubs, perennials, conifers, etc., you will not have to amend soils, only top
dress them with organic matter.


On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 22:15:51 GMT, "news.houston.sbcglobal.net"
wrote:

Moved into a house a while ago and am just getting around to sending in soil
samples to see what I need to feed it with (yard with some St Augustine and
bermuda, normal suburban shrubs and trees). There are a LOT of options for
the test including:

- Routine analysis (pH, NO, P, K, Ca, Mg, S and Conductivity)
- Routine +Micronutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn)
- Routine +Micronutirents +Boron
- Routine + Detailed salinity
- Routine + micro+salinity
- Routine + micro+detailed Lime requirement
- Routine+ micro+Boron+Lime+organic matter+salinity
- Routine+texture analysis
- Routine +organic matter

This is way too many choices. I am gardening organically if it changes
anything. Anybody know what test I should get?

Thanks,
Hank Longino

You have to be very careful on this. I put down a general turf fertilizer
last year, only to find out that the phosphorus levels in my soil are
crazy stupid high. I just sent off my sample to A&M for the routine analysis.
They sent back the analisys with a long list of suggested ways to amend the
soil. The local Ag office mentioned that high phosphorus is a VERY common
problem in Austin-area soils. The problem is that it binds to iron easily,
and can result in nutrient uptake problems for your plants.

The A&M test is somehting like $12. Well worth it, even if just for
curiosity's sake.

-parc


animaux wrote:
Save your money. Unless you are growing fancy exotic plants you can, in mid to
late April put down fertilizer for your turf, which will also feed trees.
Buying compost from a reputable compost maker, like The Natural Gardener, is a
good idea. You can spread that out over the lawn area at 1/4 inch and if you
want to really do something to help the turf, aerate with a core aerator. You
can hire someone to do it very inexpensively. Leave the plugs on the lawn and
they will break down when you water or after it rains.

We have very calciferous soils in N.Central Texas. The pH is going to be
between 7.5 and 8.5. If you stick with native plants, which include trees,
shrubs, perennials, conifers, etc., you will not have to amend soils, only top
dress them with organic matter.


On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 22:15:51 GMT, "news.houston.sbcglobal.net"
wrote:

Moved into a house a while ago and am just getting around to sending in soil
samples to see what I need to feed it with (yard with some St Augustine and
bermuda, normal suburban shrubs and trees). There are a LOT of options for
the test including:

- Routine analysis (pH, NO, P, K, Ca, Mg, S and Conductivity)
- Routine +Micronutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn)
- Routine +Micronutirents +Boron
- Routine + Detailed salinity
- Routine + micro+salinity
- Routine + micro+detailed Lime requirement
- Routine+ micro+Boron+Lime+organic matter+salinity
- Routine+texture analysis
- Routine +organic matter

This is way too many choices. I am gardening organically if it changes
anything. Anybody know what test I should get?

Thanks,
Hank Longino



--
"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a
period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin' it without our permission,
will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it.
Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted
to do." --Woody Guthrie on Copyright

You live in Houston. Call me 713 665 5055 and I can give you some
references.

"news.houston.sbcglobal.net" wrote:
=

Moved into a house a while ago and am just getting around to sending in=
soil
samples to see what I need to feed it with (yard with some St Augustine=
and
bermuda, normal suburban shrubs and trees). There are a LOT of options=
for
the test including:
=

- Routine analysis (pH, NO, P, K, Ca, Mg, S and Conductivity)
- Routine +Micronutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn)
- Routine +Micronutirents +Boron
- Routine + Detailed salinity
- Routine + micro+salinity
- Routine + micro+detailed Lime requirement
- Routine+ micro+Boron+Lime+organic matter+salinity
- Routine+texture analysis
- Routine +organic matter
=

This is way too many choices. I am gardening organically if it changes=

anything. Anybody know what test I should get?
=

Thanks,
Hank Longino

-- =

J. Kolenovsky, A+, Network +, MCP
=F4=BF=F4 - http://www.celestialhabitats.com - commercial
=F4=BF=F4 - http://www.hal-pc.org/~garden/personal.html

On Tue, 04 Mar 2003 18:47:25 GMT, wrote:

You have to be very careful on this. I put down a general turf fertilizer
last year, only to find out that the phosphorus levels in my soil are
crazy stupid high. I just sent off my sample to A&M for the routine analysis.
They sent back the analisys with a long list of suggested ways to amend the
soil. The local Ag office mentioned that high phosphorus is a VERY common
problem in Austin-area soils. The problem is that it binds to iron easily,
and can result in nutrient uptake problems for your plants.

This was a striking revelation when I first heard it at an Aggie soil
science lecture a few years ago. Homes of in our area which have been
fertilized even intermittently over the years were showing phosphorus
at levels high enough to last for generations! Yet lawn centers
continue to push "balanced" fertilizers, and then later Ironite to
overwhelm the iron deficiency caused by the P they sold you in the
first place (Ironite in any case being a problem worse than any
symptom it might mask). Even organic gardeners need to consider this
as most organic matter contains moderate levels of P (sorry, I can't
stomach blood meal :-)

The best lawn fertilizer for our area, imho, is the slow-release
"Sustain", available at places like Lowes. I've come to think that,
for an organic gardener myself who lives over the Edwards recharge
zone, Sustain may be a more environmentally sound lawn fertilizer than
compost.

On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 00:32:09 GMT, (Terry Horton) wrote:



This was a striking revelation when I first heard it at an Aggie soil
science lecture a few years ago. Homes of in our area which have been
fertilized even intermittently over the years were showing phosphorus
at levels high enough to last for generations! Yet lawn centers
continue to push "balanced" fertilizers, and then later Ironite to
overwhelm the iron deficiency caused by the P they sold you in the
first place (Ironite in any case being a problem worse than any
symptom it might mask). Even organic gardeners need to consider this
as most organic matter contains moderate levels of P (sorry, I can't
stomach blood meal :-)

The best lawn fertilizer for our area, imho, is the slow-release
"Sustain", available at places like Lowes. I've come to think that,
for an organic gardener myself who lives over the Edwards recharge
zone, Sustain may be a more environmentally sound lawn fertilizer than
compost.

Compost is not a fertilizer, it contains humates which is a necessary product
for good soil structure and texture. Putting down 1/4 inch on turf which has
been core aerated is not going anywhere other than into the soil. Sustane is a
great product, but LadyBug Brand is made by Sustane and has molasses coating on
the prill. Horticultural molasses contains approximately 15% Fe (iron).
Ironite has arsenic and is most useless. Chelated iron is much better for our
soils in this area.

I'm fortunate in that I have very deep soil. When we dug the pool, it wasn't
till we got to about 4 feet before we reached caliche. LadyBug brand can be
bought at Home Depot. Sustane at Lowes. Both 8-2-4 and have sufficient levels
of phosphorous NOT to be hazardous to our saturated with phosphorous soils.

Victoria

Howdy folks,
The high level of phosphates in Austin soil is a big issue. I've
talked at length with Skip Richter, our Horticultural Ag agent sbout
this, and I've talked to the folks at the city of Austin who put
together the Grow Green program.
Skip took a number of soil tests in the neighborhood centered on
Steck and Mesa ( He had gotten a private grant and has not had funding
for city wide city testing. ) He found 100% of the reults showed
excessive to toxic levels of Phosphate the middle number in ratio mix.
He was very concerned about this, since 100% of any result
statisticly is unusual.
His recomendations for lawn fertilizing are in a leaflet available
in many nurseries around town through the Austin Grown Green program.
He has also on occasion talked about this problem on Central Texas
Gardener on PBS.
( They also have a website www.growgreen.com )
Ask for the Grow Green Earthwise guide to Lawn Care, it covers
this topic in greater depth.

As a result of talking to him, two years ago I started telling all
my customers while I was working at a retail nursery here, to get soil
tests before fertilizing since they may be creating more damage to
their lawns by using Phosphates then they are doing good.
Most folks were not interested in going to that much trouble but a
large number did, and came back to show me the results. This is of
course anecdotal but in two years, without exception every single
customer who brought in their results to show me had excessive levels
of Phosphate and were advised to only add nitrogen to their soil.

This shift in thinking has met with hugh resistance from many local
nurseries, let alone the Megamarts that sell a lot of national brands
with high Phosphate.

I had a second concern, which had to do with the EPA approved
practice of allowing mine tailings, industrial pollution ( even in a
case in Oklahoma, radioactive medical waste ) to be disposed of by
'recycling' into fertilizers for lawn and agriculture use.
If the EPA was allowing a certain amount of lead and heavy metals
into the fertilizers because 'at the recommended' rates it was
tolerable for us folks, could there be a problem with these same
levels reaching dangerous levels if there was evidence of over
fertilizing beyond recommended levels and shouldn't we test for that
problem in Austin?

This is sort of a personal mission for me and I write about my
progress on my web site, but so far the answer seems to be the Ag
Extension does not have the funding for this, the water quality folks
are restrained by looking for only certain toxins that get into the
watershed, and the Health department assumes toxicity of soils to be
some other department's concern, and will only commit resources to
check for problems once a threat to public health has been
demonstrated.
It has been interesting.

I would suggest getting a soil test or at least follow Skip and
the Grow Green's recommendations.

take care,
Steve Coyle
www.austingardencenter.com

On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 01:29:05 GMT, animaux
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 00:32:09 GMT, (Terry Horton) wrote:

This was a striking revelation when I first heard it at an Aggie soil
science lecture a few years ago. Homes of in our area which have been
fertilized even intermittently over the years were showing phosphorus
at levels high enough to last for generations! Yet lawn centers
continue to push "balanced" fertilizers, and then later Ironite to
overwhelm the iron deficiency caused by the P they sold you in the
first place (Ironite in any case being a problem worse than any
symptom it might mask). Even organic gardeners need to consider this
as most organic matter contains moderate levels of P (sorry, I can't
stomach blood meal :-)

The best lawn fertilizer for our area, imho, is the slow-release
"Sustain", available at places like Lowes. I've come to think that,
for an organic gardener myself who lives over the Edwards recharge
zone, Sustain may be a more environmentally sound lawn fertilizer than
compost.

Compost is not a fertilizer, it contains humates which is a necessary product
for good soil structure and texture. Putting down 1/4 inch on turf which has
been core aerated is not going anywhere other than into the soil. Sustane is a
great product, but LadyBug Brand is made by Sustane and has molasses coating on
the prill. Horticultural molasses contains approximately 15% Fe (iron).
Ironite has arsenic and is most useless. Chelated iron is much better for our
soils in this area.

"Sustane"... I walk past a stack of it in the garage every day and
never noticed they misspell it. ;-)

High phosphorous levels is a widespread, largely undiagnosed (or
misdiagnosed) problem for soils here in west Austin.. Stillhouse
Hollow http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/growgreen/stillhouse.htm seems in
most ways typical of west Austin neighborhoods built around the same
time, and virtually every yard tested in Stillhouse showed positive
for excessive phosphorous and potassium.

Compost provides soluble nutrients, beneficial microorganisms, organic
matter, humates ...and applied judiciously should be a core part of
responsible organic soil amendment. Depending on its composition
compost's nutrients may come primarily indirectly through the action
of decomposers. Some composts such as those based on poultry manure
quite high in soluble nutrients.

Compost should not be used on soils where phosphorous levels are known
or suspected to be high.

BTW, our Austin tax dollars have funded an extraordinarily useful
study, "Evaluating Potential Movement of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in
City of Austin Soils Following Varying Fertility Regimes: Greenhouse
Simulations". Open the Word doc at the bottom to see the tables:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/growgreen/fertstudy.htm .

I'm fortunate in that I have very deep soil. When we dug the pool, it wasn't
till we got to about 4 feet before we reached caliche.

Here it would take a weapon of mass destruction to reach 4'. :-) We're
over Edwards karst (I once discovered a small cavern while digging to
plant a Mex. buckeye). We have little springs and seeps al over the
place.

LadyBug brand can be bought at Home Depot. Sustane at Lowes.
Both 8-2-4 and have sufficient levels of phosphorous NOT to be
hazardous to our saturated with phosphorous soils.

I agree a product like Ladybug shouldn't add too significantly to the
problem. But any P will delay remediation in soils where high
phosphorous is a problem. It may also end up as runoff into our
streams and aquifers. Since phosphorus is rarely a limiting factor for
growth and bloom here it makes sense for most homeowners to use low P
organic fertilizers anyway. This year we'll use Sustane 10-1-2.

On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 06:16:33 GMT, (Terry Horton) wrote:

"Sustane"... I walk past a stack of it in the garage every day and
never noticed they misspell it. ;-)

Yes, well, play on words counts!

High phosphorous levels is a widespread, largely undiagnosed (or
misdiagnosed) problem for soils here in west Austin.. Stillhouse
Hollow http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/growgreen/stillhouse.htm seems in
most ways typical of west Austin neighborhoods built around the same
time, and virtually every yard tested in Stillhouse showed positive
for excessive phosphorous and potassium.

Yes, but it while it may be toxic levels, it is not toxically available unless
it is met with other elements.

Compost provides soluble nutrients, beneficial microorganisms, organic
matter, humates ...and applied judiciously should be a core part of
responsible organic soil amendment. Depending on its composition
compost's nutrients may come primarily indirectly through the action
of decomposers. Some composts such as those based on poultry manure
quite high in soluble nutrients.

Correct, and it slowly seeps in feeding the organisms which produce the waste in
the form of available nitrogen. This year I am planting white Dutch clover in
the fall with an inoculant. Nitrogen will always be available that way. Of
course the perfect lawn police in my area will frown, but I personally don't
care. I have the greenest garden around.

Compost should not be used on soils where phosphorous levels are known
or suspected to be high.

Why?

BTW, our Austin tax dollars have funded an extraordinarily useful
study, "Evaluating Potential Movement of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in
City of Austin Soils Following Varying Fertility Regimes: Greenhouse
Simulations". Open the Word doc at the bottom to see the tables:
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/growgreen/fertstudy.htm .

I'm fortunate in that I have very deep soil. When we dug the pool, it wasn't
till we got to about 4 feet before we reached caliche.

Here it would take a weapon of mass destruction to reach 4'. :-) We're
over Edwards karst (I once discovered a small cavern while digging to
plant a Mex. buckeye). We have little springs and seeps al over the
place.

Yes, that's why I said I was fortunate. The woman at the top of the hill on my
block needed dynamite to dig her pool in the solid rock not 10 inches down. I
should let you know I'm on the east side of 35 in far northeast Round Rock, not
directly in town or in the hills. I do live in hills, but not Austin hills!

LadyBug brand can be bought at Home Depot. Sustane at Lowes.
Both 8-2-4 and have sufficient levels of phosphorous NOT to be
hazardous to our saturated with phosphorous soils.

I agree a product like Ladybug shouldn't add too significantly to the
problem. But any P will delay remediation in soils where high
phosphorous is a problem. It may also end up as runoff into our
streams and aquifers. Since phosphorus is rarely a limiting factor for
growth and bloom here it makes sense for most homeowners to use low P
organic fertilizers anyway. This year we'll use Sustane 10-1-2.

Phosphorous is very stable and doesn't move in the soil nearly as well as other
leaching materials like N or K. There's far more atrazine in our water than any
other chemical on the market. That's the "weed" in weed-n-feed products. Me, I
garden. I weed with hands and gloves. To me, gardening is a verb!

Thanks for the info,

Victoria

Yes, but it while it may be toxic levels, it is not toxically available unless
it is met with other elements.

It is not available, period! While there might be an excess of phosphorous,
that doesn't mean plants don't need bio-available phosphorous to thrive.
Our plants respond great to bone meal. I'm sure if we test our soil it would
be high in phosphorous.

--
Victor M. Martinez

http://www.che.utexas.edu/~martiv

In article ,
(Victor M. Martinez) wrote:

Yes, but it while it may be toxic levels, it is not toxically available
unless
it is met with other elements.

It is not available, period! While there might be an excess of phosphorous,
that doesn't mean plants don't need bio-available phosphorous to thrive.
Our plants respond great to bone meal. I'm sure if we test our soil it would
be high in phosphorous.

--
Victor M. Martinez

You are partially correct (& practically correct). Phosphorous is
generally found as a precipitate because it precipitates with Aluminium
and Iron at acidic pH ranges and with Calcium in Alkaline pH ranges. So
under many common soil conditions it will not be mobile or available.
Because our soils are so alkaline it is generally found as a calcium
precipitate. If you do suceed in moving the pH to neutrality with sulfur
more phosphate becomes available but it is unlikely to ever really
runoff.

The fact that phosphate levels are of the scale is widespread: for
example in the book Gardening In the Humid South (written by two retired
Louisiana State Horticulture researchers one of whom has expertise in soil
science) they say this is also true for all measurements made in
Louisiana. They make the same point that you do: even though the
Phosphate is off the charts, that does not mean it is available. They
recommend side dressing. They approach this reluctantly because the
phosphate sources are not renewable yet do come down on the side of adding
some.

Another interesting point raised in this book is how difficult it is to
raise soil organic content. The example they run through is the
following: the top 6 inches of 1000 sq ft of soil weighs 46000 pounds!!
To raise the organic content by 1% you need to add 460 pounds of stable
gums and humates and this will take 4600 pounds (dry weight) organic
matter because the stable gums and humates are about 10% of the original
dry weight. In practical terms this would require a layer of 2 feet of
Oak leaves. Similarly a cover crop only yields about 230 pounds of dry
weight/100 sq ft . I know compost by wet weight is about 1000 pounds a
yard. Its dry weight is ? I would guess in the range of 100-200
pounds/yard. So for each yard of compost you add to 1000 sq ft you are
adding about 10-20 pounds of stable gums/humates and raising the stable
organic matter by .04-.08 % !!! The only way to raise organic content is
slowly over time.

Roland

Joe Doe wrote:
precipitate. If you do suceed in moving the pH to neutrality with sulfur
more phosphate becomes available but it is unlikely to ever really

You can't really change the pH of our soils to neutral for long. It would
be a losing battle. Most of us have some soil above limestone (alkaline)
and water with tap water which comes from the city (pH of 9-10) or even
worse, from a well (pH of 10-11 and hard with carbonates).

organic matter by .04-.08 % !!! The only way to raise organic content is
slowly over time.

We've been adding compost to our garden by the truckload. We've got a pretty
good soil now, but we'll always keep adding compost.

--
Victor M. Martinez

http://www.che.utexas.edu/~martiv

On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:10:57 +0000 (UTC), (Victor M.
Martinez) wrote:

Yes, but it while it may be toxic levels, it is not toxically available unless
it is met with other elements.

It is not available, period! While there might be an excess of phosphorous,
that doesn't mean plants don't need bio-available phosphorous to thrive.
Our plants respond great to bone meal. I'm sure if we test our soil it would
be high in phosphorous.


We are in agreement. That's why I grow native and adapted plants which have the
capacity to adapt to our calciferous soils and levels of whatever element is
overabundant.

Thank you, Joe Doe for this post. However, changing the pH of soil is a most
useless, exhausting task in high pH soils...as we have. The addition of compost
and leaving as much organic matter on the soil is what will feed microbial
activity, which in turn makes elements available, slowly. Slowly is how plants
use elements, and I've proved more than once there are myriad plants with rich
foliage, flower and form which will thrive in our soils.


On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 13:26:54 -0600, (Joe Doe) wrote:


You are partially correct (& practically correct). Phosphorous is
generally found as a precipitate because it precipitates with Aluminium
and Iron at acidic pH ranges and with Calcium in Alkaline pH ranges. So
under many common soil conditions it will not be mobile or available.
Because our soils are so alkaline it is generally found as a calcium
precipitate. If you do suceed in moving the pH to neutrality with sulfur
more phosphate becomes available but it is unlikely to ever really
runoff.

The fact that phosphate levels are of the scale is widespread: for
example in the book Gardening In the Humid South (written by two retired
Louisiana State Horticulture researchers one of whom has expertise in soil
science) they say this is also true for all measurements made in
Louisiana. They make the same point that you do: even though the
Phosphate is off the charts, that does not mean it is available. They
recommend side dressing. They approach this reluctantly because the
phosphate sources are not renewable yet do come down on the side of adding
some.

Another interesting point raised in this book is how difficult it is to
raise soil organic content. The example they run through is the
following: the top 6 inches of 1000 sq ft of soil weighs 46000 pounds!!
To raise the organic content by 1% you need to add 460 pounds of stable
gums and humates and this will take 4600 pounds (dry weight) organic
matter because the stable gums and humates are about 10% of the original
dry weight. In practical terms this would require a layer of 2 feet of
Oak leaves. Similarly a cover crop only yields about 230 pounds of dry
weight/100 sq ft . I know compost by wet weight is about 1000 pounds a
yard. Its dry weight is ? I would guess in the range of 100-200
pounds/yard. So for each yard of compost you add to 1000 sq ft you are
adding about 10-20 pounds of stable gums/humates and raising the stable
organic matter by .04-.08 % !!! The only way to raise organic content is
slowly over time.

Roland