Fertilizers N-P-K with added micros worth it?

[BobinCt]

I’ve asked an agronomist if these added micros are worth it and he said it such a small amount it really won’t bring the levels up much. Keep in mind, he’s probably giving advice on a weekly basis to farmers who are farming for profits and not food plotters. I’m not even sure if he realized what percent of each micro was or not in the bag, but he probably had a decent idea. I did not inform him I’m doing plots and not farming for profit. I never realized until this year that they had fertilizers out there such as 13-13-13 with added micronutrients. I’n my opinion, I don’t think it can really hurt because the price per bag was very reasonable. In any case, it’s good to pass along that there are these bags out there with the added micros to the guys who didn’t know like myself. Obviously, you also can address the micros by taking a more in depth soil test (S-3) which gives you the PPM’s and you can elect to address it that route. Hope this helps anyone who might start looking into the micros.

 

[yoderjac]

It depends on your objectives. For instance, when I was growing trees in RootMaker containers in a medium like promix, I used micromax. This is because they were not in an natural environment.

I can see where a farmer trying to maximize yield may want to consider this if not rotating crops and the soil is depleted. For food plots, I've never intentionally added N and I have not use P & K for a few years now with no negative impacts. Food plotting is different than farming. Objectives are different. We don't harvest, and have a lot more flexibility to we focus on soil health and nutrient cycling.

If you are planting a specific crop like soybeans and a soil test shows your soil is low in a minor mineral like sulfur that beans need, I'd consider addressing the issue some how. Perhaps AMS or some means of adding sulfur.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[FarmerDan]

Not to put too fine a point on it, I think we need to start with an understanding of what's on a list of macronutrients and what you will find on a list of micronutrients. The tail end of macros are often included on a list of micros.

N-P-K. We all know what list to look at to find those. Calcium, sulfur, and/or magnesium? Those are also on the macro list, but when we talk about fertilizers here, we come at them from an angle. Then there's carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. All come to the plant from the growing medium (think soil).

Then there are the true micronutrients (or trace minerals): iron (Fe), boron (B), chlorine (Cl), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), molybdenum (Mo), nickel (Ni).

Determining the true micronutirent defficiencies (forget correcting them) probably provides little benefit to the crops were are fooling with here.

So, no, IMO, fertilizers with TRUE micronutrients provide plotters little to no value, but I will occasionally buy a couple bags for certain situations - like when my wallet is too heavy.

However, there are a group of elements where imbalances hurt. N-P-K we understand. You must give consideration to calcium, sulfur, magnesium, & boron. But, you won't find sufficient 'correcting' quantities in mass mixed 'fertilizers with micronutrients.'

 

[yoderjac]

Not to put too fine a point on it, I think we need to start with an understanding of what's on a list of macronutrients and what you will find on a list of micronutrients. The tail end of macros are often included on a list of micros.

N-P-K. We all know what list to look at to find those. Calcium, sulfur, and/or magnesium? Those are also on the macro list, but when we talk about fertilizers here, we come at them from an angle. Then there's carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. All come to the plant from the growing medium (think soil).

Then there are the true micronutrients (or trace minerals): iron (Fe), boron (B), chlorine (Cl), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), molybdenum (Mo), nickel (Ni).

Determining the true micronutirent defficiencies (forget correcting them) probably provides little benefit to the crops were are fooling with here.

So, no, IMO, fertilizers with TRUE micronutrients provide plotters little to no value, but I will occasionally buy a couple bags for certain situations - like when my wallet is too heavy.

However, there are a group of elements where imbalances hurt. N-P-K we understand. You must give consideration to calcium, sulfur, magnesium, & boron. But, you won't find sufficient 'correcting' quantities in mass mixed 'fertilizers with micronutrients.'

Completely agree. Sometimes we get focused on trying to back-fit solutions into non-existent problems. Why do we plant food plots? For small property owners, it is most likely to attract deer or influence their movement in such a way to make our properties more huntable. For folks with the scale to do QDM, we have the same goals as small property owners for some plots, but with the additional goal of having a measurable improvement on the health of the local deer herd. Since food plots can only be a fraction of a deer's diet, most of their nutrition through out the year, including minerals and such will come for eating native plants. Since the huge variety of native plants they eat each have unique abilities to mine different minerals from the soil, we simply don't see mineral deficiencies in free ranging deer herds in necropsy studies. From a QDM standpoint, our feeding plots should be focused on providing quality foods during the major stress periods when quality native foods are at a minimum. We need to recognize that since deer derive so much from native plants, even if we smooth out the dips in the annual cycle of nature, our herd will still be limited by the underlying fertility of our soil. Guys on marginal soils will never have deer like folks on high fertility soils. An mos folks in that situation have big agriculture providing much of the quality deer foods on scale for them already.

I think understanding your soil can be a great help. Not from a commercial fertilizer perspective, but from a soil health perspective. First, reducing the harm we do to the soil buy using techniques that may provide short-term results at the cost of long-term soil health and sustainability. Second, learning the techniques and crop selection that can, over the long haul, restore soils that have been abused over the years to a better state of health.

We have learned so much from farmers and adopted many of their techniques, some of which work great. But too often, we adopt them blindly, not recognizing the differences between deer and wildlife management goals and commercial farming goals. For farmers, cost-efficient yield is king. For food plotters, whether large or small property owner, planting food plots is one relatively small tool in the much larger tool box of habitat management.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[TreeDaddy]

Not to put too fine a point on it, I think we need to start with an understanding of what's on a list of macronutrients and what you will find on a list of micronutrients. The tail end of macros are often included on a list of micros.

N-P-K. We all know what list to look at to find those. Calcium, sulfur, and/or magnesium? Those are also on the macro list, but when we talk about fertilizers here, we come at them from an angle. Then there's carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. All come to the plant from the growing medium (think soil).

Then there are the true micronutrients (or trace minerals): iron (Fe), boron (B), chlorine (Cl), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), molybdenum (Mo), nickel (Ni).

Determining the true micronutirent defficiencies (forget correcting them) probably provides little benefit to the crops were are fooling with here.

So, no, IMO, fertilizers with TRUE micronutrients provide plotters little to no value, but I will occasionally buy a couple bags for certain situations - like when my wallet is too heavy.

However, there are a group of elements where imbalances hurt. N-P-K we understand. You must give consideration to calcium, sulfur, magnesium, & boron. But, you won't find sufficient 'correcting' quantities in mass mixed 'fertilizers with micronutrients.'

Jeff Lowenfels covers these in his book"Teaming with Nutrients"

The book is a crash course in plant anatomy,botany,physiology, chemistry(general,organic,and bio)

Much like baby trees and bees, I am fascinated with soil health/science

bill

 

[FarmerDan]

Sorry. Me again. I think there's one more point we must put on the table for consideration -- and I might go so far as to suggest it be your top thought before you go about expending money and energy in doing what ever might be your goal.

Ask, "What is my most limiting factor?" To go back to micronutrients, whether it be a consideration for food plots, production ag, vegetables, fruit trees, forest - or other aspects of life - if you don't account for that item (elements, factors, or whatever term you choose to use) no amount of additional input will provide much benefit.

If you are short on N, P, K, S, B, Ca, Mg, organic matter, soil depth, moisture, heat, light, no micronutrient will help. Typically, I think of vegetable growers and micronutirents. Those crops tend to be high value ($/acre), and there's room to control moisture (irrigation), light, heat, and all the other factors. Those handled, then tending to deficiencies provides substantial benefits.

And, forgetting the specific case here and speaking generally, what limits you?

 

[yoderjac]

Sorry. Me again. I think there's one more point we must put on the table for consideration -- and I might go so far as to suggest it be your top thought before you go about expending money and energy in doing what ever might be your goal.

Ask, "What is my most limiting factor?" To go back to micronutrients, whether it be a consideration for food plots, production ag, vegetables, fruit trees, forest - or other aspects of life - if you don't account for that item (elements, factors, or whatever term you choose to use) no amount of additional input will provide much benefit.

If you are short on N, P, K, S, B, Ca, Mg, organic matter, soil depth, moisture, heat, light, no micronutrient will help. Typically, I think of vegetable growers and micronutirents. Those crops tend to be high value ($/acre), and there's room to control moisture (irrigation), light, heat, and all the other factors. Those handled, then tending to deficiencies provides substantial benefits.

And, forgetting the specific case here and speaking generally, what limits you?

Great point! And I'll circle back to goals. Some micro deficiency in the top few inches of soil may limit the development of some particular crop you plant. For a vegetable farmer, the net from that crop may be the goal. While that deficiency may be the limiting factor for that crop, for deer management, a herd that ranges over a thousand acres and eats a wide variety of plant material that extract minerals from a much broader range of soil.

pH and fertilizer uptake are a perfect example of a fairly fixed limiting factor relationship for a specific plant. If pH is out of whack, a particular plant may not be able to utilize an abundance of a mineral. Iron chlorosis is a perfect example that I encountered when growing chestnuts in media indoors. Other limiting factors are not fixed. Some change seasonally and change over time.

When I started, deer were so abundant in relation to quality food that when I would mow a clover field, they would eat at one end while I was looping around the other and then go back in the woods and I would approach inside 40 yards. The next loop around, they would repeat the process. We had a pine desert will few quality native foods. Bucks had been shot indiscriminately. There was little predation. All of those limiting factors changed over time as we began to manage. Wise timber harvest, food plotting, harvest controls, coyote range expansion, mast crop failures and explosions, weather, equipment, time, and the list goes on, all play a role in the changing limiting factors for my herd. And as I mentioned earlier, the underlying fertility of my soil places a ceiling on my deer herd. There is a constant cycle of measurement, evaluation, and adjustment are required and we never get everything right.

We can sometimes be so myopic when it comes to the specifics of food plot that we often forget to look at our goals and ask "Why do I care? How much does this really impact my goals?"

Thanks,

Jack

 

[TreeDaddy]

Sorry. Me again. I think there's one more point we must put on the table for consideration -- and I might go so far as to suggest it be your top thought before you go about expending money and energy in doing what ever might be your goal.

Ask, "What is my most limiting factor?" To go back to micronutrients, whether it be a consideration for food plots, production ag, vegetables, fruit trees, forest - or other aspects of life - if you don't account for that item (elements, factors, or whatever term you choose to use) no amount of additional input will provide much benefit.

If you are short on N, P, K, S, B, Ca, Mg, organic matter, soil depth, moisture, heat, light, no micronutrient will help. Typically, I think of vegetable growers and micronutirents. Those crops tend to be high value ($/acre), and there's room to control moisture (irrigation), light, heat, and all the other factors. Those handled, then tending to deficiencies provides substantial benefits.

And, forgetting the specific case here and speaking generally, what limits you?

.......Von Leibig's Law of the minimum.....

bill

 

[FarmerDan]

.......Von Leibig's Law of the minimum.....

bill

Cool! Never heard of him.....
https://www.acgmaterials.com/liebigs-law-minimum/

 

[Troubles Trees]

Fertilizer (probably rookie) question, I had a soil test when I first bought the property but my ex-wife relieved me of all my paperwork which included my soil sample results. But I know I basically have low nutrient soil that is lacking on P and K from memory (I should redo my soil test). When talking with Ryan from Blue Hills he said I should add a small handful of 0-20-20 fertilizer to the hole when planting but I am unable to find anything locally that doesn't have Nitrogen in it.
Is there a substitute that I can mix for both to make my own? I have Googled this a couple times but most of the clickable stuff is more sciency than I can understand lol I admit I am relatively clueless with fertilizer other than what the numbers mean on the bag.

 

[yoderjac]

Fertilizer (probably rookie) question, I had a soil test when I first bought the property but my ex-wife relieved me of all my paperwork which included my soil sample results. But I know I basically have low nutrient soil that is lacking on P and K from memory (I should redo my soil test). When talking with Ryan from Blue Hills he said I should add a small handful of 0-20-20 fertilizer to the hole when planting but I am unable to find anything locally that doesn't have Nitrogen in it.
Is there a substitute that I can mix for both to make my own? I have Googled this a couple times but most of the clickable stuff is more sciency than I can understand lol I admit I am relatively clueless with fertilizer other than what the numbers mean on the bag.

"small handful of 0-20-20 fertilizer to the hole" Does this mean you are talking about planting a tree?

 

[yoderjac]

"small handful of 0-20-20 fertilizer to the hole" Does this mean you are talking about planting a tree?

Ok, I just saw your other thread that references Blue Hills, so now I'm convinced you are talking about planting a tree. I'm not sure how well this technique will work with a bare root tree, but you may want to consider it.

Most say not to add fertilizer when planting a tree. One concern is the N burning the roots. But think about how folks add fertilizer when planting a tree. They typically either mix it with the soil or add it on top. So, as water liquidates it, the roots get exposed to the fertilizer and can't avoid it.

I typically plant my trees from 3 gal RB2 containers, so planting is a bit different than bare root trees. I use an 3-pt auger that is very slightly larger than the RB2 diameter. I did the hole deeper than needed. I just use 10-10-10, but I dump a cup or so in the bottom of the hole. I then backfill the hole so that when I add the tree, the top of the medium is about 1" above the ground. I then mound my native clay on top of the media and out. This helps with the difference in infiltration between the promix and my clay.

But back to the point. The roots of my tree are several inches above the fertilizer. I have found that trees are pretty smart when it comes to root growth. If you plant a tree and it gets inundated with water for long it dies, yet native trees will grow right next to a creek or pond. What is the difference? In the first case, the water is applied to the roots. In the second case, the roots seek the water. I think the same thing holds true for fertilizer. Over time, that fertilizer I use will dissolve but in my clay, it will move slowly through the soil. The planted tree gets none of it at first. By the time the roots grow through those few inches of soil, the tree is better established and the roots are moving into the fertilizer as they see fit, not the other way around.

It has worked for me and I've not had any issue with the fertilizer hurting the tree. I presume something similar could be done with a bare root tree but I've never tried it.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[TreeDaddy]

Ok, I just saw your other thread that references Blue Hills, so now I'm convinced you are talking about planting a tree. I'm not sure how well this technique will work with a bare root tree, but you may want to consider it.

Most say not to add fertilizer when planting a tree. One concern is the N burning the roots. But think about how folks add fertilizer when planting a tree. They typically either mix it with the soil or add it on top. So, as water liquidates it, the roots get exposed to the fertilizer and can't avoid it.

I typically plant my trees from 3 gal RB2 containers, so planting is a bit different than bare root trees. I use an 3-pt auger that is very slightly larger than the RB2 diameter. I did the hole deeper than needed. I just use 10-10-10, but I dump a cup or so in the bottom of the hole. I then backfill the hole so that when I add the tree, the top of the medium is about 1" above the ground. I then mound my native clay on top of the media and out. This helps with the difference in infiltration between the promix and my clay.

But back to the point. The roots of my tree are several inches above the fertilizer. I have found that trees are pretty smart when it comes to root growth. If you plant a tree and it gets inundated with water for long it dies, yet native trees will grow right next to a creek or pond. What is the difference? In the first case, the water is applied to the roots. In the second case, the roots seek the water. I think the same thing holds true for fertilizer. Over time, that fertilizer I use will dissolve but in my clay, it will move slowly through the soil. The planted tree gets none of it at first. By the time the roots grow through those few inches of soil, the tree is better established and the roots are moving into the fertilizer as they see fit, not the other way around.

It has worked for me and I've not had any issue with the fertilizer hurting the tree. I presume something similar could be done with a bare root tree but I've never tried it.

Thanks,

Jack

Jack,

What size is the auger used to dig the hole?

bill

 

[yoderjac]

I think for a 3 gal RB2 it was 9". I'll need to check to be sure.

 

[Troubles Trees]

"small handful of 0-20-20 fertilizer to the hole" Does this mean you are talking about planting a tree?

Yessir, I was referring to planting new bare root trees. Ryan's advice was to add a handful of 0-20-20 to the hole when planting his bare root trees bud. I can't find any fertilizer locally that doesn't have Nitrogen in it. I know things like ammonium nitrate translate to Nitrogen so I was wondering if there was something organic I can mix with the backfill dirt to help with planting. Traditionally I add ProMix to the backfill dirt because my soil sucks lol I think your answer will work though Jack so thank you.

 

[Barndog56]

For potassium, you can use rock dust, wood ash, manure, or compost.

For phosphorous, try human urine, bat guano, bone meal, or mushroom compost.

Of course the nutritional value of those things will very greatly, so who knows how much to add or how much they'll actually help.

I add wood ash, coffee grounds, and egg shells to my garden, along with pulling the weeds to use as mulch, and get great results without actual fertilizers.

 

[Troubles Trees]

For potassium, you can use rock dust, wood ash, manure, or compost.

For phosphorous, try human urine, bat guano, bone meal, or mushroom compost.

Of course the nutritional value of those things will very greatly, so who knows how much to add or how much they'll actually help.

I add wood ash, coffee grounds, and egg shells to my garden, along with pulling the weeds to use as mulch, and get great results without actual fertilizers.

That is more of what I was looking for, thank you for that! Wood ash I readily have as well as used coffee grounds, the problem there is how much or how strong are they but I suppose if I just used a little of each to mix into my ProMix when back filling would only help not hurt.

 

[yoderjac]

That is more of what I was looking for, thank you for that! Wood ash I readily have as well as used coffee grounds, the problem there is how much or how strong are they but I suppose if I just used a little of each to mix into my ProMix when back filling would only help not hurt.

If you are planting bare root trees can back-filling with pro-mix, you must very high infiltration soils. If I did that in my clay, I'd create a pond and kill the tree.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[White Birch Farm]

The simple is “Yes”, they are definitely worth it for many food plotters. Many people are short on both Boron and Sulphur to the point that it impacts the quality of their plots and they have no idea how to add them to their soil safely. For those people, bagged fertilizer with micros can be a godsend. They are a cheap, quick, easy and safe way to address those deficiencies while addressing macro deficiencies simultaneously.

Below is just one of many bagged options I can get from my dealer.

 

[TreeDaddy]

If you are planting bare root trees can back-filling with pro-mix, you must very high infiltration soils. If I did that in my clay, I'd create a pond and kill the tree.

Thanks,

Jack

Jack,

How deep are you drilling with the auger for the 3 gal RBII?

What goes at the very bottom to backfill to keep from creating a pond?

Pea gravel,river rock, or just clay?

bill