Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

I have been to a lot of reading AP, permaculture, SWC, wicking beds, hydroponics. All of them said "you need to put compost, fertilizer etc. I'm a keen observer of nature and cant help but ask "is nature unfair"? because in nature you see grassland and bushes where you can hardly squeeze in. and to think that these plants grow year after year after year without anyone putting anything in it I mean nothing not even seeds water compost nada. Then comes man clear the bushes, plant his veggies and on the second year he needs to fertilize. Experts would say soil is depleted. Yeah right... but those grass and bushes have been feeding on the same soil for thousand of years and the soil never gets depleted.
OR maybe nature is not unfair at all but rather man lacks understanding.

Fields are not created equal, it's obvious where fields of lush pasture exist near a constant water source as opposed to a dust bowl which springs to life for just a few months of the year. Depending on the availability of the water life in the water way can provide a plentiful supply of nutrients which are conveniently deposited on the fields during flood.
Grass and bushes have a low demand of nutrients compared to fruiting plants so it makes sense to fertilize if you want "more".
The flood and drain AP systems we use emulate the water ways nutrient depositing method.

_________________
Pete.

1 viewtopic.php?t=27800
2 viewtopic.php?f=18&t=27965
3 viewtopic.php?f=18&t=28231

I will add that grasses have deep root systems. One cause of the dust bowl of the Great Plains in the USA was removing grasses which have survived droughts for millions of years were removed being replaced by shallow root crops which could not survive a drought.

_________________
Brian's AP

Hard Specs: 2600 gallon Masonry fish pond. Everything else in flux.
My life's Oxymoron: Retired workaholic

2 good posts

_________________
If it/s free pick it up
If it isent broke dont fix it

Thanks but there is one problem I see. As I have mentioned lush wild vegetation when taken over by man becomes depleted in no time. While the wild lush vegetation has existed for thousand of years without depleting the soil. even with low demand of nutrients by wild vegetation soil should be depleted in less than ten years I suppose. There should be a reason why its not depleted and depleted quickly. There is also a problem with your theory of "nutrient deposited by flood theory" Inclined/high places should be barren or at least deprive. But that's not the case. I have seen inclined lush vegetation of up to 45 degrees slope.

Its not the case from my experience. I have pulled hundreds of grass some of them have shallow roots some have deeper. So are our veggies. In general the bigger the plant the deeper the roots. herbs have deeper roots than grass, bushes deeper than herbs and tress deeper than bushes.

I appreciate very much both of your effort trying to answer my query but it just does not satisfy my curiosity logically. By asking questions is how we learn.

First of all, I'm not an ecologist, biologist, or expert in any way whatsoever.

My theory however is that in nature things aren't being taken away. In your grassland scenario the grass grows, it dies, it breaks down, it nourishes the next generation.

Some of it might get eaten, then pooped out, and the same thing happens.

In your vegetable garden you're picking fruits and vegetables and taking things out of the system, and some things will need to be replaced.

Just a theory mind you...

Theories and observations of other people are my best source of info. better than scientific research. At least in these times when business interest comes ahead of everything. theories and observation I have the capacity to verify with my own observation and logic. While i dont even have a microscope and the likes.

I have come to the same theory as you. But again taking into account sloping terrain, decaying matter will be washed down the slope. Say the uppermost plants feed the lower ones. where did the highest ones get their feed. Mountains would be as heads progressively balding. In a thousand years all mountain peaks should be bald. Pete Brian and your theories have some valid points but it simply does not account foe everything. Somehow something keeps providing the wild plants with nutrition but stops when man comes in. Man must have done something terribly wrong when he comes in.

Take another look at nature, it's pretty rare to find the same plants growing on the top of a mountain as in the valleys.

So, the pants at the top may well need less nutrients than those being fed down slope

Climate change, erosion, acid rain, over population and its demands.....another 40 years will do thankyou.

_________________
Pete.

1 viewtopic.php?t=27800
2 viewtopic.php?f=18&t=27965
3 viewtopic.php?f=18&t=28231

I can not forget the time when I was about 13 or 14 and saw a long patch of sweet potatoes one portion has small and pitted leaves another portion has big and clean leaves. When I ask my friend why, he simply answered that "the healthy portion is newly opened".

I think I know what is happening. I was just reading about the soil. And learned that all of the nutrients needed by the plant ,except nitrogen,is available in the soil in a non bio-available form. that a certain Mycorrhizae Fungi along with other members of soil ecosystem converts soil nutrients into a bio available form for plants. in exchange for some sugars on plant roots. That nitrogen fixing bacteria live in the soil on the roots of certain plants.

Now it is clear to me that the first thing man do when he decided to do gardening is to kill the soil ecosystem that helps the plants grow. by clearing the wild bushes grass and herbs... jeezz how could I not realize before that plants that is part of the natural ecosystem above ground is also part of the natural ecosystem in the soil? And while birds insects bees rodents feed on the top portion and helps the plant some lifeforms do the same on the roots. hahaha

Now I know that nutrient on the newly opened patch of sweet potato is made bio available to the soil by the soil ecosystem just before my friend kill them. After they are exhausted no more to come since the processors are dead. and just as the ecosystem is starts to establish the sweet potatoes are killed again (harvested) and the cycle of gardening goes on.

This is only my conclusions but my route to gardening will be based on these two principle:

1. Never bare the soil; always keep it planted
2. maintain biodiversity in every square meter of soil.

this is how nature do it. And I am pretty sure that I am not the first one to come up with the same conclusion. But we understand. researches are mostly on the payroll of big fertilizer company.

You're starting to understand.. Do some research on "permaculture", permanent agriculture/culture, it all makes sense..

_________________
www.havehomewilltravel.com
Life on the road

Thanks Joel and to everyone who lent their brains for the storming. I've been reading about permaculture and their "observe nature" concept really works . I will try to make a drawing of this concept and a proposal on how to go about it and post it here for discussion maybe we can come up with a better way to do gardening.

Just one guy's opinion, for whatever it's worth. "Is Nature Unfair?" I think Nature is most assuredly "fair". What could be more fair than survival of the fittest? That's nature in a nutshell. Maybe I'm being a bit picky, but I don't see much relationship between your initial question and the answers you're getting about how man's interference has anything to do with nature's "fairness". My personal opinion is, 20th Century man has become a parasite to the planet. We just take with little regard to the long term consequences. We preserve our mistakes. We think we can control Nature to suit our comfort levels. We're starting to come around, but slowly.
Now, I'm no treehugger by anyone's standards, and I don't believe in the "climate change" yammering going on by the likes of Al Gore or Michael Murphy. What I "do" believe is that the planet is "changing" the same as it has for the past millions of years, and there's not much anyone can do about it. But that's a whole other discussion.

There are two questions in the original post.

"Is nature unfair?"

"OR maybe nature is not unfair at all but rather man lacks understanding."

Not my fault if you dont see a relationship between the question and answer

ans.

"Man must have done something terribly wrong when he comes in."

"Now it is clear to me that the first thing man do when he decided to do gardening is to kill the soil ecosystem that helps the plants grow"


No sir you ain't a bit picky, I'm pretty sure, you're something else