I am very glad To have found your channel!! I really appreciate how you push back in a healthy and scientific way. I have just finished Dr Elaine’s foundation courses and I am very excited to put it to the test! I’m not a trained scientist and I am glad that her methods at the end of the day can be scrutinized by what you see in the soil with a microscope and while there are many factors to a gardening/farming success, I think getting to know the biology is a huge step forward. I think you have made some assumptions about her work that are incorrect but I am not here to take sides, criticize, debate theories or pretend to challenge your knowledge as a soil scientist with my rudimentary education of the Soil food web. I do hope to device some experiments to challenge some of her claims and yours simultaneously. Once I have what I believe to be supporting data I would love to have your input to make sure my reasoning is not biased.
I'm not exactly a fanatic about the soil food web, but I think you take her "selling points" without a grain of salt. There may be areas with extreme examples of soil types that will always need work on compaction/drainage, and from what I've seen she has acknowledged this. Those types of soils can be improved, maybe not "fixed" forever with a one time application. They can be vastly improved, especially if they've been farmed for years until bad compaction and lack of microbes has happened. Weeds by her definition are fast growing, fast to create seeds and spread, and do not typically put many nutrients into growing deep roots. She has her own definition of weeds besides just "unwanted plants" basically. Her solution to diseases that come back every year is to cause competition for any diseases by applying compost teas/extracts with "beneficial microbes". I have seen people use this kind of thing to prevent tomato blights or at least curtail the disease (once noticed) enough to fight off total plant death even when their neighbor's plants all died at the same time from the same thing. Then half the other points relating to you saying "nature isn't even perfect enough." Well. I don't think she's ever claimed it is perfect. Just that diversity is key, and that nature will always balance out over time but we may not like the timescale needed to reach those points. I've always looked at her soil food web approach of making quick composts, adjusting the microbes, and applying as compost or teas/extracts as being the accelerated approach to no-till and similar methods. No-till from what I've seen when done on a farm-wide scale will take something like 3-5 years before seeing the best benefits after following it religiously. Her approach (which is much like Dr. David Johnson from NMSU's work) introduces the right mix of microbes across a field all at once rather than waiting for nature to do it. Dr. David Johnson did it by drilling the seed with a small amount of compost extract from his "John-Su bioreactor", and from what I've seen she would do the same thing with a compost tea/extract that has been analyzed with a microscope. I haven't taken her course but have watched a lot of her and I think it's best suited to accelerating current large-scale farmers into farming more organically/biologically (might be why the price is so high, she wants legit serious people to be her consultants).
I just found your channel and really enjoyed your video. I am in the process of purchasing a traditional western farmed, heavy gmo, very compacted mini farm. I plan to stand up a website and so very transparently the process to recovery for anyone interested. I find the cost of the food soil web course out of reach and assume Im not the only one. That said, I want to be part of the solution and not the problem. I hope you continue to post videos and educate individuals on options based on your opinion. None of us are right all the time, but these open conversations go a long way to learn how to get it right more often. Thank you again.
If you use an argument about her charging for courses, then perhaps look up the work of Dr. David Johnson who doesn't because he's paid by New Mexico State University. He shares everything for free, and has validated her work and more.
Elaine Ingham gas put so much content online that anyone could follow her system. The course makes one an affiliate, part of a support network. Which incidentally I’m not. I have studied topics I already know just to get certified.
Well your number 1 in my book, because you seem to be open to new concepts and you always explain the pros and cons. You don't ever try to SELL anything. That gives you credibility and show integrity on you part. That is why I tune in. The bottom line is you are open minded. Nothing is perfect in this world, everything is an experiment.
@@GardeningInCanada I don’t understand what you mean by “unless it’s foraging it’s all a mystery.” I just watched this video and realize it’s over a year old, but I’m wondering if you’d elaborate on this. If not, no biggie! The statement just seems rather unscientific, or even anti-science. I might be reading too much into it, and if so my sincere apologies. Are you saying that in spite of the progress we’ve made in understanding soil characteristics and function, we still don’t really know much at all, or that we can’t actually know much due to either our own limitations/the nature of our approach or that the subject itself is unknowable to some degree? Or something else entirely? Regardless, I find your content interesting and hope you keep putting it out there.
Your examples on crop rotation and the "bad " fungi happily taking over when diseased matter is left in place are so on point. And, we forget that nature is no longer isolated to do its pure actions. Examples are the introduction of invasive ppants and animals. Not all worms for example are good for the soil. Asian Jumping worms are quickly spreading and they are destructive. No amount of compost can overcome them and forest destruction is one of the biggest concerns.
It's not microbes persay that prevent weeds but having a fungal dominant soil shifts the nitrogen profile from nitrate dominant to ammonia dominant which favors late successional plants. She is all about fungal to bacteria ratios
Tanks a lot for this video (and all other too). Science without bias is very much in need this days...of neo romantic post modern obscurantism we are living on.
You are right, you can not turn sandy soil into black rich soil. I have been working on our sandy soil since 1975. I have used everything under the sun, used all kinds of manure, and grasses. And we still have about 1/2 to 1 inch of top soil. In our sandy soil area we have a very high water table. I originally hand drove a well point by hand 14 feet and got all the water I ever wanted. Because I am 68 now, we decided to have a well drill. 405 feet later, we finally had water, lucky they hit rock at 40 feet, that saved the casing cost for the rest. At 4 feet you hit hardpan that is made from granulated marble. The well point gave us clean, safe to drink water. If sand could turn to black soil, then Fort Drum NY would be a beautiful army base. The Army Corp of Engineers would have made the sandy soil black!
Hi, not sure how I stumbled on your site, and this is the first vid I watched and quite Loved it! Sounds like you have some history with another person's school of thought. The rationale I heard on your behalf was pretty cut and dried, and would align with my knowledge base and sounds realistic. The soil crop web is nothing new. I have incredible books from the 60's (before I started in Ag, lol)that have recognized this long before permies ever borrowed these practices. Many mixed farming areas of Sask., and Alberta decades back, used pretty ingenious methods that utilized whole-farm approaches that have primarily disappeared in the last 30 or so years. I worked as a crop advisor in S. Alta also consulted for ag.can, well, let's just say a few years back, and things have changed, not entirely for the better. I see some of the vids you have put out and can't wait to watch them. Both my parents farmed in Sask and it's great to hear a western Canadian perspective on soils and production. You have a new sub! Cheers T.
Ok 3 times through now. There is so much content to digest here. When I first heard a podcast from Elaine,.I was fascinated with her concept.(didnt realize she phrased "the soil food web"). After several podcasts, it seemed more like a fairytale. Microbes will take care of everything
Then I found out this isn't research, this is a product she was selling. When I found your channel, I was hoping you would cover this topic. Question, is water retention better with deep mulch or cover crops? The myceilial web sounds good to have. Do you have to have a perennial root in ground 24/7?
Yea great question I’ll be doing a video on the deep mulch here shortly. But for perennials 24/7 I don’t think it’s completely needed. Where I am for example the soil is pretty well asleep for 9 months of the year. 🤣
@@scottsmith507 Once innoculated, endo arbascular myco should lay dormant in the soil during the winter months assuming you haven't yanked-up all the roots and/or also destroyed all the hyphea by tilling. My understaning is that spores get released into the soil after the plant dies from end of life cycle, cold weather or lack of moisture. I grow perennials at the edges & corners of my veg beds to give the endo AB something to "wake up to" if I am slow getting out seedlings or direct sowing.
Very interesting. As a beginner gardener I have hooked on to the "forest" approach to natural gardening. You have made me realise that I need to look at this more critically. However, you mentioned powdery mildew so briefly that I didn't understand why letting the plant mulch to the ground is a problem. ???
The powdery mildew is more a sign of a unhealthy plant and poor growing conditions. The spore is gonna be there whether you like it or not. It will become visible if you have unhealthy plants/soil
Hi Ash! A bit off topic...the home compost I make is comprised of leafs, grass clippings and kitchen waste that’s about 1/2 coffee grounds ( yeah we like our coffee) I do not add any kind of manure. I know that the compost feeds the microbes in the soil that in turn make it available for slow release for the plants. Without a soil test for the availability of nitrogen ( never had a test that showed a nitrogen result) 1) can I anticipate having a nitrogen shortage ? 2) should I preempt it by adding a source at planting time? 3) what’s best to use at planting time? Thanks Bruce Some days are just getting nice enough here in Ontario to sit out back for a couple of hours in the afternoon sun and just dream of summer...
Well your climate right now sounds dreamy! And I actually wouldn’t worry about a nitrogen deficiency mostly because you have years of build up so with your compost your using reserves from years back. What you add compost this year your putting insurance on your nutrients for next year and the year after.
Great video! I so appreciate some critical evaluation of Dr.Inghams work. I'm curious to hear more about crop rotation in small suburban gardens. I recently read an article ( I wish I could source it, I can't locate it) that talks about how most harmful insects & soil biology can move 5 or 15 feet to access the plant that has been rotated in a small space. I can understand rotating commercial fields - but is the benefit there in a small garden where space is limited ( especially space with the right light, heat, wind protection etc for each plant)?
So in a small space it’s arguably impossible to rotate which is why cleaning up debri and composting it properly is important above all. I think the biggest thing is rotating as much as possible in order to prevent against amplified amounts of “pests” in the rhizosphere.
Thanks for the info! Im trying to learn what best practices are especially because right now I only have a tiny back yard, with just little two feet paths left between plants, and I am planting 94 tomatoe plants this year to start a small business. I really need to plant back to back as I can grow year round and its the most profitable crop I can grow...
About changing the sand into black soil : I heard that mycelium could break down sand particles into smaller ones (Loam and clay), and from there create a better nutrients rétention in the soil. In this regard, her claim would seem realistic. Maybe I have been misinformed, by I would love to have your input about this! (Thanks for the video!)
So sand can be broken down. The mechanism by which it works can include mycelium or even just acids released by plant roots. The issue is it’s working on a scale that would not be noticed within our life time.
I was currious if a lot of educational institutions get funding from big chemical companies and thats why they take the approach in studies primarily with chemicals or synthetic nutrients.
Maybe in the USA but in Canada it’s more so governments and boards. So boards that are common would be the canola council or SaskPulse. Both groups don’t really care if it’s grown organically or conventional they just want to advocate for it being grown
@@GardeningInCanada .thank you for the reply😊. I watched a little more and I wanted to comment before I lose train of thought. When you were talking about how she was mentioning weeds wont grow in a well balanced soil and how weeds are a plant too and you dont know what she was getting at? I believe the answer lies in the fact weeds prefer an anaerobic environment with less oxygen and perhaps a different ph level. So there are microbes that would flourish in these conditions, but in a well aerated soil with beneficial microbes working to create an ideal soil food web for I'd guess vegetables, cannabis and other things we farm. Where as certain other plants that we dont use or grow intentionally like weeds, or maybe wild flowers🤔 will grow better in soil with not much organic matter and microbes. For example. There are two sides of the house with new flower beds. The one in the back got general top soil, worm castings, compost, alfalfa pellets, kelp meal, glacier rock dust, wollastonite and humalite. Nothing planted because it was late summer or fall. The side of the house just had top soil. The back has no weeds at all where the side had maybe 20 weeds in a 50 foot strip. That has been one comparison ive seen indicating a enriched and soil with some good microbial life and food can help create the food chain to create optimal conditions growing specific crops and having a healthy "weed" free garden. That was long winded but I hope my point about " weeds like anaerobic conditione and beneficial microbes protect the plants and create aerobic conditionds that weeds don't like. Something along those lines, im a novice but im surprised you havent heard her talk about this specifically before.
Can I add a combination of fresh chicken manure and chickening bedding(straw, wood shavings) directly on top of bare soil during the winter starting g October/November? And let in decompose for at least 90 days before I start planting vegetables?
We in India used principles now propagated by for many millenia, but without following western scientific methods of validation and verification. Her methods work
@@GardeningInCanada yeah i grew in a few raised beds and some grow bags. With garden soil and a few bags of soil If I refreshed the soil with that method would I need to worry about what was previously planted
In a small scenario like that it’s going to be hard to manage & rotate crops. My suggestion would be care for them like you normally would and if you’re noticing diseases that it’s time to rotate out of that area. Something as simple as tomatoes in one area one year and then the opposite side the next year is enough to help.
I tinkered with compost tea and humic acid on my lawn. I made the tea from year-old compost that I made myself. It occurs to me that I have no clue what microbes are in it. Nor if the heated, molasses-fed brew actually multiplied the microbes from the compost tea bag.
Having seen some of Elaine's stuff, well there is no "one size fits all", and also it's way to complicated. I don't see a healthy forest going thru all that stuff. That said, I've seen my family farm in Sask, go from til, and til some more, even weeded the grain with rod weeders, not the no til, air seed, and their soil health, fertility is far ahead, and yes they GreenStar Harvest, and plant, so they do get results, so for me I try to replicate what I see in a healthy environment, cover crops, rotations, and soil sampling, and adding what is needed, and also tissue sample
@@GardeningInCanada my family's farmed near Neudorf, and Gramma always planted several long radishes, and peas, she brought seed from Old Country, Austria, they were like Diakon, but colored, and now what I think are called, Austrian Winter Peas, she even covered her Fraser Valley retirement home garden with them every fall after harvest was done, even between her loooong raspberry rows, seemed that long as a little boy picking with grampa. Gramma used to say it was better than the composted manure, in prairies they had, horses, cows, a turkey barn, she said the cover cropping got her into the garden earlier, her spud patch was always in the remaining straw pile. In Okanagon of BC I still put the garden to bed, til it plant Diakon, vetch, Austrian Winter Peas, and when we return Mid May it's ready to get gardening again, we cycle between AZ and BC, 2 gardening seasons. Any thoughts on the LAB ?
Thank you so much for all that you do!!! I am very grateful. Could you please comment on the DirtBooster by Anderson/Doc? Would you recommend it? I am toying with the idea of purchasing a bag but I am not sure of whether this would be a wise decision or not. I imagine hundreds or thousands of people are in the same boat. Thanks a lot.
Hey Ashley: I’m a forest ecologist and I can tell you straight up compaction happens all the time along with pathogen out breaks (natural). I spend a lot of time determine the eco physiology at work in ecosystems- it’s basically why we have so many species of different plants even naturally it’s to cope with many different physical parameters like nutrients. Yes microfauna is very very important but it also has to follow basic rules of chemistry and physics. I’ve never of the lady you were critiquing but she sounds a little crackers.
People love to say "take lessons from nature' or "do what nature does". It's really oversimplifying everything and always ignoring part of the conflict. Humans planting a garden is by itself contradicting nature. You aint gonna go into the forest or prairie and collect a ton of tomatoes and lettuce, You be hard pressed to find any food. In many situations nature might tackle problems in several ways and they can all be impractical for humans. It just a sort of pet peeve to me when people say "do what nature does" cuz truly that would actually mean "do nothing".
Yes, it is a simplification. Also, we must not forget humans are also a part of nature. And as a part of nature the whole exists to it's fullness when the parts work together, not against or excluding parts. The industrial revolution was not a natural phenomenon but one of greed/profit at the expense of some life. As it sits in current day, I believe we are living thru a shift that is & will correct greed/profit at life's expense. Human innovation will not be lost but be used to do this...a recalibration of past arrogance/domination of all life.
My father always says that whenever somebody says that what they've got is a very easy solution for EVERYTHING and that it is very easy to do they are either avleier or a fool. Of course there is always a true core to everything but we just schoulldn't belive everything.
I feel like this entire video was made cause you were offended by her understanding of soil scientist. I agree with Dr. Ingram because I’ve seen it work.
Nope not at all I don’t own the label of soil science and there are many ways to think about the science. I believe some of her theory is spot on and well done. But I also see flaws in other aspects of her work, the lack of crop rotation is a definitely one I have a hard time getting on board with because I’ve seen producers pay a big price as a result of not rotating.
When Elaine is referring to a weed she's referring to pioneer species of plants that typically begin plant succession, I think this is just a matter of definitions because I know people who Define it either way
Thanks for this. i also found it difficult to comprehend the idea that a weed would be distinct from other plants. I do like my dandelions. And my thistle. I think Inghams idea that nature will take care of things is true. But not in the way she may intend. That means our desired outcomes aren't necessarily aligned with nature's. She wont mind an extinction event, as that's just part of the process, as are disease outbreaks, as well as the ongoing biological warfare that's part of the evolutionary process. It seems that an idea comes along and it gets translated into three; the idea, then the extreme interpretations of it in opposite directions. That doesn't mean I think her ideas are to be tossed. Simply scrutinized.
Interesting thoughts. My understanding of her approach to weeds is that there are less expensive (at least in the long run) and less environmentally degrading ways to control weeds by addressing soil management through application of biological principles rather than application of chemical agents. I have not heard her suggest that the soil microbiome would differentiate between desired and unwanted plants. I have heard and read her suggestions regarding indirect intervention to create a less favorable environment for weeds by crowding them out or influencing soil characteristics such that desirable plants outcompete them for and starve them of available nutrients. It’s apparent to me that this does not mean soil microorganisms are choosing between goodies and baddies, but maybe I missed that part? For large-scale producers, it all comes down to what works with the least amount of labor and other expenses while (hopefully!) being both economically and environmentally sustainable. Characterizing her system or approach as imputing conscious choices to soil microorganisms is, so far as I can tell, unjustified. That’s certainly not to say that she’s beyond criticism; rather, that this particular criticism falls flat. The relevant question remains: are there biological means of weed control that solve the problem less expensively and in a more environmentally friendly way, making the operation both more profitable and more sustainable?
@@npmerrill I agree. The criticism falls flat. That is, if you're more understanding of a scientific method and approach. But I'm thinking more of how it is taken in the common language, which, unfortunately, is often poorly versed in the scientific method. What often passes forward is the simplest interpretation. As flat as it may fall in more knowledgeable minds, there is often inappropriate, in some cases ethical pronouncements, placed on a plant when it is called a weed. My attempt here is to point out that nature doesn't bend to our emotions. It's also possible that the term, "weed" is likely more effective when taken in a particular biome, in a particular geographical location where it applies to certain undesirable plants. It doesn't translate as well on a global basis. There are cultures that make use of some plants that may be considered a weed in others; dandelions come to mind, as an example. I'm sure you could think of others. I have my own issues with big ag, but it has more to do with scrutinizing the nature of institutions, and how they both help us, and destroy us. In that regard, Ingham's ideas may bring about a temporary change, as long as it brings increases in outcomes. But, the nature of institutions is to drive for constantly increasing outcomes, to which, if her ideas bring about a change, they too will have limits, to which, when institutions come up against them, will push for further increases, beyond which will drive them to once again institute more outrageous behaviors. This is a problem with institutions. It is always seeking increases. It cannot sustain a constant. It is always struggling to overcome encroaching competitors. It cannot rest on merely sustained operations. That's another issue altogether though. Sorry to bring that up.
@@RichardRoy2 So true re: never ending growth mindset. Nature will certainly correct this with one of those extinction events you previously mentioned, if we don’t beat her to it. We’ve had a recent taste of it with covid - a prelude to the kind of pernicious pandemic that will really knock us back. I wonder if real patience and true contentedness are achievable in spite of human nature.
@@npmerrill It's a very interesting and complex story. Something I've puzzled over for a long time. Well, pretty much all my life. I'm no genius, so I could easily be misunderstanding this problem. But I think one of the mistakes we make, often with a shrug, is that its a fault of human nature. This I find unfortunate, because it tends to throw us off a trail we might actually be able to make some headway with. For some time I'd been stymied by the constant reference to Human Nature as the cause of our misfortunes. But what bothers me about that characterization is the fact that there is only one quality that can be regarded as an isolating quality that separates us from all other living things. We're clever. I mean, I understand that that quality exists in other creatures to varying degrees, but we have this power to create fictional entities. But what most people refer to as the damaging quality is "greed." This, to me, became an interesting combination. Because, when you break it down to its basic element, greed is the drive to maximize the accumulation of resources, and the serving of the self. The problem there is that this is a pair of qualities all living things exhibit. All living things seek to maximize their resources in service of the life of the self. Those that don't have these qualities often end up on the extinction list. With that, it follows that any surviving creatures are going to have those particular qualities built into the fabric of their genetic makeup simply because they are qualities that make it possible for a species to survive long enough to procreate and pass that quality on to their offspring. There are often obstacles that limit the expansion of any species beyond certain certain points. Populations that exceed what resources are available can either achieve equilibrium with that limiting factor, or perish. Plenty of creatures, including man, have exceeded the resources of their environment and suffered from it, or reached a struggling equilibrium. We, the clever beings that we are, often have managed to overcome the limits of environment. While this allows us to expand in population and production, it has the effect of causing us to push the environment to new limits. Each time we do this, we've incorporated new technology into our processes that creates greater populations and demands on environment that make any failure of these processes have greater and more dire consequences. Our cleverness makes use of the creation of the fictions I earlier referred to. We create institutions which take on the role of performing repetitive tasks that produce positive outcomes. These institutions have a beneficial effect of allow us to refocus our efforts on other areas. But we neglect a problem of institutions to have secondary effects, and qualities. They take on a life of their own. They actually take on the qualities of maximizing resources and serving the self. I observe that such entities, no matter how noble the original purpose for their creation, reset their hierarchy to focus on their own sustainability. If you look into the operations of institutions, you'll notice this transformation. Looking at charitable institutions, if you look at how much of its resources go toward actual charity, over time, the amount of resources that are redirected to administration tends to grow disproportionately to the original purpose of its formation. This can happen to almost any institution you can think to name. Political, financial, charitable, manufacturing, judicial, military, etc. We are clever. But I think we still need to learn to understand the nature of our creations, as well as our own nature. We're like any other animal. We just haven't learned to understand our cleverness, our fears, and the fictions we create. I like to think our cleverness can come to grips with our limits, and the limits of our creations, and how to regulate them. Lately we've been overwhelmed with talk of deregulation, as though there were some natural process we can close our eyes, and let take charge. It often seems our cleverness can make us pretty foolish. Maybe we'll figure it our some day. I'm still hoping.
I always get the impression people try to do too much. The essence of permaculture is just Taoism in practice; gather the ingredients and let nature do the baking of the cake. Build water capacitance structures and let nature do the work. Same with the nutrients and the biology. You make the initial investment and with very little interference, the goal can be achieved.
A lot of great stuff, but please check out AEA's channel and see that just because spores are present does not mean that it will take in healthy plants at all. It's the terrain not the microbes yall.
Her idea of explaining things doesn't make since. I wonder if she is really talking about is how weeds naturally want to fix the soil. Clovers want to fix nitrogen. So maybe by increasing the nitrogen in other ways the clover will be less attractive to that area. Dandelions also want to fix the soil. There is an idea that if you let these beneficial weeds fix the soil they will naturally die off on their own when they are done fixing the soil. You are the redheaded freckled nerd (great combination by the way). I would love to hear your thoughts on this idea of weeds fixing the soil and naturally dieing on their own.
I mean that’s a great point and in some cases that very well maybe the true (such as the clover). But when I go into native grasslands smooth brome is out competing and totally removing natural populations of fescue. So it’s just hard for me to wrap my head about the idea
"Nature makes mistakes" Sorry sister, you are going to have to go deeper. Nature is literally the fabric of reality itself and is organized by definition, but thanks so much for what you are doing. Go to AEA's page and get your noodle baked (all puns intended) you will love it!
Thanks for your video. Regarding weeds, the mechanism she describes is based on how weeds ( short cycle plants, not just the plants you consider valuable) benefit from a nitrate rich environment, whereas longer cycle plants benefit more and more from ammonium, and ammonium dominated environments will result from the presence of a fungi balanced Soil. Whats your take on that? This video of the SFW better describes it than me: ruclips.net/video/pRIXUdhGptU/видео.html . And also, what do you think about her claim that you can go out and identify organisms in the soil with a microscope without a microbiology background? Do you think that's close to reality? Thank you
When speaking about weed suppression, does she not speak about the succession of weed growth. Meaning the earlier on in succession you’ll have a more bacterial dominated soil which weeds prefer and the farther you get into succession you’ll get a more fungal dominated soil. I was to believe weed suppression and the balance of fungal/bacterial ratios went hand in hand. Meaning a more balanced or even fungal dominated soil would be better at suppressing weeds. Does this sound right or am i off? Not being a smart ass just seeing if I’m understanding it properly
there are a decent number of studies coming out to show this is possibly the case. For example fox tail is a sign of high salt in the soil. plantain weed is a sign of a high water table. With that being said there will be specific microbes associated with those soils. Now the argument would be is it the chemistry, the physics or the biology that's causing the expression of certain weeds.
What is your thoughts on the types of weeds and their root structure hinting at soil conditions? Ie. deep taproots pointing to signs on compaction and a weeds with spreading root features pointing to erosive and loose soils?
YES YES YES! She seems so pseudosciencey with her claims of no compaction and weeds somehow being singled out and eliminated. Also anyone charging thousands of dollars for a course is always putting profit above honesty and results. It seems predatory towards people who genuinely just want to help their plants and soil thrive. This also says nothing about the weird fan bases that usually form around these types of people and how their fans with bully anyone who says that their system isn’t a perfect system for everyone to be using🤮
describing it as predatory seems unfair. if I taught karate isn't it fair that I make money for my lessons? if I have proven that my karate is really good is it predatory to charge alot of money for my classes. one could argue that my karate isn't good karate and that's fair but even teaching bad karate is time I out of my life I want to be compensated for. would it be better if she simply charged less?
By this standard, I suppose universities that charge thousands of dollars for tuition are “predatory.” I don’t mean to defend Ingham or the courses, but I don’t get loan shark or megachurch evangelist vibes from her. 🤷🏻♂️
In my feeble, lay research I find more and more contradiction in Dr Ingham's work. I am by no means throwing her "under the bus" with all of her concepts. The few accomplishments that she highlights required massive amounts of compost. She mentioned 2 million tonnes per acre (yes she used metric & Imperial measurements together often) to make President Bush's garden in Texas. With the same monolithic amounts for other projects. I am sorry but if a 5 ton truck is driven on the landscape there is bound to be compaction no matter what is grown and is being driven on. Compaction is inevitable. "To emulate - but there is no competition- There is only the fight to recover what has been lost and found and lost again and again; and now under conditions that seem unpropitious . But perhaps neither gain nor loss. For us , there is only the trying. The rest is not our business." TS Eliot
![Fungi and the Soil Food Web | Farming with Fungi Part 1 [Replay]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/07wQOHf2Hm8/mqdefault.jpg)
I am very glad To have found your channel!! I really appreciate how you push back in a healthy and scientific way. I have just finished Dr Elaine’s foundation courses and I am very excited to put it to the test! I’m not a trained scientist and I am glad that her methods at the end of the day can be scrutinized by what you see in the soil with a microscope and while there are many factors to a gardening/farming success, I think getting to know the biology is a huge step forward.
I think you have made some assumptions about her work that are incorrect but I am not here to take sides, criticize, debate theories or pretend to challenge your knowledge as a soil scientist with my rudimentary education of the Soil food web.
I do hope to device some experiments to challenge some of her claims and yours simultaneously. Once I have what I believe to be supporting data I would love to have your input to make sure my reasoning is not biased.
Yea absolutely send it on over!
@Emmanuel how has your experience identifying microbes been? Thanks
I’ve seen Dr Ingham’s work transform. She is truly a Jedi at this.
What did they transform?
I'm not exactly a fanatic about the soil food web, but I think you take her "selling points" without a grain of salt.
There may be areas with extreme examples of soil types that will always need work on compaction/drainage, and from what I've seen she has acknowledged this. Those types of soils can be improved, maybe not "fixed" forever with a one time application. They can be vastly improved, especially if they've been farmed for years until bad compaction and lack of microbes has happened.
Weeds by her definition are fast growing, fast to create seeds and spread, and do not typically put many nutrients into growing deep roots. She has her own definition of weeds besides just "unwanted plants" basically.
Her solution to diseases that come back every year is to cause competition for any diseases by applying compost teas/extracts with "beneficial microbes". I have seen people use this kind of thing to prevent tomato blights or at least curtail the disease (once noticed) enough to fight off total plant death even when their neighbor's plants all died at the same time from the same thing.
Then half the other points relating to you saying "nature isn't even perfect enough." Well. I don't think she's ever claimed it is perfect. Just that diversity is key, and that nature will always balance out over time but we may not like the timescale needed to reach those points.
I've always looked at her soil food web approach of making quick composts, adjusting the microbes, and applying as compost or teas/extracts as being the accelerated approach to no-till and similar methods. No-till from what I've seen when done on a farm-wide scale will take something like 3-5 years before seeing the best benefits after following it religiously. Her approach (which is much like Dr. David Johnson from NMSU's work) introduces the right mix of microbes across a field all at once rather than waiting for nature to do it. Dr. David Johnson did it by drilling the seed with a small amount of compost extract from his "John-Su bioreactor", and from what I've seen she would do the same thing with a compost tea/extract that has been analyzed with a microscope. I haven't taken her course but have watched a lot of her and I think it's best suited to accelerating current large-scale farmers into farming more organically/biologically (might be why the price is so high, she wants legit serious people to be her consultants).
You are such a breath of fresh air in your content and even more in your delivery! Please don't stop what you are doing.
I just found your channel and really enjoyed your video. I am in the process of purchasing a traditional western farmed, heavy gmo, very compacted mini farm. I plan to stand up a website and so very transparently the process to recovery for anyone interested. I find the cost of the food soil web course out of reach and assume Im not the only one. That said, I want to be part of the solution and not the problem. I hope you continue to post videos and educate individuals on options based on your opinion. None of us are right all the time, but these open conversations go a long way to learn how to get it right more often.
Thank you again.
Absolutely!
If you use an argument about her charging for courses, then perhaps look up the work of Dr. David Johnson who doesn't because he's paid by New Mexico State University. He shares everything for free, and has validated her work and more.
Elaine Ingham gas put so much content online that anyone could follow her system. The course makes one an affiliate, part of a support network. Which incidentally I’m not.
I have studied topics I already know just to get certified.
Well your number 1 in my book, because you seem to be open to new concepts and you always explain the pros and cons. You don't ever try to SELL anything. That gives you credibility and show integrity on you part. That is why I tune in. The bottom line is you are open minded. Nothing is perfect in this world, everything is an experiment.
Thank you! And when altering or trying to be better then Mother Nature it’s definitely an experiment. Unless it’s foraging it’s all a mystery
@@GardeningInCanada I don’t understand what you mean by “unless it’s foraging it’s all a mystery.” I just watched this video and realize it’s over a year old, but I’m wondering if you’d elaborate on this. If not, no biggie!
The statement just seems rather unscientific, or even anti-science. I might be reading too much into it, and if so my sincere apologies.
Are you saying that in spite of the progress we’ve made in understanding soil characteristics and function, we still don’t really know much at all, or that we can’t actually know much due to either our own limitations/the nature of our approach or that the subject itself is unknowable to some degree? Or something else entirely? Regardless, I find your content interesting and hope you keep putting it out there.
Yay my after-lunch lunch time!!!! Did I mention I ve been looking for science based approach to gardening so I am super addicted to your content!
Hahah I feel like an addiction to science is probably the healthiest of addictions 🤣
Your examples on crop rotation and the "bad " fungi happily taking over when diseased matter is left in place are so on point.
And, we forget that nature is no longer isolated to do its pure actions. Examples are the introduction of invasive ppants and animals. Not all worms for example are good for the soil. Asian Jumping worms are quickly spreading and they are destructive. No amount of compost can overcome them and forest destruction is one of the biggest concerns.
Thanks for watching! If you want to check out Elaine Ingham here is the link.ruclips.net/channel/UCSAU5ludwNyqMHBaR1ZfheQ
It's not microbes persay that prevent weeds but having a fungal dominant soil shifts the nitrogen profile from nitrate dominant to ammonia dominant which favors late successional plants. She is all about fungal to bacteria ratios
Tanks a lot for this video (and all other too). Science without bias is very much in need this days...of neo romantic post modern obscurantism we are living on.
You are right, you can not turn sandy soil into black rich soil. I have been working on our sandy soil since 1975. I have used everything under the sun, used all kinds of manure, and grasses. And we still have about 1/2 to 1 inch of top soil. In our sandy soil area we have a very high water table. I originally hand drove a well point by hand 14 feet and got all the water I ever wanted. Because I am 68 now, we decided to have a well drill. 405 feet later, we finally had water, lucky they hit rock at 40 feet, that saved the casing cost for the rest. At 4 feet you hit hardpan that is made from granulated marble. The well point gave us clean, safe to drink water. If sand could turn to black soil, then Fort Drum NY would be a beautiful army base. The Army Corp of Engineers would have made the sandy soil black!
Haha yea I agree. It’s just way to porous with a low CEC.
Very nice in-depth look at Elains soil food web and how it relates to real life!
Glad you enjoyed!
Wow this is what I've been waiting for!
Have to watch couple more times before commenting!
Hahaha looking forward to it!
Hi, not sure how I stumbled on your site, and this is the first vid I watched and quite Loved it!
Sounds like you have some history with another person's school of thought. The rationale I heard on your behalf was pretty cut and dried, and would align with my knowledge base and sounds realistic. The soil crop web is nothing new. I have incredible books from the 60's (before I started in Ag, lol)that have recognized this long before permies ever borrowed these practices. Many mixed farming areas of Sask., and Alberta decades back, used pretty ingenious methods that utilized whole-farm approaches that have primarily disappeared in the last 30 or so years.
I worked as a crop advisor in S. Alta also consulted for ag.can, well, let's just say a few years back, and things have changed, not entirely for the better. I see some of the vids you have put out and can't wait to watch them. Both my parents farmed in Sask and it's great to hear a western Canadian perspective on soils and production. You have a new sub!
Cheers
T.
Hello! And welcome hope you enjoy I try to take the approach of an open mind and anything is possible.
Ok 3 times through now. There is so much content to digest here. When I first heard a podcast from Elaine,.I was fascinated with her concept.(didnt realize she phrased "the soil food web"). After several podcasts, it seemed more like a fairytale. Microbes will take care of everything
Then I found out this isn't research, this is a product she was selling. When I found your channel, I was hoping you would cover this topic.
Question, is water retention better with deep mulch or cover crops?
The myceilial web sounds good to have. Do you have to have a perennial root in ground 24/7?
Three!!!! Hahaha
Yea great question I’ll be doing a video on the deep mulch here shortly. But for perennials 24/7 I don’t think it’s completely needed. Where I am for example the soil is pretty well asleep for 9 months of the year. 🤣
@@scottsmith507 Once innoculated, endo arbascular myco should lay dormant in the soil during the winter months assuming you haven't yanked-up all the roots and/or also destroyed all the hyphea by tilling. My understaning is that spores get released into the soil after the plant dies from end of life cycle, cold weather or lack of moisture. I grow perennials at the edges & corners of my veg beds to give the endo AB something to "wake up to" if I am slow getting out seedlings or direct sowing.
Fantastic overview, thank you!
Thank you!
Very interesting. As a beginner gardener I have hooked on to the "forest" approach to natural gardening. You have made me realise that I need to look at this more critically. However, you mentioned powdery mildew so briefly that I didn't understand why letting the plant mulch to the ground is a problem. ???
It’s because the spores over winter in the debris. I made a video going into more detail. ruclips.net/video/NXrsMRCQhus/видео.html
Spores are there either way.
The powdery mildew is more a sign of a unhealthy plant and poor growing conditions. The spore is gonna be there whether you like it or not. It will become visible if you have unhealthy plants/soil
Hi Ash!
A bit off topic...the home compost I make is comprised of leafs, grass clippings and kitchen waste that’s about 1/2 coffee grounds ( yeah we like our coffee) I do not add any kind of manure. I know that the compost feeds the microbes in the soil that in turn make it available for slow release for the plants. Without a soil test for the availability of nitrogen ( never had a test that showed a nitrogen result) 1) can I anticipate having a nitrogen shortage ? 2) should I preempt it by adding a source at planting time? 3) what’s best to use at planting time?
Thanks Bruce
Some days are just getting nice enough here in Ontario to sit out back for a couple of hours in the afternoon sun and just dream of summer...
Well your climate right now sounds dreamy! And I actually wouldn’t worry about a nitrogen deficiency mostly because you have years of build up so with your compost your using reserves from years back. What you add compost this year your putting insurance on your nutrients for next year and the year after.
Great video! I so appreciate some critical evaluation of Dr.Inghams work. I'm curious to hear more about crop rotation in small suburban gardens. I recently read an article ( I wish I could source it, I can't locate it) that talks about how most harmful insects & soil biology can move 5 or 15 feet to access the plant that has been rotated in a small space. I can understand rotating commercial fields - but is the benefit there in a small garden where space is limited ( especially space with the right light, heat, wind protection etc for each plant)?
So in a small space it’s arguably impossible to rotate which is why cleaning up debri and composting it properly is important above all. I think the biggest thing is rotating as much as possible in order to prevent against amplified amounts of “pests” in the rhizosphere.
Thanks for the info! Im trying to learn what best practices are especially because right now I only have a tiny back yard, with just little two feet paths left between plants, and I am planting 94 tomatoe plants this year to start a small business. I really need to plant back to back as I can grow year round and its the most profitable crop I can grow...
You got this!
About changing the sand into black soil : I heard that mycelium could break down sand particles into smaller ones (Loam and clay), and from there create a better nutrients rétention in the soil. In this regard, her claim would seem realistic.
Maybe I have been misinformed, by I would love to have your input about this!
(Thanks for the video!)
So sand can be broken down. The mechanism by which it works can include mycelium or even just acids released by plant roots. The issue is it’s working on a scale that would not be noticed within our life time.
What about oasis in deserts.
I was currious if a lot of educational institutions get funding from big chemical companies and thats why they take the approach in studies primarily with chemicals or synthetic nutrients.
Maybe in the USA but in Canada it’s more so governments and boards. So boards that are common would be the canola council or SaskPulse. Both groups don’t really care if it’s grown organically or conventional they just want to advocate for it being grown
@@GardeningInCanada .thank you for the reply😊.
I watched a little more and I wanted to comment before I lose train of thought.
When you were talking about how she was mentioning weeds wont grow in a well balanced soil and how weeds are a plant too and you dont know what she was getting at? I believe the answer lies in the fact weeds prefer an anaerobic environment with less oxygen and perhaps a different ph level. So there are microbes that would flourish in these conditions, but in a well aerated soil with beneficial microbes working to create an ideal soil food web for I'd guess vegetables, cannabis and other things we farm. Where as certain other plants that we dont use or grow intentionally like weeds, or maybe wild flowers🤔 will grow better in soil with not much organic matter and microbes. For example. There are two sides of the house with new flower beds. The one in the back got general top soil, worm castings, compost, alfalfa pellets, kelp meal, glacier rock dust, wollastonite and humalite. Nothing planted because it was late summer or fall. The side of the house just had top soil. The back has no weeds at all where the side had maybe 20 weeds in a 50 foot strip. That has been one comparison ive seen indicating a enriched and soil with some good microbial life and food can help create the food chain to create optimal conditions growing specific crops and having a healthy "weed" free garden.
That was long winded but I hope my point about " weeds like anaerobic conditione and beneficial microbes protect the plants and create aerobic conditionds that weeds don't like. Something along those lines, im a novice but im surprised you havent heard her talk about this specifically before.
yeah. like if you customize your soil for acid loving plants you won't get high ph plants flourishing in that area.
Can I add a combination of fresh chicken manure and chickening bedding(straw, wood shavings) directly on top of bare soil during the winter starting g October/November? And let in decompose for at least 90 days before I start planting vegetables?
We in India used principles now propagated by for many millenia, but without following western scientific methods of validation and verification. Her methods work
That is awesome
Any tips for veggie rotation for a beginner gardener ? I saw your video on pouring soil out to reuse is that sufficient to solve the problem
Yea absolutely! Are you in garden beds with soil or soilless medium (peat-moss based)
@@GardeningInCanada yeah i grew in a few raised beds and some grow bags. With garden soil and a few bags of soil
If I refreshed the soil with that method would I need to worry about what was previously planted
In a small scenario like that it’s going to be hard to manage & rotate crops. My suggestion would be care for them like you normally would and if you’re noticing diseases that it’s time to rotate out of that area. Something as simple as tomatoes in one area one year and then the opposite side the next year is enough to help.
I tinkered with compost tea and humic acid on my lawn. I made the tea from year-old compost that I made myself. It occurs to me that I have no clue what microbes are in it. Nor if the heated, molasses-fed brew actually multiplied the microbes from the compost tea bag.
Having seen some of Elaine's stuff, well there is no "one size fits all", and also it's way to complicated. I don't see a healthy forest going thru all that stuff.
That said, I've seen my family farm in Sask, go from til, and til some more, even weeded the grain with rod weeders, not the no til, air seed, and their soil health, fertility is far ahead, and yes they GreenStar Harvest, and plant, so they do get results, so for me I try to replicate what I see in a healthy environment, cover crops, rotations, and soil sampling, and adding what is needed, and also tissue sample
Cover crops are so difficult in sask 😢
@@GardeningInCanada my family's farmed near Neudorf, and Gramma always planted several long radishes, and peas, she brought seed from Old Country, Austria, they were like Diakon, but colored, and now what I think are called, Austrian Winter Peas, she even covered her Fraser Valley retirement home garden with them every fall after harvest was done, even between her loooong raspberry rows, seemed that long as a little boy picking with grampa.
Gramma used to say it was better than the composted manure, in prairies they had, horses, cows, a turkey barn, she said the cover cropping got her into the garden earlier, her spud patch was always in the remaining straw pile.
In Okanagon of BC I still put the garden to bed, til it plant Diakon, vetch, Austrian Winter Peas, and when we return Mid May it's ready to get gardening again, we cycle between AZ and BC, 2 gardening seasons.
Any thoughts on the LAB ?
Ash thanks for the excellent discussion, dare I say rebuttal...
Bruce zone 6b ontario
Hahaha dun dun dunn
Thank you so much for all that you do!!! I am very grateful. Could you please comment on the DirtBooster by Anderson/Doc? Would you recommend it? I am toying with the idea of purchasing a bag but I am not sure of whether this would be a wise decision or not. I imagine hundreds or thousands of people are in the same boat. Thanks a lot.
I handle transplanting with just setting the fabric pot inside a larger fabric pot, my little transplant hack
Hey Ashley: I’m a forest ecologist and I can tell you straight up compaction happens all the time along with pathogen out breaks (natural). I spend a lot of time determine the eco physiology at work in ecosystems- it’s basically why we have so many species of different plants even naturally it’s to cope with many different physical parameters like nutrients. Yes microfauna is very very important but it also has to follow basic rules of chemistry and physics. I’ve never of the lady you were critiquing but she sounds a little crackers.
Perfect definition of weed
People love to say "take lessons from nature' or "do what nature does". It's really oversimplifying everything and always ignoring part of the conflict. Humans planting a garden is by itself contradicting nature. You aint gonna go into the forest or prairie and collect a ton of tomatoes and lettuce, You be hard pressed to find any food. In many situations nature might tackle problems in several ways and they can all be impractical for humans. It just a sort of pet peeve to me when people say "do what nature does" cuz truly that would actually mean "do nothing".
Yea I always think of that too. The earth and nature don’t naturally sustain the current populations
Yes, it is a simplification. Also, we must not forget humans are also a part of nature. And as a part of nature the whole exists to it's fullness when the parts work together, not against or excluding parts. The industrial revolution was not a natural phenomenon but one of greed/profit at the expense of some life. As it sits in current day, I believe we are living thru a shift that is & will correct greed/profit at life's expense. Human innovation will not be lost but be used to do this...a recalibration of past arrogance/domination of all life.
This is an awesome video!!
🥳 glad you enjoyed it!
@@GardeningInCanada yes we did thanks much love xoxox
YAY Xoxo
Please remember us in Zone 3 & 4 in the USA ....
I haven’t forgotten i promise ❤️ I’m zone 3 Canada and a zone 4 USA
My father always says that whenever somebody says that what they've got is a very easy solution for EVERYTHING and that it is very easy to do they are either avleier or a fool.
Of course there is always a true core to everything but we just schoulldn't belive everything.
I feel like this entire video was made cause you were offended by her understanding of soil scientist. I agree with Dr. Ingram because I’ve seen it work.
Nope not at all I don’t own the label of soil science and there are many ways to think about the science. I believe some of her theory is spot on and well done. But I also see flaws in other aspects of her work, the lack of crop rotation is a definitely one I have a hard time getting on board with because I’ve seen producers pay a big price as a result of not rotating.
May I ask how have you seen it work?
When Elaine is referring to a weed she's referring to pioneer species of plants that typically begin plant succession, I think this is just a matter of definitions because I know people who Define it either way
Thanks for this. i also found it difficult to comprehend the idea that a weed would be distinct from other plants. I do like my dandelions. And my thistle. I think Inghams idea that nature will take care of things is true. But not in the way she may intend. That means our desired outcomes aren't necessarily aligned with nature's. She wont mind an extinction event, as that's just part of the process, as are disease outbreaks, as well as the ongoing biological warfare that's part of the evolutionary process. It seems that an idea comes along and it gets translated into three; the idea, then the extreme interpretations of it in opposite directions. That doesn't mean I think her ideas are to be tossed. Simply scrutinized.
Interesting thoughts. My understanding of her approach to weeds is that there are less expensive (at least in the long run) and less environmentally degrading ways to control weeds by addressing soil management through application of biological principles rather than application of chemical agents. I have not heard her suggest that the soil microbiome would differentiate between desired and unwanted plants. I have heard and read her suggestions regarding indirect intervention to create a less favorable environment for weeds by crowding them out or influencing soil characteristics such that desirable plants outcompete them for and starve them of available nutrients. It’s apparent to me that this does not mean soil microorganisms are choosing between goodies and baddies, but maybe I missed that part?
For large-scale producers, it all comes down to what works with the least amount of labor and other expenses while (hopefully!) being both economically and environmentally sustainable.
Characterizing her system or approach as imputing conscious choices to soil microorganisms is, so far as I can tell, unjustified. That’s certainly not to say that she’s beyond criticism; rather, that this particular criticism falls flat. The relevant question remains: are there biological means of weed control that solve the problem less expensively and in a more environmentally friendly way, making the operation both more profitable and more sustainable?
@@npmerrill I agree. The criticism falls flat. That is, if you're more understanding of a scientific method and approach. But I'm thinking more of how it is taken in the common language, which, unfortunately, is often poorly versed in the scientific method. What often passes forward is the simplest interpretation. As flat as it may fall in more knowledgeable minds, there is often inappropriate, in some cases ethical pronouncements, placed on a plant when it is called a weed. My attempt here is to point out that nature doesn't bend to our emotions. It's also possible that the term, "weed" is likely more effective when taken in a particular biome, in a particular geographical location where it applies to certain undesirable plants. It doesn't translate as well on a global basis. There are cultures that make use of some plants that may be considered a weed in others; dandelions come to mind, as an example. I'm sure you could think of others.
I have my own issues with big ag, but it has more to do with scrutinizing the nature of institutions, and how they both help us, and destroy us. In that regard, Ingham's ideas may bring about a temporary change, as long as it brings increases in outcomes. But, the nature of institutions is to drive for constantly increasing outcomes, to which, if her ideas bring about a change, they too will have limits, to which, when institutions come up against them, will push for further increases, beyond which will drive them to once again institute more outrageous behaviors. This is a problem with institutions. It is always seeking increases. It cannot sustain a constant. It is always struggling to overcome encroaching competitors. It cannot rest on merely sustained operations.
That's another issue altogether though. Sorry to bring that up.
@@RichardRoy2 So true re: never ending growth mindset. Nature will certainly correct this with one of those extinction events you previously mentioned, if we don’t beat her to it. We’ve had a recent taste of it with covid - a prelude to the kind of pernicious pandemic that will really knock us back. I wonder if real patience and true contentedness are achievable in spite of human nature.
@@npmerrill It's a very interesting and complex story. Something I've puzzled over for a long time. Well, pretty much all my life. I'm no genius, so I could easily be misunderstanding this problem. But I think one of the mistakes we make, often with a shrug, is that its a fault of human nature. This I find unfortunate, because it tends to throw us off a trail we might actually be able to make some headway with.
For some time I'd been stymied by the constant reference to Human Nature as the cause of our misfortunes. But what bothers me about that characterization is the fact that there is only one quality that can be regarded as an isolating quality that separates us from all other living things. We're clever. I mean, I understand that that quality exists in other creatures to varying degrees, but we have this power to create fictional entities. But what most people refer to as the damaging quality is "greed." This, to me, became an interesting combination. Because, when you break it down to its basic element, greed is the drive to maximize the accumulation of resources, and the serving of the self. The problem there is that this is a pair of qualities all living things exhibit. All living things seek to maximize their resources in service of the life of the self. Those that don't have these qualities often end up on the extinction list. With that, it follows that any surviving creatures are going to have those particular qualities built into the fabric of their genetic makeup simply because they are qualities that make it possible for a species to survive long enough to procreate and pass that quality on to their offspring.
There are often obstacles that limit the expansion of any species beyond certain certain points. Populations that exceed what resources are available can either achieve equilibrium with that limiting factor, or perish. Plenty of creatures, including man, have exceeded the resources of their environment and suffered from it, or reached a struggling equilibrium. We, the clever beings that we are, often have managed to overcome the limits of environment. While this allows us to expand in population and production, it has the effect of causing us to push the environment to new limits. Each time we do this, we've incorporated new technology into our processes that creates greater populations and demands on environment that make any failure of these processes have greater and more dire consequences.
Our cleverness makes use of the creation of the fictions I earlier referred to. We create institutions which take on the role of performing repetitive tasks that produce positive outcomes. These institutions have a beneficial effect of allow us to refocus our efforts on other areas. But we neglect a problem of institutions to have secondary effects, and qualities. They take on a life of their own. They actually take on the qualities of maximizing resources and serving the self. I observe that such entities, no matter how noble the original purpose for their creation, reset their hierarchy to focus on their own sustainability. If you look into the operations of institutions, you'll notice this transformation. Looking at charitable institutions, if you look at how much of its resources go toward actual charity, over time, the amount of resources that are redirected to administration tends to grow disproportionately to the original purpose of its formation. This can happen to almost any institution you can think to name. Political, financial, charitable, manufacturing, judicial, military, etc.
We are clever. But I think we still need to learn to understand the nature of our creations, as well as our own nature. We're like any other animal. We just haven't learned to understand our cleverness, our fears, and the fictions we create. I like to think our cleverness can come to grips with our limits, and the limits of our creations, and how to regulate them. Lately we've been overwhelmed with talk of deregulation, as though there were some natural process we can close our eyes, and let take charge. It often seems our cleverness can make us pretty foolish. Maybe we'll figure it our some day. I'm still hoping.
@@RichardRoy2 Appreciate the convo. Much food for thought. I’m hopeful, too, but often less optimistic than I’d prefer to be.
I always get the impression people try to do too much. The essence of permaculture is just Taoism in practice; gather the ingredients and let nature do the baking of the cake. Build water capacitance structures and let nature do the work. Same with the nutrients and the biology. You make the initial investment and with very little interference, the goal can be achieved.
Yea I think you’re right nature is much smarter than we give it Credit for
A lot of great stuff, but please check out AEA's channel and see that just because spores are present does not mean that it will take in healthy plants at all. It's the terrain not the microbes yall.
I want to know what your input is in increasing the gardening community of cannabis!
❤❤
❤️❤️❤️
Hi could you also please talk about humic acid?
Yea absolutely!
Thats bern on my mind too.
Haha uh oh! That’s two people so now I have to do it!
Her idea of explaining things doesn't make since. I wonder if she is really talking about is how weeds naturally want to fix the soil. Clovers want to fix nitrogen. So maybe by increasing the nitrogen in other ways the clover will be less attractive to that area. Dandelions also want to fix the soil. There is an idea that if you let these beneficial weeds fix the soil they will naturally die off on their own when they are done fixing the soil. You are the redheaded freckled nerd (great combination by the way). I would love to hear your thoughts on this idea of weeds fixing the soil and naturally dieing on their own.
I mean that’s a great point and in some cases that very well maybe the true (such as the clover). But when I go into native grasslands smooth brome is out competing and totally removing natural populations of fescue. So it’s just hard for me to wrap my head about the idea
who is 'her'?
Eliane Ingham she’s the teacher/instructor behind the concept. Very smart women.
@@GardeningInCanada
He talks about different weeds and what they can be a sign of.
ruclips.net/video/bpEy-Mpm6AI/видео.html
Thanks! We studied this in ecology courses at university and there is some merit to the concept that certain “weeds” grow in certain scenarios.
I was watching her and was like I don't trust this lady I'm gonna see what Ashley says lol
"Nature makes mistakes" Sorry sister, you are going to have to go deeper. Nature is literally the fabric of reality itself and is organized by definition, but thanks so much for what you are doing. Go to AEA's page and get your noodle baked (all puns intended) you will love it!
If a system's primary input is giant piles of cash from new humans every day, then that is by definition a bad system!
Haha 😆 yea
Thanks for your video. Regarding weeds, the mechanism she describes is based on how weeds ( short cycle plants, not just the plants you consider valuable) benefit from a nitrate rich environment, whereas longer cycle plants benefit more and more from ammonium, and ammonium dominated environments will result from the presence of a fungi balanced Soil. Whats your take on that? This video of the SFW better describes it than me: ruclips.net/video/pRIXUdhGptU/видео.html . And also, what do you think about her claim that you can go out and identify organisms in the soil with a microscope without a microbiology background? Do you think that's close to reality? Thank you
When speaking about weed suppression, does she not speak about the succession of weed growth. Meaning the earlier on in succession you’ll have a more bacterial dominated soil which weeds prefer and the farther you get into succession you’ll get a more fungal dominated soil. I was to believe weed suppression and the balance of fungal/bacterial ratios went hand in hand. Meaning a more balanced or even fungal dominated soil would be better at suppressing weeds. Does this sound right or am i off? Not being a smart ass just seeing if I’m understanding it properly
there are a decent number of studies coming out to show this is possibly the case. For example fox tail is a sign of high salt in the soil. plantain weed is a sign of a high water table. With that being said there will be specific microbes associated with those soils. Now the argument would be is it the chemistry, the physics or the biology that's causing the expression of certain weeds.
What is your thoughts on the types of weeds and their root structure hinting at soil conditions? Ie. deep taproots pointing to signs on compaction and a weeds with spreading root features pointing to erosive and loose soils?
@@evangrills4080 very interesting observation
“I lean” away from this religion, but it has its place as an agenda driven explanation. ..
Hahah that’s a good way of wording it
I’d rather listened more from the seasoned veteran than an educated neophyte.
YES YES YES! She seems so pseudosciencey with her claims of no compaction and weeds somehow being singled out and eliminated. Also anyone charging thousands of dollars for a course is always putting profit above honesty and results. It seems predatory towards people who genuinely just want to help their plants and soil thrive. This also says nothing about the weird fan bases that usually form around these types of people and how their fans with bully anyone who says that their system isn’t a perfect system for everyone to be using🤮
Haha this is very well written I enjoy every part of it because it’s true. Predatory is a great way of saying it.
describing it as predatory seems unfair. if I taught karate isn't it fair that I make money for my lessons? if I have proven that my karate is really good is it predatory to charge alot of money for my classes. one could argue that my karate isn't good karate and that's fair but even teaching bad karate is time I out of my life I want to be compensated for. would it be better if she simply charged less?
By this standard, I suppose universities that charge thousands of dollars for tuition are “predatory.” I don’t mean to defend Ingham or the courses, but I don’t get loan shark or megachurch evangelist vibes from her. 🤷🏻♂️
In my feeble, lay research I find more and more contradiction in Dr Ingham's work. I am by no means throwing her "under the bus" with all of her concepts. The few accomplishments that she highlights required massive amounts of compost. She mentioned 2 million tonnes per acre (yes she used metric & Imperial measurements together often) to make President Bush's garden in Texas. With the same monolithic amounts for other projects.
I am sorry but if a 5 ton truck is driven on the landscape there is bound to be compaction no matter what is grown and is being driven on. Compaction is inevitable.
"To emulate - but there is no competition- There is only the fight to recover what has been lost and found and lost again and again; and now under conditions that seem unpropitious . But perhaps neither gain nor loss. For us , there is only the trying. The rest is not our business." TS Eliot
I didn’t even know she worked on bush’s garden that’s really interesting