One point of view:
-it amends the soil, helps fertility
-adds organic matter
-speeds up decomposition
-is essential to a successful garden

Another thought:
-it ruins soil structure
-quick fix that leds to long problems
-damages the delicate balance in soil,microorganisms,etc
- is unnecessary and harmful
- leads to huge problems down the road

I would like to here your opinions? Do you till? Is so how often? What amendments,etc do you till in? How deep do you till? Why do you till? Why dont you till? If you dont till what do you do? What kind of mulch,etc? Any benefits/concerns from your method?

Thanks so much,
Joe

PS- I understand there's been multiple thread on this subject, wanted to hear something newer.

Some cover crops need tilling for best effectiveness of utilization of the N produced vs having it gas off into the atmosphere or not being available in the root zone. Not every legume cover crop solely has it's N content in root nodules...some, like favas, contain high N in the above-ground plant matter.

Some nutrients and some herbicides/pesticides need tilling for best effectiveness.

Some soils contain clays which do not lend themselves to root growth without tilling...and though OM amending will help these soils, they are "natively" not good at all without tilling for a while. Many modern home sites have all top soil removed and are graded by heavy machinery compacting and leveling the soil so a house's foundation can be more cheaply and easily applied. It's hard enough on those soils to get laid-sod to actually get a good root system to attach to them.

There are applications for tilling where it makes sense. Not all soils are created the same and not all amendments that are top dressed can find their way into some soil profiles in a timely manner. Root systems and earthworms can only do so much, though they can do a lot given time/seasons.

I'll use myself as an example (the one I know best!)... I live with a sandy loam. It doesn't have much structure, but it sure drains well. I till because I do not mulch a second time, in winter, but rather let the non-tenacious winter weeds grow as a free cover crop that keeps my nutrients from blowing away in the areas where my summer mulch has decomposed to the point where weeds find enough light to grow. I only till in spring. This minimizes the disturbance to my soil, and since I mulch right after tilling, minimizes my loss of nutrients due to exposure of the soil while adding back what the weeds have taken in. I do not worry about weed seeds being brought to the surface because of the mulch, and besides they keep blowing in anyhow. I grow on this soil from March through November/December, though not every inch of it is in use constantly. Areas not in use are covered, though. Time is a factor for me- I have a large space and am single-handedly providing not only for my family, but also a restaurant. Well, not all of the restaurant's needs, but as much as I can manage. Tilling is primarily a way for me to add valuable nutrients into my soil (top-dressing with manure from the neighbor in fall-winter), while keeping in place the nutrients in the weeds, which in turn are keeping the nutrients from blowing away. And all of this happens on the $2 for 1/2 gallon of gas (or less) it takes for me to till. A great steal compared to the $100 or so I would have to pay for hay from my neighbor to cover that area so no weeds grow in winter. And it takes less of my time and effort than doing by hand or flaming. And that is how I personally answer whether or not to till in my personal situation. But my situation won't translate directly to everyone else's, and that's why I do not say "do exactly as I do". Cheers!

Crud, forgot to add earlier that my garden is in the middle of a field of bermuda grass. If you won't use massive amounts of weed killer (I won't) and do not have the time to solarize (I don't and that plastic has to go somewhere when I am done anyway), then digging out the stolons is the only solution. Cannot even begin to imagine the time savings on that aspect, weeks and weeks most likely. Anyhow, I tilled as deep as my tiller would go the first time, shallower since the grass is mostly gone.

Is pulling a weed tilling the soil? There is soil disturbance when a plant is wrenched from the ground.

Is running one's fingers through light soil tilling?

Is jabbing a stick in the ground tilling?

Is loosening or moving soil with tools like a shovel, a fork, a hoe, tilling?

Is the action of a turning plow the same as a rotary tiller? because both are commonly considered 'tilling'.

Here is another question: if you are confronted by a patch of perennial grasses, forbs, shrubs, etc, and you want to grow some food crops there, how would you go about it? By not tilling after you do a bunch of cutting and mowing? It is unlikely that a given site will produce enough cut material to cover the ground thickly enough to prevent re-growth of the established well-adapted plants. Without some tilling to start, and some tilling at certain intervals, an area will produce so little food as to be an exercise in frustration.

To quote UAF Integrated Pest Management : http://www.uaf.edu/files/ces/districts/tanana/mg/manual/23-Integrated-Pest-Management.pdf

Tilling kills some individuals, buries some so deeply they can’t crawl back to the surface and exposes others to predators and extreme weather conditions.

It also has the benefit of turning under any bacterial or fungal contaminated crop debris, moving it down to the level where the beneficial soil bacteria from all the compost turned in with it can effectively control/destroy those contaminants. They have no access to it if left on the surface.

University of Cornell advocates tilling in even Late Blight debris: "by thoroughly tilling them under, or by cutting them off and immediately burying or bagging them to avoid producing large numbers of spores that could put nearby farmers and gardeners at risk." http://nysipm.cornell.edu/publications/blight/

Light tilling to the 6" level (common plant root level) is also recommended as the most effective method of equally distributing throughout the soil any added amendment/nutrients.

It also has the benefit of turning under any surface weed seeds so that they are deprived of light and oxygen.

Dave

PS: I define tilling as mechanically turning over my garden soil to a depth of 6-8" annually.

First i have heard of it. Trying to imagine what sort of machine could do it.

The reasons why I do not till:

1. Expense. Shovels are $20 (sometimes less, sometimes more). A roto-tiller is not in my budget and renting one really is not either (all I have to do is calculate how many plants I could get for that rental fee). There is also the gasoline to drive and pick up the tiller and to put into the tiller. But, if I ever expand my garden, I will have the whole darn area tilled first by hiring someone with a tractor.

2. Nerves. I have a hard time with power equipment. The vibrations affect the nerves in my hands. It is easier to just not have to depend on something that will affect me negatively.

3. For cover crops, I may not be able to till them in but I can cut them and put them in the compost or cut and leave in place as a mulch for the next round of plants.

What I love about gardening is that there is more than one way to get it done responsibly and there can be good results for those who till every year and those who cannot or will not.

Definitely agree with this one. Tilling is very much dependent on the crop that you want to grow.

I never quite know what is meant by 'tilling' on these forums. Some people seem to include digging with a spade or fork as tilling. Others only seem to mean mechanical tilling.

I dig to a fork's depth but I do not rotovate or plough. If I didn't dig the plot over lightly in the winter or early spring it would be impossible for me to sow or plant in my clay soil. It would be completely solid despite years of compost and manure.

In a flatter site I'd be following Moser's lead with alternate strips of low till/no till (for soil biota conservation) and deep tillage (for drainage and oxygenation).

Do "no till" gardeners not turn the soil at all? I guess I need to do some research.

Are we? I think some of us are, and some have a much more over-arching concept of it. Hence my questions. Joe hasn't been back to clarify, but I suspect he means most any kind of mechanical moving or turning of soil, whether by powered machine or hand tools.

IMO, what is really at discussion in these threads is scale. I think a lot of people suppose that if one has a sufficiently small garden that one does not have to use powered equipment to manage it then one is not "tilling". But as Flora is alluding to, turning sod over with a spade is not materially different from what a turning plow does, whether pulled by a mule of a john deere. Loosening soil with a deep fork is not greatly different from what a chisel plow or field cultivator does.

It is true that what a rotary tiller does is not easy to replicate with hand tools.

During the season, I'll till the rows to keep the weeds in check. (I weed amongst the vegetables by hand.)

I'll probably get flamed for this, but part of the reason I till is because I want the garden to look nice. I live in an old farmhouse, and I like the look of a old-time veggie garden. I can see it from the kitchen & porch, and it can be seen from the road.

For some reason tilling has become partially non pc...to be worn like a badge of honor...what a shame. You all do what works best for you in your situation.

Appreciate all your posts,
Joe

Note: Tilling is anything that moves/turns the soil... Whether it is loosening with a fork,shovel,digging,plowing, rotary, turning, etc.. I consider "no till" as in a forest, minimal disturbance to the soil..

Ok that is your definition but it is not the standard definition of no-till as used in farming. It should be pointed out that even no-till agriculture takes place in fields that were originally tilled - heavily - and once it goes to a no-till status it still requires the use of some tools and soil disturbance by harrows, furrowers, discs, and drill planters.

I consider "no till" as in a forest, minimal disturbance to the soil..

But growing a forest, be it by nature or by man, isn't the same thing as farming/agriculture/gardening for food production. One can compare no-till agriculture with tilled agriculture. They have the same goals, just differ in methodology. But the goals, purpose, and methodology of forest ecology and the ecology of agriculture are totally different, intrinsically different, and can't be isn't a valid comparison.

The purpose of agriculture (gardening) is to produce food and to insure as much production of that food as possible within a defined set of constraints. Yet even devoted no-till commercial growers readily admit that production can easily be lost if all the no-till practices aren't meticulously implemented.

So if agriculture was to be reduced to strictly forestry methodology there would be a lot of starving people in this world.

Dave

So if agriculture was to be reduced to strictly forestry methodology there would be a lot of starving people in this world.

I don't think we would starve at all without any agriculture.. In fact, i think we would be better of eating the wild edible plants nature provides us.. There is no way we could ever get to the production nature has.. There is so many wild edibles to eat it is unbelievable...

Anyways that's off point..

This isn't about who's right or wrong.. Its about opinion...

Thanks so much everyone,
Joe

I read a great article on soil structure and I thought it was in Mother Earth News but I cannot find it now. Definitely worth reading to understand what goes on in the soil when it is not disturbed.

Based on what I have seen for myself, done myself, and extensive reading on the subject, I think you are exceedingly mistaken in the belief that any large population could live without agriculture. Also you seem a bit confused, for example in your last post you say we would starve if we tried to manage food-production like forestry (IOW, input absolutely nothing to the system most of the time), which is correct, and then and go on to say that we could all live off of gathering wild and feral foods (not remotely possible).

I don't know what you see around you in Ohio. Probably you see rather more wild food than I do here, because Ohio in general has much superior mineral soils and more bottomland. Nevertheless, there is no chance that an average population density for the eastern States could survive by gathering just what plants and game exist without effort from humans. Have you read the accounts of how quickly game was hunted out as europeans went westward in the continent? We have so many deer now not because that is a natural situation but because the top predators are extirpated and we are not eating the deer because we have plenty of other food. Take away mass food-production fueled by synthesized fertilizers and the deer, nuts, and wild tubers would be gone in a twinkling. People would then suddenly realize that trees equal starvation for human beings.

I was quoting digdirt... I was merely using the wild food to emphasize that there is food already growing all around us. Even if we did adapt this forestry methodology i think we would have more than enough food for us.. Half our farmland is for cattle to begin with, beef makes more money than corn... It all goes back to money.. I think you are mistaken at living of what nature provides you... At least a quarter of my diet is from wild edibles, the other is what comes out the garden.. Matter a fact the winter rye I grow is
probably more than enough to sustain me throughout winter... I would even go as far as saying we could probably all survive off our lawn.. Is it ideal, no! Can we surive, yes! Matter a fact a know a buddy just north of me in Toronto cananda who eat wild edibles exclusively... Nowadays people would rather eat an apple pie rather than an apple, we lost touch with nature...

I should try and stay away from stating my beliefs and opinions... It always leads to arguments and strays away from the topic...

Anyways guys! Keep on tilling!
I cannot thank you guys enough for your posts, thanks,
Joe

I harvest wild berries around my area...there's figs and pecans to be had, too.

That said, I know of a stand of 5 pecan trees in my area harvested by a single family. I'm pretty sure I'm the only person hitting up my "berry patch."

There's a lot to be found, quickly, because there's only a fraction of 1% of people actually doing it. I wouldn't have a shot at those berries if I had 1000-10,000 wanting it rather than just me. At best, you can get maybe 60-80 pints per season off that wild stand as it is. I live in a 600K population city with 1.2m in the metro area, btw.

As far as wild game, even with the small amount of hunters (10-15% of the population at most in many areas) there's limits on kills to keep the population alive. With fishing it's even more control with less people in most inland areas.

As far as living off your own land...there's 10s of millions of people living in apartments that don't have their own land.

"If everyone lived off the land you'd have a lot less to harvest and have to spend a lot more time to do it."

Alot more time by us the consumers yes, but overall i think it is far more time consuming and polluting what are farmers are doing now.. To walk out your door and grap a handful of grass,etc, isn't to time consuming...

"There's a lot to be found, quickly, because there's only a fraction of 1% of people actually doing it. I wouldn't have a shot at those berries if I had 1000-10,000 wanting it rather than just me. At best, you can get maybe 60-80 pints per season off that wild stand as it is. I live in a 600K population city with 1.2m in the metro area, btw."

Were talking about living to survive here... If that was the case people would kill for berries.. Thatll be a delicacy... You don't need a shot at those berries.. Do you know how many times you cut the grass in summer? Imagine eating all that, and that's just your lawn! It's a matter f harvesting in a sustainable manner, if not you'll learn real quick next season to watch how you harvest...

"As far as wild game, even with the small amount of hunters (10-15% of the population at most in many areas) there's limits on kills to keep the population alive. With fishing it's even more control with less people in most inland areas."

I think we could survive off edible plants alone, not even bringing into equation dead animals! That'll be like icing on the cake! But personally, I don't see why we eat dead animals... That's a whole other discussion...

"As far as living off your own land...there's 10s of millions of people living in apartments that don't have their own land."

That's what is sad... The further younger away from nature the further your hurting... That being said, they could walk down the block and find some plant to eat...

Now we could argue all day about if it's possible to survive off the land...

When the economy collapses which is not to far away, we will learn real quick how to live off the land.. You'll then realize you had more than enough to survive... It's a matter of if you want to survive...

Joe

Nature does disturb the soil.. I understand the point.. But she does not till acres of the same land everyyear, year after year... Are the animals necessarily digging to plant plants though?

Joe

One would expect such under-informed and mis-leading beliefs from a teenager with a term paper due perhaps, one who has yet to personally confront many of the world's realities, or perhaps from an ideologue who has led a very rural and isolated life. But not from an adult in this age of information. And given the readily available information it is impossible to reconcile some of your stated beliefs with reality.

Hunger is a current and real problem even in this country and millions of people are already starving in this world. Where is all that edible wild plants for them? US Agriculture feeds so much of the world. What would happen to all of them if we regressed to the type of agriculture you advocate? Do we just say that's their problem? It's every man for himself.

And how does one address even basic healthy nutrition with a diet composed of nuts, berries, and wild salad greens? You can't even come close. Have a bad weather year in the garden? Do we just plan to survive the following winter by skipping work and scavenge? Both history and current events are full of examples of that approach not working. So how can they possible be advocated for the future?

Discussion is a good thing but it only works when the points made are supported by something other than personal opinion. Otherwise it is just preaching and of little value.

Dave

How can I argue any of your other points when this makes my brain hurt before we even get to them?

You seem to have an idealistic, yet doom-filled, view of society. It's an interesting mix of notions before we get to the point of having 300,000,000+ people looking for food and protein sources on their own, in competition with each other...with very little training.

This is the room they live in...

There's many dorms like this on this campus...of 450,000 people...alone...in this one factory complex area...

There's more of them...Foxconn employs over 1m people.

These people are supposed to "find food" in their general area so they can make a computer for others to lecture us on the "facts" of food production in between 8-10 hour work days?

This is a very isolated example. Just one tiny blip on the map.

I could point to an apartment complex in a mid-sized city in the SouthWest...I could point to a block in NYC...

They're probably not building computers...but they're probably contributing something to society rather than spending hours competing with each other in their vicinity for a finite amount of resources...or protecting them from those who don't have the knowledge or means to obtain them.

Wild Goldenseal used to grow all over the NC mountains. When it became a trendy health-supliment in the 1990s it was harvested to rarity-near-extinction in less than a decade. People will horde for economic gain and exploit a market. In the end, people will "farm" these goods to exploit a market that's in decline. The end result of scavenging is an evolution to production. The end result in scarce resources of food via scavenging is an evolution to farming food to fill the glut.

The things we use/enjoy/need in society are all produced via an economic cost. This cost can involve everything from necessities to leisure time.

Let your experience be your evidence... Unrealistic is having someone else put food on the table for you. Naive is not thinking twice about it..

"One would expect such under-informed and mis-leading beliefs from a teenager with a term paper due perhaps, one who has yet to personally confront many of the world's realities, or perhaps from an ideologue who has led a very rural and isolated life. But not from an adult in this age of information. And given the readily available information it is impossible to reconcile some of your stated beliefs with reality."

We here to guess personalities? Confront many of the worlds realitys? The reality is you have to take care of yourself.. You think the government really gives two sh*ts about you.. If a normal adult Wasnt being spoon fed from the government, they would stand on their lawn starving to death and you call me uninformed?

"Hunger is a current and real problem even in this country and millions of people are already starving in this world. Where is all that edible wild plants for them? US Agriculture feeds so much of the world. What would happen to all of them if we regressed to the type of agriculture you advocate? Do we just say that's their problem? It's every man for himself."

The people are sitting there starving when there's food underneath their feet.. People are unaware... How many people today eat off the land? They don't know a dandelions edible, they spray round up on it...

And how does one address even basic healthy nutrition with a diet composed of nuts, berries, and wild salad greens? You can't even come close. Have a bad weather year in the garden? Do we just plan to survive the following winter by skipping work and scavenge? Both history and current events are full of examples of that approach not working. So how can they possible be advocated for the future?

What is basic nutrition? I dont think you have a clue.. Or perhaps, it's just my nieve unsupported "beliefs".. You Liston to the government for nutrition? What is proper nutrition in your eyes? I am talking just to merely survive.. The least you would be worrying about is work.. If you were cut off of water, and grocery stores, what would you do?

Excuse my preaching,
Joe

I strongly feel that we need to take good care of the earth, and I do as much as I can each day to be a good citizen of the planet. That doesn't mean I think I need to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to picking and choosing my gardening practices. It's a bunch of tricky, big questions and choices, and I think you tend to try to simplify everything, which is lazy thinking.

I also think you have some confusion about the difference between what we do as a single gardeners as compared to what megafarms do. Want to help save the world? See if you can get those guys to be more environmentally minded. You have a great amount of energy and enthusiasm, and I appreciate that. But you are nitpicking at a bunch of people who are already more or less like-minded, why not take that boundless energy elsewhere? Join the Peace Corp and help? Start an Urban Gardening project in your area? Be the change you want to see in the world rather than trying to make everyone else join the church of Joe? I know it sounds like I am down on you, but I actually think you have a great deal to offer, just that you need a bit more realism. And maybe a brush up on skills like diplomacy and research. The latter by which I mean researching as many aspects of a subject as you can before making a judgement. Don't cling so hard to your beliefs that you stop learning or resist the truth if it becomes apparent it is different than you thought. Cheers!

Oh, and the ploy of stating your opinion then saying "but I don't want to argue" doesn't hold water. It's the verbal equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "I can't hear you, I can't hear you"... Not very... Um.

I appreciate all the post, you guys are great!
Joe

If you'd care to tell us how the 450,000 people living in a complex of apartments used to build your computer are supposed to compete with each other in their area while building your computer I'm sure there's a Nobel Prize in your future.

There's 8,000 college kids living in a dorm 2 miles away from me that would enjoy a micro-scaled answer between their 30-40 hours a week of school/homework, too.

Heck, there's a 300 unit apartment 1 block away from me with about 700-800 people in them that would have a hard time fighting for the resources you say are "all around us."

Forgive my ignorance,
Joe

Neat.

Along with your impending doomsday predictions, it makes for an interesting world view.

Yes, people can learn to forage...but given the amount of seedlings I give to people who WANT to grow a garden that can't even manage to grow the plant to maturity it's probably better to deal with the real world and how it works rather than forcing idealism or fearing doom pushing society's decisions.

I am a forager...I am a gardener... I also realize the reality of the world we live in...what's been gained vs what's been given up...and the systems that have allowed this progress...such as the computer YOU and ME are using to talk about this...and the electricity running it...and the power mined to provide it...etc.

...and still...people are being fed.

You may not like the system...but the system is not only working...it's working better than it has in the history of our food system.

You can't be serious, Joe? People who are starving are victims of social disasters that are the results of environmental disasters. Obviously anybody with a lawn and fertilizer and a garden hose connected to water wouldn't just wait to starve to death, and in any case anybody like that doesn't live where people starve to death. C'mon.

Now if one of your arguments is that lawns and parks and so forth are prime space that could be used for sustainable food production then I quite agree. If another of your arguments is that the prime land used to grow grain to finish cattle and other animals for the meat market is an inefficient use of land, then I quite agree. If one of your arguments is that poor grazing management degrades marginal lands that should instead be used for permaculture then I quite agree.

Appreciate it,
Joe

One point of view:
-it amends the soil, helps fertility
-adds organic matter
-speeds up decomposition
-is essential to a successful garden

Another thought:
-it ruins soil structure
-quick fix that leds to long problems
-damages the delicate balance in soil,microorganisms,etc
- is unnecessary and harmful
- leads to huge problems down the road

To saving the world and foraging for food!
I think most of us are just about growing some healthy veges for our families to consume, maybe save some $, a great hobby, some good exercise, a little zen experience and maybe a glass of wine out in the fading sun in the garden with your kitty sitting in your lap!
That's MY take on the garden!
Guess what!?! I'm going to borrow a small tiller from my neighbor to fluff up my soil for planting this week! I might till (using a small electric rototiller BTW) a few worms in half, but many more may survive to further help out my garden!
Let's get back to what we are here for! Nancy

I'm currently trying to trade some gold coins for a tank of water so I can plant turnips and silver for some bullets to keep away the hordes of city dwelling marauders.

Good luck everyone.

Joe, it's clear you are enthusiastic about eating local. That is good. When you say that most people have no idea about the mass food system nor what is available around them that is correct. Of course, the reason you are getting so much feedback here is because many of us on this forum have a very good idea about these things. For myself, I have been working at and studying closely the subject of food-production for enough years to realize that there is no possibility of one person or one family managing to be sufficient during some kind of societal disturbance. That is a fantasy, and unuseful in the way that doomsday preppers are not useful, in fact those people would be part of the problem in the actuality of events that they so obsess about.

What is needed is far more gardeners and people knowledgeable about wild and feral food sources. These latter would become useful as replacement for the staple food crops that we may not find practical to produce. For example, the croplands of the mid-west may become less and less used as climate-change and increasingly expensive farming costs take their toll. If the people around know how to intentionally inoculate those fields with adventitious species of plants that have some high food value well-adapted to the circumstance then everyone would be better off. Jerusalem artichoke, just as one prime example.

I prefer to not have the good stuff in the weeds blow away with the wind, but burning is a fine way to clear up diseased residue.

I believe 9/11 was a wakeup call to America. On the very spot where Gerorge Washington dedicated this country to the providence of God is ground zero.

Have you ever heard of the Harbinger? Google it up. Now I doubt that America will repent like Nineveh did. So I expect more to hit America. Just think what an EMP bomb would do...or any nuclear bomb/s. .....even a sunspot EMP that is a danger until 2020. We don't even produce the large electrical tranformers here in this country anymore.

As Sodom wasn't spared, I look for trouble much greater than the Climate Change thingy.

You know Wayne, I can't quite understand why there have not been more extremist incidents here in the US. It makes one wonder if there really are so many US-haters willing to commit murder/suicide after all. Apparently not.

Joe

> Can someone help define the terms for me? In British English there is
> a clear distinction between digging, 'rotovating' and ploughing,
> depending on the tools used. I never quite know what is meant by
> 'tilling' on these forums. Some people seem to include digging with a
> spade or fork as tilling. Others only seem to mean mechanical tilling.

I contrast "tilling" with "no-till". So to me, "tilling" refers to turning/mixing the soil more than is necessary to get a seed or plant inserted, and more than is necessary to cut off weeds (for example, I don't call shallow hoeing "tilling"). So I would include digging, forking, rototilling, and plowing in the definition of tilling. "No-till" would be things like lasagna gardening where you build the soil by piling things on top and cut into it just enough to insert a plant or seed.

None of this means that I disapprove of tilling; I haven't made up my mind yet. Nor does it mean that there can't be a level of tilling that is "bad" and a level that is not-bad - I don't know that either. I'm just defining. :)

We revamped much of the garden this year. We have permanent wide rows and paths to avoid walking on the soil, and we are rototilling the rows again, but hope not to till as many of them again next year. Ideally, I'd like the perennial crops and the big-plant-in-one-spot crops (like tomatoes) to be fed by deep lasagna-like piling-on-top, and I'd like non-grass mowable cover, like clover, on the paths.

But last year I lost the battle to the weeds, so this year we're using a lot of landscape fabric and biodegradable landscape paper, which is not compatible with no-till. (Well, the biodegradable landscape paper would probably be a dandy bottom layer for lasagna piling, but we're not doing that.)

Edited to add: I would like to know the death rate of earthworms from forking versus shoveling versus rototilling. The one thing that I am confident of is that the more earthworms the better.

It sounds good, but to get those wild edibles, we'd have to go tromping out in the wild and _get_ them. Driving our cars, tromping on soil that would be otherwise undisturbed, scaring the wildlife, and so on. The wild is wild largely because we're not out there interacting with it. :)

I think that a more useful goal would be to increase our consumption of locally and organically and sustainably grown food.

Now, maybe you'd consider some of that sustainably grown food to _be_ wild - for example, not too far from my house is a permaculture farm that, among other things, sells pick-your-own blueberries grown using permaculture practices. It's not wild, but it is as sustainable as the owners can make it.

Joe

...me either.

...the original poster may have derailed his own thread, but it's not like myself and others didn't participate in driving the car off the cliff, though.

Woo...internet.

What are we supposed to consume?

If you're eating grass you're a really horrible forager...with a soon to be happy dentist.

Lawn grasses contain 1-5% silica...it can be even higher if grown in clay soils depending on variety.

They're also rather nutritionally bare unless you happen to need a some alkali metals (especially phosphorus) in your diet.

Humans can't access the carbs or proteins because we don't have digestive systems that ferment the grass.

It's nutritious quality isn't found in nutrients as much as it is the chlorophyll which our human bodies can use for circulatory effects (hemoglobin/red blood cell production).

Wheat grass isn't lawn grass, though...wheat grasses contain a few more vitamins and amino acids in abundance (though not heavy in them) not found in lawn grasses...much like corn grasses contain a LOT more silica than lawn grass...it's a different makeup.

Thank you,
Joe

OK, you're worrying me now. Not all plants are edible. Lots of plants are not edible, and a non-trivial number of plants are poisonous. You can't safely just step outside and eat whatever comes to hand.

I guess that's why you take medical advice from a guy who cured his own cancer with raw foods...a guy who initially had Stage 3 cancer in his early talks then changed it to a more believable Stage 1 cancer later on...because it's more believable...aka, Dave "paid speaker" Conrardy.

Joe

...especially for a vegetable gardening forum.

This post about tilling has turned into a cancer quackery post...after taking a few other weird detours.

Hell, this is the guy that promotes the "fruits/veggies that looks like body parts helps those body parts" stuff...amongst other pseudo-science.

I understand established science scares the hell out of you, but that's no reason to ignore all of it just so you can eat grass off your lawn.

Oh and about this thread ceasing to have information - I advise you to watch these videos with a open mind... You might learn a thing or two.. Still skeptical - try it out for yourself.. I was just like you until i started eating what dr morse said... Matter a fact I was more skeptical, my old man passed from lung cancer in 09'.. You think I would lead preople in the wrong direction? Try it for yourself..

Joe

There's so many things wrong with it that it's hard to know where to begin.

His proteins-in-grass statement wasn't just pseudo-science...it's ignorantly incorrect. It's wrong...100% totally wrong.

Enzymes...proteins...hormones....that part of his rant is non-sense.

His lack of knowledge about how grass is digested in humans is horrible.

Aside from that, he goes on a wikidly useless rant about Eres/sheep.

The video you posted is useless, yet to you it's information gold.

Having an open mind doesn't mean you should accept ignorance as a helping hand. It doesn't make pseudo-science worth consideration.

What's next Dr morse quackery? What's these testimonials about? What he paid them for it right? Check out him on the news,etc.. He has tons of supporters on Facebook that shares their experience.. Try it for yourself for a few monthes.. It can't hurt right? After all he's just advising eating fruits and vegetables with some herbs... Quackery right?

I don't think there's any way to show you the truth here.

Welcome to the Vegetable Gardening forum, guy.

You posted a video backing up a claim about the health properties of grass...yet all it did was make the speaker and your defense of it extremely weak.

You want to believe these things. You want to wholesale discount other things...mostly things involving research and validity in the real world...because they fit into some conspiracy of a large, educated body of people hell-bent on holding others down.

You toss science out the window. You're calling out the FDA, the government, and medical community as having an agenda...but ignore the fact everyone you're flocking to as also has a paid agenda...be it the unregulated substances they sell at a high markup, the books/speaking-tours they're on, or that they are mostly speaking about dozens-hundreds of different ideas as if they're experts in all of them.

I mean, hell, some of these guys have absolutely zero credentials, yet you blindly follow them.

God bless,
Joe

Steve Jobs believed some of these cancer-denying snake oil salesmen. It didn't get him very far for very long.

It's one thing to advocate a raw diet for health...which I strongly believe in...it's another to wrap it around the guise of a cure/prevent-all and kill people who want to believe those good intentions.

One of the guys you point to..."the raw food trucker"...used to say he had Stage 3 colon cancer early in his speeches...and later changed it to Stage 1 colon cancer in his talks. You know damn well what stage you have...there's no grey area there. If that doesn't tell you what his intentions are...and how "good" or "bad" they are...I don't know what to tell you about that.

Joe

No one.

Who said people are dying from cancer quackery?

This guy...and many others.

Cancer quackery is cancer quackery.

Anyways...

Do you think Dr.Morse is a quack? What doctor do you Liston to? What "diet" do you follow?

Appreciate it,
Joe

Well, he got his diploma from a known diploma mill and unaccredited school...Brantridge Forest School...which no longer exists.

That's a start...

Most people actually like their "doctors" to have more than a paid-for, mail-in degree where they actually attend classes and do research to obtain said degree.

Again- what doctor do you like? What diet do you follow?

Here's a link to his schooling... Not that it means anything.. I would rather lesson to his 30-40 years of clinical observation than a letter after his name..

Joe

Yeah, believe it or not the fact a "doctor" got his doctorate from a mail-in diploma mill would matter to some people. Most people like their doctors to attend classes, do research, and get their doctorate from an accredited school.

It seems he also got his MH from the same mail-in, no classes, no research diploma mill school...I didn't know that one.

If this is what you want to tie your horse to...feel free.

...holy crap...after looking at ALL his credentials, it seems he's NEVER gone to a single legit or accredited school in his life. Even his "Honorary Degree from the Medical Association of Portugal" is suspect given the "Medical Association of Portugal" is a discredited alternative association that only existed for a few years. Heck, if you search Google for the "Medical Association of Portugal" Dr. Morse makes up all but 3-4 of the total given links. Also, Iridology...really? Iridology is pure quackery.

One of his schools..."Southern School of Naturopathic Medicine" (aka, "Southern College of Naturopathic Medicine")...which gave him his Doctorate of Naturopathic Medicine (N.M.D.)...offered this degree with a TWO WEEK COURSE! It was sued out of existence by the state of Arkansas back in 2002 for offering fake degrees in a deceptive trade practices lawsuit.

I've thought that snce the earliest posts.

Regardless, this kind of prosthelytzing is not for the Gardenweb...never has been and never will be.

For example, the people on the verge of heart-attack and stroke, etc, massively over-wheight, who go on the blended greens-and-fruit diet for a few weeks or months. Incredible results, even though actually that isn't a permanently sustainable diet for an adult, and for a growing child it would be damaging unless made up primarily of bananas and avocados along with nuts and seeds.

Anyway, I see no reason for this thread to be censored.

And silica does not rot your teeth, it wears them away.

Obviously we are all pro-vegetable in the diet here or we would not be on the vegetable gardening forum.

I think as long as there is a strong polarizing influence here a new thread is going to go the way of this one, but we can always try.

Joe

I absolutely agree that to till or not to till depends on individual needs and circumstances, and even gardening philosophies.

I am an old-school row-gardener and rototiller(er?) because these are the methods I was taught and grew up doing. Quite frankly it works well, which is why I stay with it. Not an efficient use of space perhaps, but I have lots of that so not an issue to me. There are many gardening methods, including low-till and no-till, but I have yet to find any other system that works as efficiently for my needs, even though I have done lots of experimenting and I will continue to do so (it would be foolish of me not to keep an mind open to new ideas). I do not know of any gardener in my general area that does not use a mechanical tiller to work their garden soil, but most only do so just prior to spring planting and sowing.

I rough-till leaves and compost into the soil in the fall and I fine-till the soil in spring as I seed rows so that I do not compact the freshly tilled soil - walking on freshly tilled soil is a major no-no. During summer where possible I occasionally zip between rows for weed suppression, and I do quick surface breakups in late summer as large areas become available from vegetable varieties finishing up. It is a very useful, handy garden tool as far as I am concerned and a good quality machine is worth every penny.

I do believe that rototilling SLOWLY damages soil structure but in a scale such that it will not be a factor for me in my lifetime. The soil will continue to be functional and productive, and there are simple, effective ways to mitigate the negative effects of tilling.

I have one area that has been a vegetable garden every year since the 1950s. It has been rototilled at least once, sometimes twice, each year (and plowed occasionally) over that time span. The soil structure is showing signs of damage but it still produces wonderfully and I believe will do so indefinitely.

I live on former prairie. More damage was done to the soil by humans destroying the prairie ecosystem than will ever be accomplished with gardeners using rototillers.

Vroom...

I also think that conspiracy theorists (and believers in the more extreme types of medical quackery count as such) are often converting their trauma from childhood abuse into their feelings towards the conspirators. They know the truth, but no-one believes them. It's heartbreaking, really.

@sunnibel: This is often the conscious intent of the radical groups. Earth First, for example, was started specifically to get people to stop thinking of the Nature Conservancy and Sierra Club as 'radical environmentalists'. Redefine what radical is, and what is moderate will change as well.

I used to turn soil by hand or with a rototiller, but I was happy to discover that lasagna gardening works better for me on clay and compacted fill.

-Be as self sustainable as possible
-Eat a plant based diet, raw foods comprising the majority
-Grow your own food, if possible
-it won't hurt to put in a good water/shower filter

Health be with you,
Joe

You preach...you defend and apologize...all constantly...in between insisting you're just innocently trying to help us and occasionally insulting us.

Is it really that hard to believe that 1- you don't have all the answers 2- some people here think your "doctors" are wingnuts 3- your advice might be wrong 4- we have our own free will, intelligence, critical thinking skills, and real life experience?

*later edit: this first paragraph was to Joe, not the person immediately proceding me. We must have been posting at the same time, hope there was no confusion!*

To the tilling question, I wonder how big an impact my rotary tiller has on earth worms populations, how long they take to bounce back, and how it compares to the impact my chickens have on those populations. I suspect that, given their short life spans and quick breeding in prime conditions, tilling in organic matter (worm food) would offset worm death, if indeed they are killed by the tiller and not just merely jumbled around. If tilling were done constantly throughout the season, then I might worry more abiut the worms.

Shallow tilling (4-6") tends to increase the amount of Earthworms (making it easier for them to find their way up to higher soil profiles), while deep tilling tends to decrease them. Time of year is important in this equation. Earthworms tend to retreat deeper into the soil the cooler it is. If you till when it's cool, you're not going to disturb many unless you till deep...if you till when it's warm/hot you're going to disturb more of them.

Tilling can also cut up some "bad" grubs residing in your soil if that's an issue...they tend to be near the surface more-so than earthworms.

I notice that the old tiller pictured in solient green's post is a rear tiller. these kind are the oh and ah tillers for making "onion bed" tillage. My neighbor and my horse manure provider have this kind. I prefer the front drive type as I can vary the type of tillage easily...quick passes for coarse incorporation, leaning for ridge making, and slower for finer dirt. Most of my gardens anymore have very loose structure so they don't need much tillage.

I do think that at some point that measures to make deep rich soil are desirable...and this can be accomplished in one day rather than in years. Of course this involves some earth moving of some kind.

I think that pnbrown said something worthwhile concerning 'unorthodox' diets...at least for an occasion or season. Schucks, even my cat will go and s chew off some grass of a certain type. Well, I better qualify that...animals are often much more discerning about diets and food quality than we humans.

Some vomit afterwards, but not all...either way it passes only partially digested leading to some easier poops.

Occasional vomiting aside...it's a lot better than the dogs (aka, every dog I've ever had) that thinks the cat box contains high protein dog treats.

Grass yards have all the sins of agriculture, without even the virtue of being edible. So trying to figure out a way to eat grass is unrelated to a goal of eating wild food.

"No-till requires more pesticides "

I find that the newer clumping and even 'tighter clumping' cat litter by Tidy Cat to be so much better that is almost makes litter box fishing almost fun.....just keep the litter 4 inches deep....no smell [almost] either.

Now that MG has finally found this thread we have some serious BS.

There's a "good" tradeoff leaving possible "bad" plant litter on your soil...from erosion control, to nutrient addition, to the natural mulch suppressing some weeds for a period of time.

Some people will forgo tilling in years where they're not expected to have a grub issue in large scale agriculture. Some will put it first on their to-do list if they expect a grub problem.

Thanks for the info about the worms, someone mentioned them earlier and it reminded me that I've wondered about it but never pursued the thought.

Discing creates a compaction and if you're using the same 12" disc year after year (without a soil chiseling, or similar) you can create an area of compaction.

Most home/roto-tillers don't develop hardpan issues, though it's possible in heavy clay or compacted soils.

I laughed, I cried. I shook my fist in rage and I gasped in horror.

I loved the part about the friend in Toronto who eats a diet of 100% wild edibles, therefore everyone can do it.

The Greater Toronto area has a population of over 5 million and spends 5 months of the year in frozen/snow conditions.

5 million people foraging for wild edibles in Toronto in January... lmao! This guy is a hoot!

"No-till requires more pesticides"

"Now that MG has finally found this thread we have some serious BS."

I meant to say herbicides. Why respond like that? ;)

When you dont till, you dont kill weeds either:

Major disadvantages

"No incorporation. Increased dependance on herbicides. Slow soil warming on poorly drained soils."

http://cropwatch.unl.edu/web/tillage/advdisadv

The great thing for me is I dont have to use pesticides or herbicides. These farmers only do what they can to keep up with food needs. There are many who point at these farmers like they are doing something wrong. The ones saying the farmers are doing it all wrong have 'their' "ideas" of food production and dont really get what it takes to produce so much food on budget or the principles of an economy in that not everyone can grow their own food and many little farmers markets are worse on the environmnet than having large stores with direct routs using large trucks that use less gas per ton shipped.

'digdirt' says- Where is all that edible wild plants for them? US Agriculture feeds so much of the world. What would happen to all of them......

Well this reminds me of when I was in India a couple years back and reading the Delhi Times about how the USA was pressuring Iraq to buy long grain rice from us rather than Basmati/Jasmine rice from India. I think the USA won that one.

Iraq's response was that they don't like long grain rice and it was more economical to get it from India.

So, without us they wouldn't starve, they might even be better off!!! With a more favorable product!!!

Not to mention how our powder milk exports to Jamaica resulted in them not having a dairy industry nowadays.

Makes you think eh????

It was started by someone who claimed to want to hear about till vs no till and then it de-evolved into living off the land and survivalism...then further derailing the whole thing until it ended up into a discussion about eating lawn grass and alternative medicine quackery.

...and no, I'm not calling all alternative medicine "quackery" but there was some prime quackery that popped up in this thread.

As far as till vs no till goes...you can pretty much ignore 1/2 this thread...and it's a shame so much useful debate/suggestion/information got pulled into the crap-fest it became.

I think the terms, tilling, rotovating, harrowing, furrowing, digging , turnibg over, double digging, ploughing, hoeing, cultivating ... all have some thing in common and that is:
1)--aerating: this action introduces air (nitrogen and oxygen) to soil which can be beneficial to micro organism. ISN'T THAT WHY YOU TURN YOUR COMPOST over?

2)-- It can be beneficial in weed prevention. A lot of weeds seeds cannot come up when buried too deep.

3.)... after digging, rotovating, ploughing if you have sunshine and the naked aerated soil will benefits from it in more than one way.

4) ... as the soil gets compacted in container, It can also happen to the beds, though to a lesser degree.

5) ... We know that nutrients, to some extent, go further down gradually. So I think deeper in the ground the soil is much richer than on the top. So by digging(turning over) we bring that rich soil back up , within the reach of a lots small rooted annuals.

FOR RAISED BEDS:
we do often add compost/organic matter. Piling it just on the top, IMO, is not as effective as if you work it in. And that is only possible by tilling it in, to become a better medium for plants root system.

My main concern here is to avoid some kind of pc intimidation...like "I don't till, and you should not also...because I am smarter and more pristine than you."

This can also "burn" (aka more quickly break down and "use up") your added compost faster...with some of the beneficial aspects being lost to the air or leeching. On the flipside, it also incorporates some of it deeper into the root zone where it won't "burn" so quickly and will make it usable to roots. While more is lost with tilling in, there's also a bit of benefit of getting it to the root zone quicker rather than waiting for natural forces (weathering and movement via gravity/water/worms).

A lot depends on your native soil. There's a lot of places around where tilling, at least initially or the first few seasons/years, will benefit from getting the organic matter deeper into the root zone which will increase pore space so top applied stuff can move through a lot easier in years following. Some people are lucky enough to live in areas where they can simply top apply and not have to worry about an initial tilling...there's not a whole lot of these places unless they want to wait years for this soil texture benefit to take place, though.

We have heavy clays where I'm at. It can take years for top applied composts to work it's way through deeper soils, even with the abundance of worms and moisture we get around here. Personally, when I'm starting a fresh bed I like to break up the ground 4-6" and incorporate some compost + quality top soil before adding a layer of compost + quality top soil on top...in a semi-sunken bed (kinda sorta) approach. After that, top applying of compost works well. The aeration and water infiltration tends to be quite good. While we do have heavy clay soils, they're not the shrink/swell/heaving or "sticky" clays...so this works to an advantage for this method in my part of the world.

Yeah. Wish they'd bring back the old 125 post limit on threads.

'digdirt' says- Where is all that edible wild plants for them? US Agriculture feeds so much of the world. What would happen to all of them......

Well this reminds me of when I was in India a couple years back and reading the Delhi Times about how the USA was pressuring Iraq to buy long grain rice from us rather than Basmati/Jasmine rice from India. I think the USA won that one.

How are those two points even comparable? The claim under dispute at the time was about how "we can all survive on edible wild plants". Sadly that isn't working in either India or Iran. It was not about who any country should buy their agricultural crops from.

So if you are going to drag up an old thread, especially one from so far out in left field, and then pick a single comment out of hundreds to focus on, at least make your post relevant please.

Thanks.

Dave

Personally I have only ever used a tiller once in over 25 years of gardening, trying to renew some grass at my old house years ago, and was left with a ton of raking to do to smooth the soil and rake out the weed clods. It was a pain, and I've since learned there are much easier ways to create a lawn.

I've had sandy loam at both houses and have never used a tiller for the veggie and perennial gardens - all digging was hand done. This was back breaking labor, digging out weeds and woody plants, stumps and roots, picking and screening rocks. I've since learned, there are easier ways to create a garden!

I use lasagne beds, top dress both lawn and gardens with compost annually, mulch with leaves and straw, and don't bother picking every rock, or digging out shrubbery rootballs and tree roots anymore. Roots will decompose over time and add organic matter to the soil. Just dig a good hole where the plant will go! Of course this depends on what you're growing, root crops prefer soil with a certain texture.

I still like to hand dig, but only as needed (and rake, and sweep, and shear by hand) - it's great exercise, no need to go to the gym! Plus the garden can be truly "green" this way - people need to get away from excess use of fossil fuels.

Many of the older threads are very interesting, and threads fall off this forum so quickly. I'm bummed, because no doubt much good information has been lost from years back.

What was amazing was the contrast from olden days of hand labor of picking the shells off and burlap bagging them.

Would anyone want to go back to hand husking corn, peanuts , or other crops? It was hard work.

Please folks, let this thread quietly fade away into the oblivion it so rightfully deserves. If you got something to say then start a new thread, we would enjoy it and its not very difficult to do.

Also, the forum encourages the members to search a subject before making new threads. Threads like this are like a good book.

Wayne, your question implies doing that for a steady job, hours per day for days, right? Of course nobody would want to do that if there was an option. However, to eat it isn't necessary to endure such drudgery. Even if one made corn one's staple grain the amount of time spent husking and shelling by hand is not overwhelming - especially since it can be done as needed. I'm sure it would be the same with peanuts.

I keep my beans in the husk and shell them when I want to eat them - often at night while watching tv.

My dad hand shucked corn in the '30s; shoveled ear corn; mowed with a 5 ft. horse pulled mower, shocked wheat and oats; etc. I still have an indelible image of the person kneeling in the peanut field picking peanuts off the vines.

I've seen a mini-van that closes the side door with a press of the button, and seen homeowners with postage sized lots using a leaf blower to clean off their 20 foot driveway. It is NOT green to till, and shred, and mow, and blow, and prune everything by machine, not to mention the noise is incredibly annoying. Why not use a little elbow grease? Much better for the health of your body and the health of the planet.

Seysonn gave a nice list of advantages of soil penetration a few days ago.

In my HZ, I frankly need to water a lot more than those up north, and that ends up compacting the soil by the end of the season. At the end of the year, that soil needs a lot more than "fluffing" on top. It's certainly not clay, but it is somewhat compressed. I can imagine that in a cooler climate, optimal soil structure could well be preserved through the season, but it sure isn't down here. That being the case, a few-inch deep tilling each season just won't do it for me. I need to turn the soil down to 1.5 spade depths every season. That also allows me to really dig in my mulch. Now, get me a Ditch-Witch, and I'll be real happy!

Back on topic, IMHO, I view tillers as convenient powered hoes. But they just don't do the job I need to get done. For example, they don't contribute to soil improvement at depth, but just make the soil more conducive to germination of seedlings.

That all being said, surface soil preparation with a tiller is a nice thing, but it just doesn't do the whole job. Deep digging (we can call it "plowing", actually) loosens both the deep and surface soil. Sure, to fluff up the topsoil, and break up clods, tilling is probably nice, but a hoe or rake will do the job, though it takes some more muscle power.

I define "tilling", by the way, as soil conditioning down to a depth of five or six inches.

Also I am talking about different crop families entirely; for example pigeon pea may be productive in circumstances too harsh even for cowpea.