Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Regenerative Agriculture and Direct Drilling
Regen Ag Crops & Agronomy
Albrecht versus conventional soil testing - my experiments
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andy Howard" data-source="post: 6987" data-attributes="member: 1246"><p><strong>Re: Albrecht versus conventional soil testing - my experimen</strong></p><p></p><p>I am too going to the Kinsey seminar. It is all very interesting but also is Carey Reams theories and Gabe Browns theory that soil tests are a pee recommendation to fritter money away on unnecessary inputs that mother nature can provide through good biology. I like to keep an open mind on all these things and use them all. A few questions to other posters: are you going to apply everything recommended on a Kinsey test? Do you think you can change yours soils enough and feasibly to get to an ideal soil? For me Kinsey is useful to know your limitations but for me Kinsey itself has limitations.</p><p>Last year I bought a load of kieserite and applied to half fields at rates recommended by kinsey, saw no yield or plant health difference. Only one years results but I would not apply anymore again without good data that it works on my soils. Personally I think applying espom salts with every spray pass will give you more bang for your buck. Maybe Kinsey and York can convince me otherwise in a couple of weeks. All interesting stuff. I am not knocking Albrect just it is not the be all and end all. Some of the things York has recommended me to do have worked brilliantly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andy Howard, post: 6987, member: 1246"] [b]Re: Albrecht versus conventional soil testing - my experimen[/b] I am too going to the Kinsey seminar. It is all very interesting but also is Carey Reams theories and Gabe Browns theory that soil tests are a pee recommendation to fritter money away on unnecessary inputs that mother nature can provide through good biology. I like to keep an open mind on all these things and use them all. A few questions to other posters: are you going to apply everything recommended on a Kinsey test? Do you think you can change yours soils enough and feasibly to get to an ideal soil? For me Kinsey is useful to know your limitations but for me Kinsey itself has limitations. Last year I bought a load of kieserite and applied to half fields at rates recommended by kinsey, saw no yield or plant health difference. Only one years results but I would not apply anymore again without good data that it works on my soils. Personally I think applying espom salts with every spray pass will give you more bang for your buck. Maybe Kinsey and York can convince me otherwise in a couple of weeks. All interesting stuff. I am not knocking Albrect just it is not the be all and end all. Some of the things York has recommended me to do have worked brilliantly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Regenerative Agriculture and Direct Drilling
Regen Ag Crops & Agronomy
Albrecht versus conventional soil testing - my experiments
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top