User avatar
Hitched_Gibson
Full Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Conroe, TX

I'm gonna like you people. :lol:

And just to stay on topic, I'm trying to start organic with all 16 plants I have.

DoubleDogFarm
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:43 pm

Stella, I also notice you left our pleasant forum for a period of time. :wink:

I will not get in a pissing match with someone who is a much more eloquent writer than me. Your teaching skills show load and clear. If you are retired, you shouldn't be. It's obvious you need the mental challenge.

Maybe farmerlon will take your challenge.

Have fun

Eric

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

DDG, I always leave the forum over the winter. Not much gardening happens up here for six months at a stretch :D

HItched_Gibson, welcome to the Helpful Gardener. I am playing Devil's Advocate on Dixana's organic thread, appointing myself the voice for those who, like me, will, in emergency circumstances, turn to chemicals. Never will I use them on my garden beds, but I have taken out a lawn dandelion or two with them, and I unsuccessfully used them in the house last year. At any rate, so long as respondents stay on topic, arguing the points outlined in my original argument, and avoid sanctimony, this could prove a fun and fast-paced thread for all of us.

Charlie MV, I applied deductive logic to my determination of membership statistics. (I love deduction!) A) Last summer or spring, a member of this forum made some kind of posting deemed inappropriate by several parties; if memory serves, it was made in a peat moss thread; B) That member no longer posts in this forum, but can be found happily posting in another; C) I deduce that he or she left because he or she felt uncomfortable here, which supports the effects of intolerance and fanaticism points. This member is just one example. Several of the old members can be found posting in other garden forums, which is at the very least interesting. Tone may be every bit as important as content.

This could be researched by evaluating the last six threads in which the errant members posted, but to do so would entail a great deal of work.

Farmerlon, that's a tough one. You said you'd like evidence about heirlooms being available because of chemicals. I actually qualified this statement with the word "imagine." I am loosely basing this supposition on my experiences as a farmer's daughter in the decade prior to the publication of Silent Spring. To have validated this supposition with solid evidence, I would need to specifically research a particular tomato, and I don't have access to those types of resources.

I shall instead offer a hypothesis. Say, for example, heirloom tomato #1 was grown in large quantities for one of the major canners back in the 1950's, the era of untested pesticides like DDT that I believe to have been responsible for the death of my father. Say that this tomato was saved from annihilation by grasshoppers during these troubling times. That tomato would be available today because of chemical use.

Because it's all supposition, though, I can only say I imagine it 8)

Okay. That's what I've got. I'm enjoying having a free forum for the brief period of time this will last. Then I will go back to either stultified agreement or silence. And, hey, those of you who do use chemicals on rare occasion and still consider yourself organic gardeners, please feel free to chime in.

Charlie MV
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1544
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 pm

Stella, huh, whut? :D

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Charlie MV wrote:Stella, huh, whut? :D
Dang it, Charlie, now you've gone and made me laugh when I'm supposed to be at my most serious. I'll see whether I can't come up with an analogy for you tomorrow evening, when I'm bound to be fresher. Analogies make everything crystal clear.

cynthia_h
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: El Cerrito, CA

Well, I have been an organic gardener since my very first foray into the vegetated dirt (uh, "soil") in college. Which was...back in Atlanta in the Stone Age. Or maybe the Bronze Age; not sure.

Anyhow. It was forced on me. Yes, forced. I had no choice. And at that time, there was no Internet to look things up on in the dead of night (anyway, I was switching between full-time college and 75% job and vice versa, depending on which quarter/term it was, so the "dead of night" is when I did most of my assignments!), and precious few books, magazines, or even leaflets on organic gardening. It was beginning to be a glimmer in people's minds: maybe there *was* something to this idea that poisons on our food might not be the best thing for us??? :roll:

Anyhow. Within a period of about 12 months, and culminating on my 21st birthday--which I celebrated by eating a whole bag of potato chips on my own and coming down with a Monster Migraine--my life underwent a major constriction. I discovered, pretty independently--because doctors had no idea then about migraines--that perfumes, perfumed products, chemical sprays, intense sodium foods (remember those potato chips?), and other very common substances in the old US of A were incredibly potent migraine triggers. For me. (Each migraineur has his/her own personal list, but many of the same triggers are common to most of us.)

Therefore, when My Man suggested that we plant some veggies in the back yard of our rented house one spring, I said yes. He bought some "bug spray," too. Some kind of bugs (aphids, I think?) attacked our little plants, and he brought out the spray. I walked by the plants 15 or 20 minutes later.

It was what I've come to refer to as a "two-inhale migraine." Only lighter-fluid-treated charcoal (Quick Light types) achieves this potency. Kind of like the "two-step snake": it bites you, and two steps later, you're dead (Southeast Asia, some African snakes, I'm told).

So we gave the bug spray away.

I'm not going to burden anyone with the amount of time I spend making spam messages go away or sending PMs to people, trying to soothe ruffled feathers, or explain Member 1 to Member 2, or anything.

But I will not apologize for being an organic gardener or for trying to educate others on the advantages to self and wider environment of the same. Organic gardening--when I've been able to garden at all--has saved me, quite literally, from a lifetime of migraines and pain I would otherwise not have been able to pin down.

Cynthia H.
Sunset Zone 17, USDA Zone 9

User avatar
webmaster
Site Admin
Posts: 9476
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 12:59 pm
Location: Amherst, MA USDA Zone 5a

Little can be gained intellectually when everyone in a social grouping agrees and merely parrots the other individuals.
stella1751, from our posting guidelines. ;)
Discussions are Not Debates
...There's plenty of room for different opinions, and there is no need to "win" a discussion. On Helpful Gardener we encourage discussions, not debates. Discussions have no winners or losers, they are about the exchange of ideas, of which you are free to decide if it is the best or not for your situation.
stella1751, you are in agreement with the spirit of this forum. We are aware that people's needs are different and our posting guidelines require our members to be respectful of those differences. The ideal, as expressed in the [url=https://www.helpfulgardener.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2739]posting guidelines[/url] is for the civil exchange of ideas. No winners or losers. No debates. Just the exchange of ideas.

Yes the ideal of our mods and this forum is to do things as naturally as possible, to work with natural processes. But that does not mean we hold that as dogma for all to follow. As our [url=https://www.helpfulgardener.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2739]posting guidelines[/url] state, "you are free to decide if it is the best or not for your situation."
Moderators need to take some of the blame.
Blame? Moderators never edit or delete posts lightly. It is official policy that editing member posts is not taken lightly. The role of moderator is not about policing. Policing members is the absolute LEAST of the moderator responsibilities. Moderatorship is simply a higher level of member participation. That's it in a nutshell.

Moderator privileges include having a direct say in how the forum is run, having a direct say in changes, additions, and subtractions, and being able to zap spam. Moderators are community members who welcome the opportunity to take a more active role in it. There is no ego thing associated with it. It does not mean they are smarter than everyone else. It's simply a more active level of community membership.
Helpful Gardener has strict rules and one can not stray. If everyone enters the same funnel, we can not help but reach a similar conclusion.
Our forum for the most part does not have rules. We have [url=https://www.helpfulgardener.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2739]posting guidelines[/url]. They were created with the idea cultivating civil, pleasant, and useful discourse. That's it. The difference between a rule and a guideline is that rules are absolute and guidelines are not.

As for so-called "funnels," stella1751 and many others, including one or two of our moderators (mods who happen to use MG) contradict that notion. In fact, we have edited members who have wished fire and brimstone on anyone who uses MG. Regardless of opinion, the emphasis is on civility.

User avatar
Hitched_Gibson
Full Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Conroe, TX

I guess I have to go back to my F150 forum for pissing matches and playing devil's advocate. I don't know any gardening to do that here.

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30514
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

Ah, that DOES make me feel sad....

@Dixana: I don't know how many times I've literally clamped my mouth shut and hurried away in garden centers or more often in *big box store* gardening depts. When I overhear a query by a customer answered not to my liking, or ...well... Plain WRONG. Maybe I should carry around little slips of paper with helpfulgardener.com on it... oh, but self-promotion is against the forum guidelines. :>

But I did give away some seed potatoes and onion and shallot sets to my friends yesterday, and gave them a brief explanation of how to plant them. That was fun, especially when one of them started talking with her hubby and missed a part and got razzed for "not paying attention in class" :lol:

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

@ hitched gibson- that sounds like a good reason to stay! To learn enough to be able to be the gardening devils advocate ;)

@Stella - there is a HUGE difference between someone like you who uses MG soil from time to time and feels no guilt spraying the occasional weed vs. someone like my stepdad.
Let me further explain... my stepdad thinks he is the gardening guru, and his yard does in fact look like it belongs in Better Homes and Gardens, BUT his yard is so toxic that everytime I see their dog go out and eat grass it makes me CRINGE. The yard is covered in some variety of weed and feed 3-4 times a year, each plant and flower is coated with various types of MG fertilizer (there's a whole shelf in the garage devoted to nothing but MG and Scotts bags-it is not a small shelf). Because his yard looks like it does the neighbors ask what he does and he's happy to share his wealth of toxin using knowledge. They live 3 blocks from a river that travels the entire state and flows into the bay, which flows into Lake Michigan.
The result has been the young newlyweds who moved in next door turning what had been an old women's beautiful (and organic!) garden into chemical central and you CAN see the difference. There are more weeds, less birds, and fewer bees every year.
I'm not 100% organic and probably never will be. I use Epsoma products, wouldn't be above using sluggo if the beer stopped working, etc - but it makes me sad, and a little sick each spring when I hear about people killing their plants with overuse of fertilizer, thinking it's safe to use Sevin on edibles because the container says so, and so on. It also frustrates me to no end that the one women on my parents block who IS organic gets condemned for not having a green yard, having a compost pile in her backyard that "attracts rodents", and choosing to use an old school non gas pushmower to reduce her carbon foot print.
New gardeners are easily influenced and the people at the big box stores are more than happy to offer up their toxic solutions at $17 a bottle with no true knowledge of the long term effects.
You can play devils advocate Stella, but all someone has to do is visit the AACT thread and see your wealth of posts there to know when it comes down to it you'll be using the organic method first ;) and that's not what I'm referring to what so ever when I say "it makes me sad".

Charlie MV
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1544
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 pm

stella1751 wrote:
Charlie MV wrote:Stella, huh, whut? :D
Dang it, Charlie, now you've gone and made me laugh when I'm supposed to be at my most serious. I'll see whether I can't come up with an analogy for you tomorrow evening, when I'm bound to be fresher. Analogies make everything crystal clear.

Try to dumb it down a bit. I like one syllable words.

And unles MG is Marlingardener, I have no clue what we're talking about.


Dixana, give your step dad a few guns and a six pack and he would be the perfect South Carolinian.

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Dixana, I do owe you an apology. You certainly never saw that coming. It might be the teacher in me, but I like to see people think for themselves. I fear conformity, always have. Nevertheless, I greatly appreciate and admire your sentiments. I think it's wonderful that you want to change the world. My greatest concern, in a nutshell, is that the world must be receptive to the message revolutionaries hope to impart.

Additionally, revolutionaries must recognize that not all people want or are ready to be saved. Those who don't want to be saved will react negatively to your actions. Those who aren't ready to be saved must be coaxed along. Every action generates an opposing reaction. By pushing too hard, you can actually compel someone to the dark side, given the natural homo sapien reluctance to admit to error.

Odds are high your stepdad belongs to the former category. If he's been messing up the environment for that long, he will likely resent any interference on your part, and you will be wasting your time. Even worse, your very presence will possibly cause a twinge of guilt he will manfully gulp down while anger rises to supplant it. You will pay next Christmas. He will see to it.

The newlyweds next door have potential. In my opinion, setting an example beats the holy heck out of telling them. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that all he or she had to do was pass out some organic vegetables to change people's thinking. Perhaps once your garden is going and thriving and making their garden look like something out of a horror movie, you will see change.

It may be nearly imperceptible at first. One day, you will watch them drag two bags of compost from their trunk. Two weeks later, you will see them unload one of those compost machines. While out watching your garden grow, you will catch a glimpse of them peering over the fence, watching your compost tea brew. Three years from now, they will be knowingly telling you that Bud Light will not work on slugs, that Michelob 64 is the route to go.

You will nod sagely and say nothing. You will know you have made a difference, and that will be enough for you.

Don't feel sad when people won't listen. Tolerate and even appreciate the differences in opinion. Then, switch your method of communication :lol:

As for me, I have not spoken with my cousin's wife in over 18 months, not since she used Miracle Gro fertilizer on the organic garden I painstakingly prepared for her in 2009. I still get angry, just thinking about it. Chemicals are okay, again in my opinion, as a last resort. However, to waste a perfect garden and forever sully all that soil just so she could grow a bigger tomato and earn the admiration of her friends, well, she must be mentally unhinged :evil:

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

Marlingardener wrote:Lordy, Charlie, MG is Miracle Gro! No relation, not kin that I know of, and like most of the kin I do know of, I wouldn't claim it with a prize attached.

Yours faithfully,
Marlingardener
This made me literally LOL right in the Dr's office waiting room!

GardenNut101
Full Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:08 am
Location: England

When I was young, my mum was delighted with the incoming use of chemical pesticides. She reckoned that she could buy a load of brussel sprouts and not be able to use one of them due to greyfly infestation. Same with cabbages.

So there is a place for chemicals.

I just think that many of the illnesses we suffer now could be due to the cocktail of chemicals we get on our food - while its still growing.

Very little research has been done on the chemicals used in combination with each other. I do think that we need our governments to be more safety minded before they approve chemicals that are to be used for food.

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

This may be overstepping our non political guidelines, as if so mods feel free to edit and/or delete as needed....

The change in what is used where and how needs to come from the people not the government. If we wait for the government here in the US to step in half the animal population will be exstinct and cancer and other sickness will be more rampant than it is now The government is concerned with money and jobs before anything else. Shutting down and/or forcing change on a huge corporation like Scotts/Monsanto would be immensely costly in several ways.
The only reason the government got all crazy with BPA in plastic (just one example) is because of the sheer volume of revenue produced when Americans panicked and went rushing out to buy new tupperware, baby bottles, drinking bottles, etc etc.
Organic is cheap, can be done 100% at home with proper preparation and is not what the government wants. The people to be self sufficient? Good grief the world would come to an end!
Same reason the German version of the FDA monitors herbal products while ours does not. Natural remedies are cheap, prescription drugs are wallet draining.
But off my soapbox before someone hits me with a rolled up newspaper.....

User avatar
Hitched_Gibson
Full Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Conroe, TX

Sounds completely logical to me. But then again when an argument sounds logical, the other person doesn't usually pick up on it.

User avatar
farmerlon
Green Thumb
Posts: 671
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:42 am
Location: middle Tennessee

DoubleDogFarm wrote:... I will not get in a pissing match with someone who is a much more eloquent writer than me. Your teaching skills show load and clear. If you are retired, you shouldn't be. It's obvious you need the mental challenge.

Maybe farmerlon will take your challenge. ...
Nah, not me. :)
I've got no time for arguments or bickering.

I welcome a good discussion, and I've got no problem with well-spirited disagreements. But, when folks start to take things personal and feelings get hurt, I don't want any part in that.

Thankfully, I find a lot more valuable and positive offerings than negativity here at HG! :D

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Dixana wrote: The change in what is used where and how needs to come from the people not the government. If we wait for the government here in the US to step in half the animal population will be exstinct and cancer and other sickness will be more rampant than it is now The government is concerned with money and jobs before anything else. Shutting down and/or forcing change on a huge corporation like Scotts/Monsanto would be immensely costly in several ways.
It needs media attention. How about a million gardener march on Washington DC?
Dixana wrote:The only reason the government got all crazy with BPA in plastic (just one example) is because of the sheer volume of revenue produced when Americans panicked and went rushing out to buy new tupperware, baby bottles, drinking bottles, etc etc.
I haven't heard about this. What happened?

tomc
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 2661
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 2:52 am
Location: SE-OH USA Zone 6-A

If organic gardening is a goal, some use of pesticides, or, herbicides is to be expected. IMO its not time to beat the new gardener up for their choice.

I did have on another gardening forum a proponent of chem-spraying (and hybrid seed) become upset with me, when I told him why people would take the steps to de-hybrized known F1 cultivars. A-n-d while he might not want to do that, he might want to keep tabs on who was doing dehybridizatiion of cultivars he felt he needed to grow.

He felt that was at least disloyal if not un-american. I'm as sorry for his ill placed beleif as I am for that new growers.

Big agri-biz' job is to sell us ever more stuff. Not to supply us with what we need.

I'm going to posit, its up to us to not use what we don't need.

Will glycophosphate make me sterile? I dunno if it really matters at my age. it does stay my hand near to my grandchildren.

User avatar
Handsomeryan
Cool Member
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:57 pm
Location: Mt. Airy MD, USA

Dixana wrote:Organic is cheap, can be done 100% at home with proper preparation and is not what the government wants. The people to be self sufficient?
You have to remember that not everyone wants to be a gardener. The lawyers, firefighters, school teachers, plumbers, and other non-agrarians out there may not want to grow their own food. No one is stopping you from having an organic garden in your back yard but to feed the world population organic gardening is not efficient. It is more expensive and labor intensive and still has lower yields. The low cost of conventionally farmed foods is what has allowed us as Americans to enjoy such a high quality of living.

Don't get me wrong, I think some of the things Monsanto does are terrible but they have also contribute a lot to modern agriculture and keeping food cheap. Imagine if your food cost 2-3 [maybe more] times what it does now, what would you have to give up in order to feed yourself?

As for organic methods, I think it's a shame that people won't try a little harder to educate themselves about GMO's before dismissing them. I manage a research greenhouse and one of the things we are working on is tomatoes that are modified to be resistant to powdery mildew. The scientists have successfully transformed arabidopsis to be almost completely resistant but before they go any further they are spending years (and a LOT of money) studying exactly what genes they changed, why it works, how it works, and what other effect the modification of those genes have. If the goal is to stop spraying chemicals then we should embrace plants that do not need to be sprayed.

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Handsomeryan wrote: Don't get me wrong, I think some of the things Monsanto does are terrible but they have also contribute a lot to modern agriculture and keeping food cheap. Imagine if your food cost 2-3 [maybe more] times what it does now, what would you have to give up in order to feed yourself?

As for organic methods, I think it's a shame that people won't try a little harder to educate themselves about GMO's before dismissing them. I manage a research greenhouse and one of the things we are working on is tomatoes that are modified to be resistant to powdery mildew. The scientists have successfully transformed arabidopsis to be almost completely resistant but before they go any further they are spending years (and a LOT of money) studying exactly what genes they changed, why it works, how it works, and what other effect the modification of those genes have. If the goal is to stop spraying chemicals then we should embrace plants that do not need to be sprayed.
I need to be educated to what Monsanto has done. I've never studied its methods. Although I feel guilty buying my bag of MG each year (I'll be purchasing the 2011 bag on Monday), I'm not sure why I feel guilty.

I do wonder on occasion where all the bagged top soil comes from. I would imagine a small city like Casper goes through a gazillion pallets of the stuff each year. Do the manufacturers of top soil strip it from somewhere? If so, where and how to they replinish it?

As for GMO's, one or two students a semester writes an argument about GMO's. Because it is simple to argue for them (I.e, supply must meet demand, and agrarian lands are diminishing), I make them argue against them. This last semester, one student made an argument connecting the increase in food allergies to GMO's. I guess many more people are developing allergies to corn-based products, ostensibly the most altered of all the vegetables, than in the past. I didn't check the student's sources, but they appeared to be reliable.

My vet told me once that he is seeing increased food allergies in cats and dogs, too. GMO's fascinate me. I worry they will sneak up on us, that one day we will have an unhappy awakening.

As a farmer's daughter with dozens of farmer relatives and friends, I really don't think the world can be fed without chemicals and GMO's. I can't condemn them. In fact, I applaud them because not a one of 'em is a corporate farmer, and in many cases, the farm has been family owned since the sod was first broken.

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30514
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

Well, there ya go, Stella. have your students do papers on Monsanto and save yourself the trouble. :wink:

I came across their condemnable practices in college when I did a paper on how corporate giants affect 3rd World countries for a class. Have your heard it mentioned that some people feel USA is fast becoming a "3rd World Country"?

...and that's as close to politics as I'm going to get. It's easy to do with this topic, so watch your comments everyone. :wink:

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

Do I ever expect to see 100% organic food on the shelves in the stores? No way, at least not in my lifetime.
Can I/should I expect to see people at least TRYING to be more "green" and go for safer more natural ways of lawn and garden care? Yes. I feel like I have an obligation to my children and their children to try and do everything I can to make their world better. I recycle and reuse everything I can, try to reduce my carbon footprint, and avoid -if at all possible- the use of harmful chemicals that can hurt and/or kill plants and animals, both short and long term. So it does ruffle my feathers when I see or hear people abusing the chemicals.
Do I think products like Sevin need to be taken off the shelves? YES. But it won't happen if people keep buying it. At the local wally world the other day I overheard an older women telling another women that coating her whole yard :eek: in sevin would kill fleas better than the flea product she was currently looking at in the pet aisle AND that it was safe for her pets and kids once it rained. I almost fainted. This lady had a little girl riding in her cart. I waited for the older women to walk away and put my two cents in about msds sheets being available online and that you can get a pill at the vets office to keep fleas and ticks off your pets better than frontline. After some time chatting I come to find out this child has severe skin reactions to everything from lotion to laundry soap. What might have happened of she covered her yard in poison and let her kid play out there? I'm not sure I want to know.
And that's the big problem with the chemicals is that people abuse them. I have to confess, after fighting this HORRIBLE vine all last year I brought a chunk of it to the county extension office. Guess what? The only way to get rid of it is poison. I explained my POV on the use of them and this awesome guy spent a good 20 minutes telling me how to cut the tips off every vine I could find and dipping the frshly cut tips in a product like Round Up until they were saturated. It kills the plant without having to soak the ground in poison. Does it take longer? Yep, it could take 2-3 years of this process to kill it off completely. Does it work with less damage to my soil? It does. And it's using the toxic chemical in the safest manner.
The one under my porch does not seem to be coming back.

Obviously there is a place in society for these things, but when you get people who don't know or care how to use them and people like my stepdad who abuse them horribly, something needs to be done.

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30514
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

Heh. I think in that situation, I would've done the same and talked to the woman with the child....

The reason I usually walk away is because I'm tired of the "who is this and why is she talking to me" looks as well as being mistaken for an employee when All I'm doing is walking down the aisles (I,ve decided this might be either the way I dress -- though some of these places have uniforms and I'm not wearing anything like that) or I'm scrutinizing individual plants too much -- I tend to turn them to see what they look like or shuffle them around looking for the "best one" :wink:

User avatar
webmaster
Site Admin
Posts: 9476
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 12:59 pm
Location: Amherst, MA USDA Zone 5a

As for organic methods, I think it's a shame that people won't try a little harder to educate themselves about GMO's before dismissing them.
I agree, educating oneself on both sides of an issue is important- but I also think it's a shame to assume someone has not tried to inform themself. ;)

The GMO business model has (fairly or unfairly) created a reputation management problem for the industry. That may be contributing to knee-jerk reactions to it.

Should Seeds Be Patented and their Usage Strictly Limited?
A complaint about GMOs that has been made is that the seeds are patented and farmers are legally bound to strict rules on how those seeds are used. On the one hand there are benefits to the farmer and consumers, including increased yields and less chemicals used (although Roundup Ready crops are crops that are resistant to herbicides).

On the other hand it has been said there are increased costs to farmers using those seeds plus some litigation against farmers that has been claimed is unfair. One thing that is clear is that many documentaries and countless negative news stories have caused a reputation management burden. Which leads to the next issue.

Scientists and Big Business Have Lost Goodwill and Trust
Perhaps another reason why people have a knee jerk reaction to GMOs are the daily studies about OTHER supposedly safe compounds and products that are now deemed to be unsafe. These are things GMO companies and scientists have nothing to do with, but it's impacting how they are viewed.

Nuclear energy, artificial turf (lead), BPAs, cigarettes, artificial colors, preservatives, hydrogenated fats, [url=https://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/16/news/la-heb-meat-bacteria-consumers-20110416]antibiotic resistant bacteria in meats[/url], etc., etc., ad infinitum. Heck, wild fish on the east coast have PCB contamination and on the west coast some of the wild fish have mercury contamination. Rightly or wrongly companies not associated with GMOs have created an atmosphere of wariness in consumers. This is nothing new, but it has been growing and reaching a tipping point where it's becoming part of our popular culture. Nowadays it's not just hippies reading an ingredient list and wondering about the safety. It's everyday moms and dads.

Scientists, big corporations, and the government have lost some of the trust and goodwill previously extended to them by our parents and grandparents. People don't believe scientists when told the climate is changing and they don't believe scientists when they say the climate is not changing. Rightly or wrongly, people are wary when told that certain products are safe. This wariness manifests itself in misinformed decisions such as mothers not inoculating their children against diseases because of unfounded fears that vaccines cause autism. :(

Scientists and corporations will have to earn consumers trust back only this time it's possible that there is so much information and misinformation out there that it might take more than trying to influence public opinion.

User avatar
Handsomeryan
Cool Member
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:57 pm
Location: Mt. Airy MD, USA

webmaster wrote:there is so much information and misinformation out there that it might take more than trying to influence public opinion.
This goes for both sides. I'm new here but I've come across many posts here bashing traditional agriculture when it's brought up and using phrases like "toxic cancer causing poisons" to describe any non-organic agro-chemical. I find it hard to believe that everyone who posts to this website has an in depth understanding of organic chemistry and cellular biology to make such claims. Yes, its cool that people have access to the MSDS sheets for chemicals but there is more to it than just a page or two of basic data.

The average homeowner may be able to spray indiscriminately with whatever they can get their hands on at whatever dilusion rate they feel like mixing but I speak for all Ag professionals when I say that we take chemical application very seriously and many precautions are taken to ensure that what we spray is doing as little harm as is possible to the environment and to the people who will come in contact with our crops. I spend 40+ hours a week in my greenhouse breathing the air and touching the foliage, do you think I want to wallow in poisons or carcinogens?!

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

Very well stated Mr. Webmaster :)

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Two quick thoughts:
  • 1) I suspect I have confused Monsanto with Scott. After reading Applestar's a.m. post yesterday, I got online and researched Monsanto. It's all about GMO's, not Miracle Gro. After making this posting, I will research Scott. I respect everyone's opinion in this forum, so much so that I do feel a twinge of guilt when I satisfy my annual MG fix by purchasing an economy bag for indoor use. I think I should know, though, why I am feeling guilty :oops:

    2) Dixana, a friend once told me that the best way to get rid of an unwanted weed in a garden bed is to use an artist's paintbrush. Dip it in the weed killer, and paint the weed's leaves. I'm betting you have bindweed. I've heard the roots on that go 6' (or more) deep. From experience I can say that if you pull it, it just comes back. In my Shepherd book (I think), the author says that if you pull a weed with a super-long root like that every time it comes back, it will eventually die from nutritional deficiencies or some such thing. IMO, that doesn't work with bind weed.

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

I have bindweed too, I just rip that out whenever I see it and try to smother it with paper.. The vine is actually a runner from a tree that I can't remember the name of for the life of me. It has two different leaves on it and comes up ALL OVER including under in and around the foundation of the house, garage, and shed. It appears to have given up the porch area but is returning in force around the house foundation on the south side. Thankfully it is no longer going to be my problem because we're moving, I just wish I knew WHEN!

And yes, Scotts is a different animal, I think there's several posts here on HG about it. It's too hard to find and post the links from my phone though. Monsanto is big farms big corporations, GMO's, etc. Scotts is big box store, anyone can buy it type stuff.

Charlie MV
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1544
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 pm

Marlingardener wrote:Lordy, Charlie, MG is Miracle Gro! No relation, not kin that I know of, and like most of the kin I do know of, I wouldn't claim it with a prize attached.

Yours faithfully,
Marlingardener

[img][img]https://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd5/charliemv/iloveitwhenaplancomestogether.jpg[/img][/img]


This all makes my head hurt. I'm going to cook some compost.

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

I made my semi-annual garden run to Home Depot yesterday. It was hard to walk past the plants. The tomatoes in particular looked tempting! I'm starting everything from seeds this year, though, so I forced myself to walk past. Should I find I have extra space in June, I might return . . .

I bought two bales of peat moss, one bag of Miracle Gro, one 15 lb bag of bone meal, three bags of cheap topsoil for the bed I over-amended last year (the cheap topsoil up here is nothing more than pale, lifeless dirt), one gallon of fish fertilizer, a watering nozzle, and a brand new 100' hose.

Which purchase made me feel the most guilty? The hose. The old one, 75' of plastic, will wind up in the municipal landfill. How much petroleum was expended in the production of both? How much fuel was expended and air pollution caused in the composition, shaping, and molding of both?

Every item I purchased was bound by, contained in, or constructed with plastic. That bothers me considerably more than the peat moss and the Miracle Gro. Again, it's all in your individual priorities. IMO, the other purchases made a comparatively negligible impact on the environment. That hose, though, well, that's something to be ashamed of.

It could have been worse. I talked myself out of buying the three 6" x 2" boards I need to finish two new garden beds, telling myself I could piece together scraps I have on hand 8)

Charlie MV
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1544
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 pm

Stella, when I played "The Old Rugged Cross" on my harmonica my dog would give me the exact same look and head tip as the dog in your picture. Then she would sing [howl] along.

trinoc
Full Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:24 pm
Location: Tennessee

I'm so glad I read this thread! The hose uses, alone, would have been worth it but all of the other information I found very helpful.

This is my 2nd year gardening and hopefully it will be my first successful year. I am striving for an organic garden but am working really hard not to allow myself to become guilt ridden or even legalistic in my efforts. For example, I did not buy organic seeds. It didn't even occur to me until I saw them somewhere, after mine were already in the ground. I have not used any chemicals or enhanced soils but I have to be perfectly honest in stating that part of the reason is cost. Manure was MUCH cheaper than MG soil. It's been fascinating to me that it's cheaper to garden organically but it's more expensive to buy it at the store. I do understand it's because of the cost of the extra labor and lower yield but I'm excited to know that I will get the benefit of the high flavor of homegrown organic vegetables w/o the cost of the specialty markets.

I'm now eager to see how the different vibes play out across the board.

User avatar
farmerlon
Green Thumb
Posts: 671
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:42 am
Location: middle Tennessee

Handsomeryan wrote:... No one is stopping you from having an organic garden in your back yard but to feed the world population organic gardening is not efficient. It is more expensive and labor intensive and still has lower yields. The low cost of conventionally farmed foods is what has allowed us as Americans to enjoy such a high quality of living...
Is that really true?
It's very possible that I have a lot more to learn about this subject... but your theory gives me pause.

I think the relatively high standard of living currently enjoyed my most of the world, and the marked increase in human population, is the result of 100+ years of the utilization of cheap energy (oil). Agriculture has "rode the coattails" of that energy boom.
As that energy source becomes more scarce, the "efficiency" it provides may eventually have a much higher cost than organics. I'm suspicious that the true cost of "conventional" ag is already higher, if the hidden costs are factored in. Those hidden costs might include: soil depletion, environmental damage, obesity, nutritional losses, climate change, healthcare, and so forth.

Lately, I've been reading the book "Farmers of Forty Centuries". That's a refreshing reminder that the peoples of China, Korea, and Japan, fed very large populations for 4,000+ years, using totally organic methods.

To me, the term "conventional" seems odd to apply to our current methods of industrialized agriculture. Compared to the long history of human agricultural endeavors, the "conventional" methods in use now may one day be looked on as only a passing fad.

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Charlie MV wrote:Stella, when I played "The Old Rugged Cross" on my harmonica my dog would give me the exact same look and head tip as the dog in your picture. Then she would sing [howl] along.
First, my apologies to Dixana for this digression. Next, Charlie, that's my Dempsey as a young dog. The tilted head look in his case meant I was doing something he thought had potential for amusement. In this case, I was on my knees to get at a better angle to shoot the photo. As soon as I snapped the photo, he mock-attacked me, knocking me down and pretend-biting me while he laughed like a loon. Like most of us, he took his fun where and when he could find it :lol:

Charlie MV
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1544
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 pm

Soooo, you never tried to teach him to sing? It's been proven by scientists [somewhere] that singing dogs participate in fewer mock attacks.

User avatar
stella1751
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1494
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:40 am
Location: Wyoming

Charlie MV wrote:Soooo, you never tried to teach him to sing? It's been proven by scientists [somewhere] that singing dogs participate in fewer mock attacks.
A moderator or the webmaster is gonna get me for this one, but I just can't help myself. It is my life's purpose to ferret out misinformation and straighten records. You need to qualify the above statement. The way it is written, the reader can be forgiven for assuming that all singing dogs participate in fewer mock attacks, which isn't the case.

If you are talking about the study conducted by Rin Tin Les and Lassie Paul at the Weimaraner Institute, then an accurate summary of their study would include their conclusion that genre played a huge role in restricting mock attacks. Classic rock, Billboard Top 40, Country Western, Blue Grass, and Rhythm and Blues were indeed credited with diminished mock attacks and, in the cases of the Bluetick and Redbone Coonhounds, an increased tendency to lie in the sun while reflecting upon the meaning of life.

Bull dog mixes like Dempsey generally prefer rap, hip hop, or heavy metal. Les and Paul determined that singing tunes from these genres elevates the blood pressure, making these type dogs more disposed toward mock attacks.

Just setting the record straight, lest owners of dogs like Dempsey rush to make appointments for canine singing lessons 8)

Charlie MV
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1544
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:48 pm

Gawd Stella, you remind me of the time I tried to sip water from a fire hose. :shock:

Is there really a Weimaraner Institute? You're just taking advantage of the slow here... right?


And the moderators will always leave you alone if you mention Les Paul in a post. It's Rand Paul that will get you zapped.

Dixana
Greener Thumb
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:58 pm
Location: zone 4

OMG Charlie you never cease to make me LOL.

cynthia_h
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: El Cerrito, CA

Charlie MV wrote:Soooo, you never tried to teach him to sing? It's been proven by scientists [somewhere] that singing dogs participate in fewer mock attacks.
I should think the self-evident logic of this statement would stand on its own. For shame, Stella.... Although I do thank you for the supporting information from the Weimaraner Inst. Who could impugn Rin Tin Les?!

However:

If a dog is singing ("singing dogs"), it is incapable of participating in a mock attack ("participate in fewer mock attacks"). Singing requires good breath and diaphragmatic support, functions which are essential in mock attacks. Tsk, tsk. :wink:


OK. Back to the original subject of this discourse:

Farmers in the Punjab have stated that they cannot continue with the industrial, Western ways which have polluted their groundwater and dried up their soil, yielding a wasteland (source: [url=https://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/06/cheap-food/bourne-text/6]National Geographic[/url]):

"Today, though, the miracle of the green revolution is over in Punjab: Yield growth has essentially flattened since the mid-1990s. Overirrigation has led to steep drops in the water table, now tapped by 1.3 million tube wells, while thousands of hectares of productive land have been lost to salinization and waterlogged soils. Forty years of intensive irrigation, fertilization, and pesticides have not been kind to the loamy gray fields of Punjab. Nor, in some cases, to the people themselves."

The entire article looks at industrial agriculture and traditional ways. It also looks at biotech from the point of view of its advocates (a representative from Monsanto) and its opponents (e.g., Michael Pollan).

Pollan also forecasts the future trend of agriculture. In an [url=https://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/06/cheap-food/bourne-text/11]extended quote[/url] from the article (which I was pleased to read when it arrived in "person" at our house in 2009), here's what the author summarizes and what Pollan then says:

"The green revolution's legacy of tainted soil and depleted aquifers is one reason to look for new strategies. So is what author and University of California, Berkeley, professor Michael Pollan calls the Achilles heel of current green revolution methods: a dependence on fossil fuels. Natural gas, for example, is a raw material for nitrogen fertilizers. 'The only way you can have one farmer feed 140 Americans is with monocultures. And monocultures need lots of fossil-fuel-based fertilizers and lots of fossil-fuel-based pesticides,' Pollan says. 'That only works in an era of cheap fossil fuels, and that era is coming to an end. Moving anyone to a dependence on fossil fuels seems the height of irresponsibility.' "

I urge anyone with an interest in agricultural technology, food production, the future of food production, and other related topics to read the *entire* National Geographic article. Please be sure to read the related topics: the photo gallery and captions, "How we did it before," and other sidebars. The entire story is a stunner. It begins with the food riots in Egypt and elsewhere in 2008/09 and examines why the price of food went through the roof for so many of the world's people.

Maximizing our own personal production and sharing any excess (if we have excess) may seem like a drop in the bucket, but many drops do make a difference.

Cynthia H.
Sunset Zone 17, USDA Zone 9

(edited for punctuation error)
Last edited by cynthia_h on Thu Apr 21, 2011 12:51 am, edited 1 time in total.



Return to “What Doesn't Fit Elsewhere”