[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Media Flips Over Tulsi & Matt Gaetz, Biden & Trump Take A Pic, & Famous People Leave Twitter!

4 arrested in California car insurance scam: 'Clearly a human in a bear suit'

Silk Road Founder Trusts Trump To 'Honor His Pledge' For Commutation

"You DESERVED to LOSE the Senate, the House, and the Presidency!" - Jordan Peterson

"Grand Political Theatre"; FBI Raids Home Of Polymarket CEO; Seize Phone, Electronics

Schoolhouse Limbo: How Low Will Educators Go To Better Grades?

BREAKING: U.S. Army Officers Made a Desperate Attempt To Break Out of The Encirclement in KURSK

Trumps team drawing up list of Pentagon officers to fire, sources say

Israeli Military Planning To Stay in Gaza Through 2025

Hezbollah attacks Israeli army's Tel Aviv HQ twice in one day

People Can't Stop Talking About Elon's Secret Plan For MSNBC And CNN Is Totally Panicking

Tucker Carlson UNLOADS on Diddy, Kamala, Walz, Kimmel, Rich Girls, Conspiracy Theories, and the CIA!

"We have UFO technology that enables FREE ENERGY" Govt. Whistleblowers

They arrested this woman because her son did WHAT?

Parody Ad Features Company That Offers to Cryogenically Freeze Liberals for Duration of TrumpÂ’s Presidency

Elon and Vivek BEGIN Reforming Government, Media LOSES IT

Dear Border Czar: This Nonprofit Boasts A List Of 400 Companies That Employ Migrants

US Deficit Explodes: Blowout October Deficit Means 2nd Worst Start To US Fiscal Year On Record

Gaetz Resigns 'Effective Immediately' After Trump AG Pick; DC In Full Blown Panic

MAHA MEME

noone2222 and John Bolton sitting in a tree K I S S I N G

Donald Trump To Help Construct The Third Temple?

"The Elites Want To ROB Us of Our SOVEREIGNTY!" | Robert F Kennedy

Take Your Money OUT of THESE Banks NOW! - Jim Rickards

Trump Taps Tulsi Gabbard As Director Of National Intelligence

DC In Full Blown Panic After Trump Picks Matt Gaetz For Attorney General

Cleveland Clinic Warns Wave of Mass Deaths Will Wipe Out Covid-Vaxxed Within ‘5 Years’

Judah-ism is as Judah-ism does

Danger ahead: November 2024, Boston Dynamics introduces a fully autonomous "Atlas" robot. Robot humanoids are here.

Trump names [Fox News host] Pete Hegseth as his Defense secretary


Science/Tech
See other Science/Tech Articles

Title: Weeds Control Without Poisons
Source: ACRES USA
URL Source: http://acresusa.com
Published: Jun 9, 2007
Author: Charles Walters
Post Date: 2007-06-09 17:59:53 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 1421
Comments: 158

Charles Walters, founder and long-time editor of ACRES USA, the monthly journal of eco-agriculture, has revised and expanded his now classic text on the secrets that weeds reveal to us about our soil. For a thorough undersanding of the conditions that produce certain weeds, you simply can't find a better source than this one -- certainly not one as entertaining, as full of anecdotes and home-spun common sense.

The book is a treasury of knowledge, exploring the workings of soil eco-systems through the findings of such giants as William A. Albrecht, C.J. Fenzau and Philip S. Callahan. It contains a lifetime of collected wisdom that teaches us how to udnerstand and thereby control the growth of countless weed species, as well as why there is an absolute necessity for a more holistic, eco-centered perspective in agricultrue today.

In Weeds, Control Without Poisons, Walters explains what fifty years of deadly chemicals have done to our soils and our bodies, demonstrating once and for all that the stuff simply doen't workl in any long-term, coomon-sense agricultural system. He goes on to tell us what will work, and he tells it with precision and clarity in a book as full of human warmth as sound soil science. Charles Walters is the author of dozens of books and thousands of articles on the technologies of eco-agriculture.

In this book learn;

What do weeds tell us about the soil?

What can you do about row-crop weeds?

Is there any role for herbicides in agriculture?


We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. Native American Proverb


FOR THE RECORD

The so-called conventional agricultural system of the United States is falling apart at the seams. Its intellectual advisers in the univesity hardly know what is going on in the countryside. Their advice has created extensive soil erosion, universal environmental contamination, and a degeneration of the health of almost every living species on this planet. Public outcry is growing in proportion to its awareness. Politicians are mocking their shared concern in order to sway votes. Legislation to curb or banish the current agricultrual system of toxic warfare on man and nature is becoming more plentiful. Caught in the middle of this political football is the farmer. One by one, his toxic crutches are being eliminated from the market. He is told that he must farm without these ''magic bullets'' which he has become so accustomed to using. This use has been sanctified by constant insistence of the USDA, land grant universities, and Extension personnel. Now, however, he is being told by the politicians that he cannot use these materials anymore, but is not being told by the lords of agriculture what to do or what to use in their place.

The farmer feels lost and frustrated. And he is lost and frustrated until he realizes that the solution to his dilemma rests with his own intuition and common sense. Farming is not a desk job nor the work of a laboratory technician. It is a natural experience. It is an understanding and appreciation for all life on this planet. It is an attitude of living, of peaceful coexistence, not an atitude of kill or be killed or of constant conflict.

The first step in builkding a system without toxic chemical war games with nature is to change your attitude. Become a farmer rather than a miner of the soil. Decide to leave the farm in a better condition when you depart than it was last year or when you started farming. Decide to accept responsibility for the health of this county, yourself, and your family.

Weeds, Control Without Poisons is an original, even though it leans on the scholarship of many in the identification of weeds. It does not pretend to have all the answers, yet it has furnished a beginning in asking the right questions. Many minor weeds still have still to be evaluated, and there can be no doubt tat answers will be forthcoming. As far as the major crop weeds are concerned, this book hints, then sledgehammers the answers into place.

Weed manuals since WWII have simply identified weeds, the implication or actual direction being that use of this or that poison is the only rational advice. Charles Walters questions this, and he has used most of his jounalistic career to gather in support for dealing with weeds without poisons. Hopefully, this little book will be a turning point away from our rush toward perdition.

Arden Andersen, author of The Anatomy of Life and Energy in Agriculture and Science in Agriculture


PREFACE

Some few years ago, I tripped to Houston, Texas and environs for the purpose of visiting a rice producer who, once upon a time, knew my old mentor, William A. Albrecht, then emeritus professor, Department of Soils, University of Missouri. This rice grower had a small plane on his farm for the purpose of monitoring his crop -- and, not least, the weeds. He had a small laboratory on his farm because he had been trained to compound things like DDT, and -- also once upoin a time -- he chest-thumped this fact to the good professor Albrecht, adding that ''this stuff works.''

Albrecht responded, 'Yes, it works today and it will probably work ten years from now.' And with that Albrecht shot a finger into the rice grower's chest. 'But ten years from now you won't know where it is!' Much of the toxic genetic chemistry spilled into agriculture over the past several decades is still out there. I know where some of it is. Richard L. Penny is an Iowa scientist who spent several years at the U.S. South Pole station. He took the biopsy specimens that revealed DDT in the fatty tissue of all the examined penguins. Appartently this toxin has established itself in the migratory food chain that travels to the South Pole and back. .....


This is an excellent book, and I recommend it for everyone that has any interest in understanding food, and how it affects our lives. There can be no doubt, after you read it, that America has been on a very dangerous path for a long time, and, it is time to correct that path, RIGHT NOW!

As an example of what this book shows; Redroot pigweed ... best possible laboratory analysis for phosphate availablility on a daily meal basis.

... quackgrass ... have herbal properties useful in treating urinary disorders. Decay systems are at fault when this weed appears. Excess aluminum also is a problem for the crop, albeit nor for quackgrass which can live with it.

And on and on through countless different weeds, using them as a teaching tool to learn what the soil is lacking, or, has to much of. Amazing the knowledge that we should be using can be this simple.....

And this book is much more than that as well. It is a look at farm life, and at OUR responsibilities, as we furnish the power behind those who grow things for us through the decisions that we make on a daily basis.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 87.

#2. To: richard9151 (#0)

Thanks.

We took the "easy way out" with big chem, and now we're reaping the deadly harvest.

Lod  posted on  2007-06-09   18:09:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: lodwick (#2)

We took the "easy way out" with big chem, and now we're reaping the deadly harvest.

You would be very hungry were it not for Big Chem...or the world population...mainly third world....would be one quarter what it is.

Take your pick and provide a solution other than Malthusian.

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-09   18:19:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: JCHarris (#4)

You would be very hungry were it not for Big Chem

Gee, it's a wonder mankind survived for many thousands of years without Dow and Monsanto and pasteurized milk...

innieway  posted on  2007-06-09   19:46:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: innieway (#25)

Gee, it's a wonder mankind survived for many thousands of years without Dow and Monsanto and pasteurized milk...

Look at the population...

and for your information, the leading cause of death in the South 1865 until WWII was due to malnutrition.

Mankind? Life expectancy somewhere between 19 and 45 years for most of its history.

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-10   1:44:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: JCHarris (#50) (Edited)

the leading cause of death in the South 1865 until WWII was due to malnutrition.

I don't doubt that one bit.

ALL disease is the result of only 2 things:
1. Malnutrition
2. Toxicity

Common, "short-lived" diseases (like colds, flu, and ear infections) are the result of malnutrition - the body isn't getting all the nourishment it needs to support a 100% healthy functioning immune system, which would destroy the "offending organism" before symptoms even occur.

The long-term debilitating diseases (like cancer, Alzheimer's, and autism) which are becoming more and more prevalent in today's society are the result of toxins.

You could probably ingest one drop of arsenic today and it wouldn't kill you. In fact, you could probably get away with ingesting 1 drop daily for years. BUT, if you did that, eventually it WOULD kill you - though the arsenic itself may not get the BLAME for it (he died of cancer)...

Just a few years ago, the government released an optimistic report stating that the rate of cancer was leveling off or declining. In 2002, the National Cancer Institute disclosed that the data used to prepare this report was seriously flawed. According to the National Cancer Institute, the incidences for some of the most deadly cancers are sharply increasing. The American Cancer Association responded to these stunning statistics by urging that more research be devoted to ascertain why prevention programs are failing. What has become strikingly apparent is that the most respected cancer institutions are "clueless" to explain why more Americans than ever before are contracting cancer.
The sad fact is that statistics show that 1 in 3 people will contract some form of cancer in their lifetime. Compare that with the 1 in 30 rate observed in 1900...

"Cancer results from the accumulation of mutations in genes that regulate cellular proliferation." Quoted from The New England Journal of Medicine, November 23, 2000, "Roads Leading to Breast Cancer."

Genes regulate cell proliferation. When genes become mutated, normal cell regulatory processes are disrupted. If too many genes involved in regulating cell proliferation become mutated, the cells lose control over their own growth rate. Cancer is a disease characterized by rapidly propagating cells that expand locally by invasion and systemically by metastasis. According to this site, the most prevalent cause of environmental genetic mutation is the food we eat everyday...Unfortunately, the list of gene-mutating foods keeps growing, as scientists expose the fact that processed foods (designed for taste and convenience) are incredibly dangerous.

Again, no argument here... But that "life expectancy" rating IS somewhat misleading. In the last 100 years infant mortality has decreased dramatically! The life expectancy rating takes into account the ages of all deaths, and averages it out - thus with a much lower infant mortality, naturally there will be a much higher "average"...
Here's another interesting little "unadvertised morsel" to chew on:
Even though "life expectancy" is now over 70, if you were born in 1900 and lived to the age of 20 you had a better chance of seeing 70 than if you were born in 1980.

I'm in my upper 40's and don't even have a "family doctor". I haven't been to a doctor for illness in years (in fact, I couldn't even begin to pinpoint the last time). Yet I see many folks younger than me that are going to the doctor several times a year - and I can literally "work circles" around many of today's youth. BUT I was raised by folks who did things "by the old school". You see, I was adopted when I was 6 days old by parents who were 60 YEARS OLD at the time!!! That's right, my dad was born in 1901 (Talk about healthy, you'd have to figure yourself to be in damn good health to be willing to undertake a task like that at that age, feeling confident you'd be around to see the child grown and on his own)... I was raised on RAW milk and butter, and fruits and vegetables out of the garden which were NOT "chemically tainted" (and which a lot of time was spent on in canning and freezing to last until the next year). We raised and butchered our own meats, and ground our own flour from the wheat we grew. (And although I "abandoned" those practices for some time while I was "out in the world on my own", I have now returned to doing ALL of them - or will be up to and including grinding my own flour and cornmeal beginning this year).
So I don't know - you tell me. Is there a connection between my very good health and my "food practices" as opposed to the plethora of health problems practically everyone around me faces and their "food practices"? I'm convinced there is.
But, like I said in another reply, I fully support your (or anyone's) right to consume your nutrition in any fashion you see fit. I only ask that we remove and quit making new "laws" which PREVENT me (well not ME necessarily, but the vast majority of folks) from consuming MY/their nutrition as I/they see fit (for example the near impossibility to purchase RAW MILK; or NOT having labeling which indicates that an ingredient is genetically modified for example).

BTW, my "food practices" also include following the "food laws" given by the Creator in Scripture. I won't eat pork, rabbit, catfish, or shrimp for example. Coming from the "old school" I also learned that when daddy says "shut up and do as you're told" that's what you did - the "reward" for disobedience is not pleasant. Could it be that the Creator actually did/does know what is best for us??? After all, the laws He gave us were intended for OUR benefit, not HIS.
NAH, people know better - His laws are archaic, impossible to follow, and mistake-riddled; and we need to fix His mistakes...

innieway  posted on  2007-06-10   9:48:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: innieway, JCHarris, farmfriend, lodwick, all (#52)

BTW, my "food practices" also include following the "food laws" given by the Creator in Scripture. I won't eat pork, rabbit, catfish, or shrimp for example. Coming from the "old school" I also learned that when daddy says "shut up and do as you're told" that's what you did - the "reward" for disobedience is not pleasant. Could it be that the Creator actually did/does know what is best for us??? After all, the laws He gave us were intended for OUR benefit, not HIS. NAH, people know better - His laws are archaic, impossible to follow, and mistake-riddled; and we need to fix His mistakes...

Jeeeeeeezzzz! There you go again, telling it like it is! shame on you!

I was raised on RAW milk and butter, and fruits and vegetables out of the garden which were NOT "chemically tainted" (and which a lot of time was spent on in canning and freezing to last until the next year). We raised and butchered our own meats, and ground our own flour from the wheat we grew.

We was lucky, was we not? Except we never ground our own flour. And, just like you, I knew better; that, dad, is why they have food for sale in the stores!

But we all learn and move on, hopefully.

And of everything you said, this is THE KEY;

But, like I said in another reply, I fully support your (or anyone's) right to consume your nutrition in any fashion you see fit. I only ask that we remove and quit making new "laws" which PREVENT me (well not ME necessarily, but the vast majority of folks) from consuming MY/their nutrition as I/they see fit (for example the near impossibility to purchase RAW MILK; or NOT having labeling which indicates that an ingredient is genetically modified for example).

When laws are passed which are intended to benefit one part of a society, i.e., the corporate farmers in this case, protecting them from competition, then nothing that is contained in the laws that are passed can be judged to be in the interests of the people of the nation. This brings into question everything that went before the passage of such laws and which lead up to the passage of such laws.

This includes toxic/chemical farming. If such was, indeed, better and more healthful than the alternatives, NO LAWS WOULD BE NECESSARY AS THE TRUTH WOULD BE ON THEIR SIDE. It is never necessary to pass laws in such cases except to hide lies and deceive people.

richard9151  posted on  2007-06-10   11:03:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: innieway, richard9151, farmfriend, lodwick, all (#55)

"food laws" given by the Creator in Scripture. I won't eat pork, rabbit, catfish, or shrimp for example

IMNSHO...

over and above some personal taboo...

the " 'food laws ' given by the Creator in Scripture" ...

are malarky as a health-related paradigm, with no substantive origin or value whatsoever, except what you choose to ascribe to them.

The smartest rabbi I have ever known, and one reputed to be the sole expert on extremely esoteric and ancient burial rites on the East Coast...

told me one afternoon sitting in his home...

after we had planted flowers from 7 AM-2 PM in 103 degree weather for the neighborhood so his tyrant of a wife would look good to the Gardening Committee....

" the 'food laws' were formulated for the uninformed masses as a tangible, felt and omnipresent physical means of eliciting daily discipline and control through taboo and proscription."

...and that's all I got to say 'bout that... F. G.

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-10   12:58:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: JCHarris, innieway, farmfriend, lodwick (#59)

are malarky as a health-related paradigm, with no substantive origin or value whatsoever, except what you choose to ascribe to them.

I am truly sorry that you are so poorly informed.

" the 'food laws' were formulated for the uninformed masses as a tangible, felt and omnipresent physical means of eliciting daily discipline and control through taboo and proscription."

And if you truly believe this, then I am doubly sorry for you. BUT, that being said, you should try reading some of the diet books, such as Eat Right 4 Your Type, which clearly explains that pork, as a for instance, can not be eaten by anyone benefically. Or soda pop drank. There are other non-religious books which bring out such subjects as well.

Here in 4um there have been numerous discussions about the food laws and such things as pork, and the info is rather amazing when you break it all down. That being said, I doubt that the facts have changed many minds, here or elsewhere for that matter, cause in these subjects, facts do not count for much. This is an individual choice, but that being said, this I will guarentee to you; IF you do the studies necessary to learn, you will find that EVERY food law contained in the Bible is correct, scientifically.

I certainly do not expect you to accept that, but perhaps it will give you something to think about as you continue to learn with us. Or not, as the case may be, but you will find supporting evidence in other areas of your life as well; I know this for a fact. Why? Because once you begin to touch on this subject, the info just keeps flowing, and, to avoid it, YOU must make a decision to ignore and stop learning. Your choice, my friend. Make a wise one.

richard9151  posted on  2007-06-10   13:17:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: richard9151 (#62)

I'm sorry, when I think of food laws I think of Jews having two dishwashers and two refrigerators because you can't mix dairy and meat.

farmfriend  posted on  2007-06-10   13:31:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: farmfriend (#63)

I'm sorry, when I think of food laws I think of Jews having two dishwashers and two refrigerators because you can't mix dairy and meat.

Good grief - I had no idea.

Is that God's law, or man's?

I shouldn't be having a nicely grilled cheeseburger?

I may have to go with Paul on this one - "All things are lawful to me."

Lod  posted on  2007-06-10   13:41:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: lodwick (#64)

Is that God's law, or man's?

I always thought of it as a form of conspicuous consumption. Just a way to show your wealth.

farmfriend  posted on  2007-06-10   14:17:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: farmfriend (#71)

I always thought of it as a form of conspicuous consumption. Just a way to show your wealth.

True...like sable at a seder...you seem to know about that.

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-10   14:45:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: JCHarris (#72)

True...like sable at a seder...you seem to know about that.

Only as an outsider looking in.

farmfriend  posted on  2007-06-10   15:03:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#77. To: farmfriend (#76)

True...like sable at a seder...you seem to know about that.

Only as an outsider looking in.

LOL

Didn't you like the sable?

Its horrendously expensive from a first line caterer....and a seder gets the best.

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-10   15:09:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: JCHarris (#77)

and a seder gets the best.

As do the Bar mitzvahs.

farmfriend  posted on  2007-06-10   15:14:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: farmfriend (#78)

and Bas mitzvahs

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-10   15:20:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#80. To: JCHarris (#79)

and Bas mitzvahs

My mother-in-law had her's a couple of years ago. Something she was denied as a young girl. She was one of 3 who did it. Blessings on her rabbi.

farmfriend  posted on  2007-06-10   15:24:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#81. To: farmfriend (#80)

Blessings on her rabbi.

Why?

It is essentially a "Coming Out".

JCHarris  posted on  2007-06-10   15:25:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: JCHarris (#81)

Why?

It is essentially a "Coming Out".

For allowing her to complete a religious rite denied her at the appropriate age based on her gender.

farmfriend  posted on  2007-06-10   15:32:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 87.

        There are no replies to Comment # 87.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 87.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]