What Coffee Grounds Do To Soil

"What do you do with your coffee grounds if you are a coffee drinker?   Those free grounds really are good for your soil.  What do your coffeepot's leftovers really add to the soil?

To find out, Sunset sent a batch of Starbucks' used coffee grounds ― the company gives them away for free ― to a soil lab for analysis. Turns out the grounds provide generous amounts of phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and copper.

They also release nitrogen into the soil as they degrade. And they're slightly acidic ― a boon in the Western climate.

Dig or till them into the soil to a depth of 6 to 8 inches.

FULL REPORT
The following information was developed for Sunset by Soil and Plant Laboratory Inc., Bellevue, WA.

Summary: Use of Starbucks coffee grounds in amending mineral soils up to 35 percent by volume coffee grounds will improve soil structure over the short-term and over the long-term. Use of the coffee grounds at the specified incorporation rates (rototilled into a 6- to 8-inch depth) will substantially improve availabilities of phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and copper and will probably negate the need for chemical sources of these plant essential elements.

The nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium "guaranteed analyses" would be as follows for the coffee grounds:
Nitrogen: 2.28 percent

Phosphorus: 0.06 percent

Potassium: 0.6 percent

Available nutrient levels: The pH or reaction of the coffee grounds is considered slightly acidic and in a favorable range at 6.2 on the pH scale.

Salinity (ECe) is a measurement of total soluble salts and is considered slightly elevated at 3.7 dS/m. The primary water-soluble salts in this product are potassium, magnesium, sodium and chloride. The potentially problematic ions in sodium and chloride are each sufficiently low as to be inconsequential in terms of creating problems for plants.

The availabilities of nitrogen, calcium, zinc, manganese and iron are quite low and in some cases deficient. Thus, the coffee grounds will not supply appreciable amounts of these essential plant elements when used as a mineral soil amendment.

However, the availabilities of phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and copper are each sufficiently high that there will be a very positive impact on improving availabilities of these elements where the coffee grounds are used as a mineral soil amendment. The coffee grounds will negate the need for additional sources of phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and copper when blended with mineral soils.

In summary, the available plant essential elements which will be substantially improved where the coffee grounds are used as a soil amendment, include phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and copper.

Total nutrient levels: Each cubic yard of these coffee grounds contains a total of 10.31 lbs. nitrogen, of which 0.01 lb. (0.09%) are available. Thus, even though available nitrogen is considered deficient in this product, there still remains over 10 lbs. of total nitrogen per cubic yard of coffee grounds. Thus, nitrogen is primarily bound in the organic fraction and is unavailable to plants until soil microorganisms degrade the organic fraction. Through this process, the nitrogen is converted to plant available forms. Over the long term the coffee grounds will act like a slow release fertilizer providing long-term nitrogen input which can then be utilized by plants.

Nearly all potassium and all magnesium are in the available forms. This means that immediate availability improvements for these two elements will take place when the coffee grounds are blended with mineral soils. About half of the copper and calcium are in their immediately available forms.

All other plant essential elements are primarily bound in the organic fraction and will thus be subject to slow release over time as soil microbes continue to degrade the organic fraction.

Physical properties: Virtually all particles passed the 1 millimeter (mm) screen resulting in a product which is very fine textured. Each cubic yard of the coffee grounds will supply an excellent amount of organic matter, measured at 442 lbs. organic matter per cubic yard. At the use rates indicated in this report, the input of organic matter will be substantial and will result in considerable short-term and long-term improvement of mineral soil structure.

Carbon/nitrogen ratio: On the basis of dry matter bulk density (452 lbs. per cubic yard), organic matter content (97.7%) and total nitrogen (2.28%), the estimated carbon/nitrogen ratio is about 24:1. This means that there is more than sufficient nitrogen present in the coffee grounds to provide for the nitrogen demand of the soil microorganisms as they degrade the organic fraction.

Use rate: Based on the overall chemistry and physical properties of the coffee grounds, they can be utilized at rates similar to other organic amendments when used in amending mineral soils. These data indicate that 25-35 percent by volume coffee grounds can be blended with mineral soils of any type to improve structure of those soils. "

I have been using coffee grounds to amend soil all of my life.  The baskets are easy for me to recycle but those little K cups seem to end up in the garbage.  They are too difficult to deal with.  Our gardens have responded to nine years of coffee grounds.  If you drink coffee or tea, do you recycle your grounds?

Ed

Finally

We finally got some good planting weather in southwest Ohio this week.  Everyone is going full tilt from what I can tell and I know I am tired after just a few hard days. 

I finally got some Apex soybeans planted from Keith Schlapkohl's farm in eastern Iowa.  I also planted a bunch of yellow hilum soybeans for the export market.  As woolly as some fields are around here I was thinking about my glyphosate post yesterday and how easy it would be to follow a Round Up Ready or Liberty Link system in Ohio this year.

Farming non GMO is just like going back to the early 90's chemical wise.  The labels and products have changed but we still pretty much have the same chemistry available as we did before Round Up Ready.  I have some fields that need a residual on before the next rain and I haven't even checked the weather yet.  It is pretty again here this morning so far and we did not get some of the predicted showers.

"Authority/Spartan contains the single active ingredient sulfentrazone. Authority/Spartan controls certain broadleaves, so tank mix to broaden control spectrum or use within a planned pre followed by post herbicide program. Do not apply Authority/Apartan if soybeans have emerged, otherwise severe crop injury will result. There are several other products that contain sulfentrazone such as, Authority Assist (Authority + Pursuit); Authority First (Authority + FirstRate); Authority MTZ (Authority + metribuzin); Authority XL (Authority + Classic) and Spartan Charge (Authority + Aim)."

I double inoculated this year as I have fields that are new to me and the fields I know from the past really respond to heavy rates of the new competitive strains of rhizobium.  I had Excalibre installed on the seed and topped the drill and planter with more GraphEx.  With all the lime I got on last month, I hope to build some big and healthy nodules that are blood red and pumping out nitrogen.

The soil has planted really nice but it is still wet underneath, I planted them as shallow as a half an inch while making sure I got all the beans covered.  There are very few beans on top of the ground and if it keeps raining like predicted they will all come up anyway.

It would be sweet if I could harvest a good crop in October and follow the combine with wheat or a cover crop mix to hold the soil and build the healthy organisms like I have in the past.  I've done what I can do so far, the rest is up to God.

He has never let me down though I am quite capable of letting Him down if I am not careful.

In one short month we could be cutting wheat and planting double crop soybeans.  I hope these "early" beans make about 20 bushels more than the double crop but I am shooting for over 50 bushel an acre on both.

Ed Winkle

Glyphosate

Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide used to kill weeds, especially annual broadleaf weeds and grasses known to compete with commercial crops grown around the globe. It was discovered to be a herbicide by Monsanto chemist John E. Franz in 1970.[3] Monsanto brought it to market in the 1970s under the trade name Roundup, and Monsanto's last commercially relevant United States patent expired in 2000.


Called by experts in herbicides "virtually ideal" due to its broad spectrum and low toxicity compared with other herbicides,[4] glyphosate was quickly adopted by farmers. Use increased even more when Monsanto introduced glyphosate-resistant crops, enabling farmers to kill weeds without killing their crops. In 2007 glyphosate was the most used herbicide in the United States agricultural sector, with 180 to 185 million pounds (82,000 to 84,000 tonnes) applied, and the second most used in home and garden market where users applied 5 to 8 million pounds (2,300 to 3,600 tonnes); additionally industry, commerce and government applied 13 to 15 million pounds (5,900 to 6,800 tonnes).[5] While glyphosate has been approved by regulatory bodies worldwide and is widely used, concerns about its effects on humans and the environment persist.[6]

Glyphosate's mode of action is to inhibit an enzyme involved in the synthesis of the aromatic amino acids tyrosine, tryptophan and phenylalanine. It is absorbed through foliage and translocated to growing points. Because of this mode of action, it is only effective on actively growing plants; it is not effective as a pre-emergence herbicide.

Some crops have been genetically engineered to be resistant to it (i.e. Roundup Ready, also created by Monsanto Company). Such crops allow farmers to use glyphosate as a post-emergence herbicide against both broadleaf and cereal weeds, but the development of similar resistance in some weed species is emerging as a costly problem. Soy was the first Roundup Ready crop.

Monsanto developed and patented the glyphosate molecule in the 1970s, and has marketed Roundup since 1973. It retained exclusive rights in the United States until its United States patent expired in September, 2000.


What has Round Up done for your farm in 40 years?

Ed

Biological Farming

As you can see from yesterday's picture, this biological farming thing does have an effect on nature.  This morning, as my eyes were starting to pop open I told LuAnn I think I hear 30 different songbirds making their call.  We have a new Cardinal that is pooping all over our car mirrors if we leave the car outside any length of time.  He has marked his spots well.

It reminded me of finding that US Geological Survey guy at our farm on Horseshoe Road a couple of years ago.  He said we had some of the rarest Ohio songbirds he had found anywhere.  That farm is covered with headed out cereal rye with a tiny bit of Mother Nature's Cressleaf Groundsel or Golden Ragwort as they used to call it around here.  It looks like a meadow but it might be a soybean field one of these days if it ever stops raining in southern Ohio.

There are some corn fields up around a few miles away from here but here the fields are basically untouched.  We had just enough dry weather to treat the wheat fields and maybe kill down a cover crop earlier but it is pretty green and growthy around here.  It has not been a good year for gardening yet and it is getting late fast, Memorial Day is upon us!  I wonder if anyone will take Preventive Planting as our June 5 corn planting date may rush right by us again like it did 2 years ago?

We took our friend Marian to lunch yesterday.  She lost her husband on the day my dad passed away 12 years ago and now has buried a son, also.  I have known her since the 70's when we attended Marathon United Methodist Church.  She has done very well at taking care of others.  Her husband John was the best notill farmer I knew and their farms have the range of nature I see on ours.  Notill farming is definitely more biological than tillage.  We talked about farming back then like we practice today.  It just makes more sense to me and I wouldn't be farming much if any at all if I had to till everything.  I have never been geared up to do it because I couldn't justify it in my mind.

I parted with tillage in 1976 when we rented the new White 5100 no-till planter at the home farm in Sardinia.  We've had a lot of bumps in the road but that one action has led me to a lifetime of study of notill and biological farming and has had a direct impact on who I am married to, who my family and friends are and what I do today.

I can't think of any farmer that notill has had more impact on except maybe for my mentor, Paul Reed.  I heard them impact of notill and biological farming this morning when the songbirds helped me wake up.

Ed Winkle

Biologist's Reply On Deer Story

"Russel Stevens is a wildlife biologist with the Noble Foundation.  Here are his thoughts."

"It is not uncommon to see many deer (mainly does) here at night or twilight along the roadsides during various times of the calendar year, esp periods when native forage quality is limited. The first question we should ask is why deer are there along the roadside. Is the reason overly high deer numbers and poor native habitat condition? Or does the mowing which the ‘State’ performs create regrowth of lush high quality plants? I tend to feel it is both as deer numbers are at all-time highs nationally, deer have long thin muzzles for the purpose of selecting the most nutritious plant parts, and very little attention is given to improve the carrying capacity of native lands on a grand scale.

Modern farming and ranching tend to busily span fence-row to fence-row while native land improvement tends to ‘take the back seat’. Deer also quickly adapt to human presence in suburbia without much hint of danger (except for ‘fluffy’ on an occasional ‘bathroom break’). Hence, the ‘suburban deer herd’ has been fostered in a virtual ‘Garden of Eden’! I believe mainly lush plant growth found in suburbia and degraded conditions of adjoining rural areas attract whitetail to the city life. The risk of deer to man goes beyond the roadside!

So we have all these female deer (does) along the highway in fall and some folk know that ’where there are does the bucks will soon follow’. The primary whitetail deer breeding season across the majority of the US begins around the second week of Oct and ends about the second week of Dec with the peak in breeding generally between Nov 13-20. Mating itself normally occurs in isolated patches of thick cover or a wide open field AWAY from other deer and the roadside as the suitor attempts to protect the suitee from other male suitors. The last week of Oct and first 2 weeks of Nov is a time of chaotic activity in the deer herd….hints of estrogen are in the air, bucks are on their feet/aggressive/non-cautious, and about every female in the herd is harassed relentlessly (chased) by the male benefactor during those weeks.

The harassment can escalate to a level where does abandon normal routines and remain closer to security cover to elude potential suitors. If fall temperatures are abnormally warm, then deer with heavy winter coats of hair are going to frequent the roadsides mainly at night which is cooler. White light also impedes the night vision capability of deer, so escape from a vehicle path can be hindered. Normal deer behavior (chasing during breeding) which creates ‘chaos’ in the roadside deer herd is the prime cause of vehicle collisions with some conditions (warm weather, winter coat, and white light) increasing the risk thereof. Don’t believe me? Then ride with me down the AR/OK highways during those weeks and observe the ‘CSI evidence on the concrete’….ie blood spatter and hide! Lest we forget, highway speed-limits have been raised recently affording the driver less ‘reaction time’! The prevalence of ‘red pavement’ easily correlates within the few week long chase phase of deer breeding not within the several month long period of hunting season!

Now of course the increase in deer vehicle collision is quickly blamed by the media on the hunter. What did Don Henley sing about?....DIRTY LAUNDRY….”dirty little fingers in everybody’s pie”! I mean….come on…..A) deer season is open….B) deer hunters chase deer….C) then deer run into cars…that is the ABC viewpoint of the Yuppie! As a good friend often states, “Cause and effect and casual observation do not always lend universal truth!” We know in agriculture that chocolate milk does not come from brown cows, for example! Those who actually hunt deer soon learn that ‘chasing deer’ is an oft fruitless endeavor, unless A) one is blessed with ‘winged track shoes’, B) an endless supply of oxygen, and C) muscles immune to the ill effects of lactic acid buildup. That is the ABCs of a hunter’s viewpoint stemmed from experience. Don’t believe me? Then go run a quarter mile sprint through thick cover like a deer would do! A hefty bet says no human can run it in under 60 sec….while a deer can run it in under 30 sec if alarmed! I’ll gladly drop you off and pick you up from the pick-up truck and call the EMTs if needed! In a few states, deer drives or running deer with dogs is common place (some legal and some illegal) and yes the likely result may be more deer collisions with autos. We cannot deny that theory despite how insignificant it may be! However, the majority of hunters rely on stealth and/or ambush while hunting deer as did our Native American predecessors. Some Tribes chased the buffalo via horseback, but not whitetail, mule deer, pronghorn, or wapiti which are much more agile and shy creatures. Again, most deer hunting is a stealthy practice far removed from major sources of disturbance, such as noisy roadsides!

One obvious answer to reducing auto insurance claims of collision with deer is to reduce deer numbers (mainly does) to fit carrying capacity of the rural landscape….ie undoing some of the deer herd explosion seen during the 80s and 90s. Again, history indicates a trend of declining native habitat quality due to man’s failure to act (eg less timber stand improvement, less prescribed fire, etc). Outside of natural weather related disasters in timber (eg tornados, wild-fire, ice-storms etc) which stimulate abundance of quality forage at deer level, the native habitat trend will continue to decline unless MAN acts upon BOTH the land and the herd NOW. At some point as land stewards/hunters/non-hunters, we need to get away from ‘antler mania’ and the ‘Yuppie media’ and think through things for ourselves and for the betterment of the community or state, safety of our fellow man, sustainability of the native habitat, and the resident herds thereof!

Does may readily seek the cover, water, food, and space resources provided in suburbia if adjoining native lands do not provide for such needs.

‘Where there are does there will soon be bucks during the breeding season’ with car collision risk concomitantly rising.

Hunters can take direct action upon space requirements of overly dense herd numbers by harvesting surplus does while at the same helping future generations understand stewardship.

Both hunters and non-hunters can spend a few hours during a year to improve native land quality by thinning out cull trees in a forest (consult a qualified forester before beginning).

Such actions providing superb cover, food, and space for deer well away from the increased risk along roadsides or within suburbs.

An added benefit of both activities for the farmer may be a reduction in crop damage by deer.

Perhaps the same would also hold true for the suburban gardener.

Very seldom are simple observations a simple matter to understand…..a simple universal truth lying somewhere between the bounds of fact and fiction!

I didn't have a good topic today and found this in my draft file from a few months ago when we were talking about deer damage after a deer run in front of LuAnn's Buick on SR 28 east of SR 134.  Wildlife damage has already started this year on the few acres of new planted crop around here.  It's mainly ducks and geese from the wet spring we've had in southern Ohio.

Ed

Sustainable Intensive Farming

We know the drill: 2050, 9 billion hungry people.

We think we know the solution: More conventional farming with higher yield.

Professor of Farming Systems Ecology Tittonell in Holland does not think so.

His views are that:
Increasing the efficiency of conventional farming alone will not be able to meet the quantity of food needed.

Intensified conventional farming is not sustainable in the long term.

Some of the farming should be transferred or developed from the Western world to the developing countries, where the food will be needed the most locally.

Over 90% of the ag research currently goes to conventional farming, more should go to sustainable farming.

So the solution is some form of intensive and sustainable farming, although the professor does not develop his thoughts on what he means exactly. He does mention organic and small scale farming, but it is probably not the whole solution either.

It is also not clear how the non-renewable oil would be used less in a sustainable but intensive farming scenario. Fertilizer such as nitrogen in its different forms hasn't been made from oil in decades, and diesel machinery will still need to till or no-till and plant and spray and harvest the fields, organic or conventional. Other fertilizers are mined or come from coal power plants, so I guess that's what he means, but some hard data would be welcome.

The Western world could indeed reduce farming "without affecting food security," but there would be other consequences, such as increased food prices, which Tittonell does not consider.

Besides Tittonell in Holland, the Imperial College in London and The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, which is having its Global Food Security Symposium in Washington D.C. next week are also supporting the notion of intensive sustainable farming as the best answer to address the food needs of the developing world, in a more practical and pragmatic way.

Meanwhile in Congress...

Oregon senator Schrader mentioned the "O" word. No, not our President, but "Organic," the Orror. What ensued was Owful. He Olmost got beaten to a pulp, as if organic farming does not exist or does not have a place in farming. So I'm guessing, no support for intensive sustainable farming in the U.S. for a while, Ow sad.

Othor of this post: Chimel.

Powerball

I bought two tickets for the Powerball drawing this morning.  I don't believe in gambling at a Casino or a lottery but it's here in our world.  I can't win if I don't play and I really shouldn't play because I've already won my fair share.  Gambling is just one of life's games but it can become very addictive.  That's one addiction I don't own.

I told the cashier I know it's a snowball's chance but you can't win if  you don't play.  She and the others around the cash register agreed.

Once in a great while I like to dream what would I do if money was no object?  What if I won $500 million tonight?  I could build a farm operation built on solid principles that would be the envy of my competitors.  Is that really God's plan for me?  Would it ruin my life?

First I would take care of my church and my charities.  They would get most of it because my needs are not that great compared to their need and the needs of the world.

I would buy a new tractor with air conditioning and a new no-till drill to attach to it.  Then I would go look at planters and combines.  A new Apache sprayer would be great.  I haven't done any of this since I bought my only first new tractor in 1976.  I think it's high time I took care of myself.

I would take care of my grandchildren to make sure they all had the opportunity for a good education and a good start in life.  I would not want to hinder them, cripple them or make them lazy.  They are being raised right so this should be there when they make up their mind, not drive their decision.

Oh, it's fun to dream a little but I admit it's not always healthy.  You can't make those unforeseen things your goal.  I just like to play "what if" once in a great while.

I won $750 in a raffle a couple of years ago and gave it all back to the charity so that's more my kind of thinking.  If I had gobs of money I would give it all away but I would keep a little bit for Ed so he can help his family and the things he believes in.

I've been very blessed in life, how about you?

Ed