So is anybody hammering the county government to change their wicked wasteful ways? In our county yard debri and road maintenance slash is collected and composted (or the crews will dump freshly chipped stuff on your land for you for free if they are working near you), then the compost is sold and basically goes back out where it came from. Yard debri etc is NOT accepted at the county landfill--you try to bring it in and you are turned away. Trees come down people fight over them for firewood. If a person wants to learn how to compost the WOW (Western Oregon Waste) people have handouts and will show you their compost operation. Which is HUGE. They use pipes through the piles to heat their offices etc.

so,,,there were enough people who cared in our county and made a stink and changed things. They do this in the suburbs/city of Portland as well, so it's not just a rural thing--although the rural road guys are def more flexible in giving away free slash. Sure the county/WOW makes a profit from selling the compost--it's all kept out of the landfill and it goes back to enrich at least some of the land it came from. If you want to compost yourself they will educate you, and if you make friends with them they'll give you free stuff when they are trimming on your road.

wyld thang,
western OR and western WA are way ahead of the curve when it comes to recycling and composting. Personally I appreciate what these extreme composters are doing. This is "unwanted" material that would otherwise fill their local landfill. I am willing to be that if someone needed a truck load of compost and did not have the means to make it themselves that forerunner or mudburn or many of the others here would be more than happy to share.
Is it really hording to take an underutilized valuable resource and use it for your own good...oh yeah, and share the knowledge of how to do it with as many others as will listen? I don't think so.
Trisha~who is now in eastern WA and realizing just how far ahead of the curve western WA really is in its eco efforts.

I hear ya, but y'all aren't getting what I'm saying--replicating composting concentrating huge amounts of stuff is not feasible on an everybody doing it scale. There just ain't the huge amounts of stuff to go around. Maybe if people rotated who gets what...

Then there is the basic principle in nature that what grows up falls down...and that is "enough". It works. That principle can be built upon for farming(and will have to be, in the future). So slash is being removed from roadsides/cleared land. That is stuff that is not falling down to nourish the land, whatever land it grew on. Someday that will bite someone in the butt. Like Forerunner, someone before him removed biomass form his land and depleted it and now Forerunner is working to fix the result of that broken cycle on his land. If he indeed gives away a lot of compost, or sells it(he is sure welcome to make a buck on that btw) he is not robbing Peter to pay Paul to concentrate that wealth on his land for his lifetime for his benefit. The question that is hard to answer (and will have to be answered someday) is how much is enough. Americans are so stuck on "more is better". I know it's dumb to argue this with something so sacred as compost...

Anyways, Oregon and WA are "ahead of the curve" because ENOUGH people cared. Critical mass. Or, maybe more importantly, it pencils out on paper for the county to run a composting business and keep yard debri out of the landfill. And now we're back to that nasty economic value...

You have a hoarding issue. Those are your issues and are not applicable to what's been described in this thread. To help you work through them, if you're willing, I'll describe again what's going on, since you seem to have missed it in this ongoing discussion.

First:
Neither my piles nor Forerunners are secret or hidden. We both do indeed collect large amounts of 'stuff' for future use. However, you seem to imply a competition for this 'stuff' in which we are beating out others in order to collect it. In both cases, I can assure you, that is not the case. The material I have collected has mainly come from the local sale barn. People are quite willing to sell them their cows, but there is only a handful of people in the county who desire the "waste" material enough to come get it. A local man with a dump truck is paid $50 per load to haul it off and dump it, wherever he can find to dump it. Is it used or wasted? Some of both. Everyone in the county has the same access to the piles as I do. The man who works there is just as willing to use his skid loader to load their vehicles as he is mine. So, why does the pile sit there for weeks at a time only to be hauled off and dumped somewhere, treated as waste, not a resource? If I put forth effort to make something useful out of this wasted resource, rather than see it be wasted, I become a hoarder (with negative connotations implied)?

Am I in competition with others for this resource? Not so you would notice. Others do not show up to get it. I do. When someone else does, I back off and let them have it. If someone wants finished compost from my piles (when they are finished), they are welcome to have it. I've offered it to several people. Forerunner gladly gives away compost. I have hauled several truck loads for others from the sale barn and have others to haul for when they're ready for it.

The simple fact is that 98% (my estimate) of the people in this county do not consider compostable materials a resource; to them it's a waste. For example, a local power company had several trees trimmed and the branches chipped. This crew dumped a few loads on the property of a man I know. He asked a friend of mine if he wanted some of the chips. When my friend said yes, the guy said that he'd wait until he got some before he burned the rest.

Do I want others/everyone to compost? Yes, of course. When/if that happens, will I continue to haul tons of the 'stuff' home from the sale barn? No. But until then, I will haul it away and make compost with it rather than let it go to waste.

Can extreme composting be done with everyone doing it? Yes, of course. The extreme part isn't really about the size of the piles; it is about a radical approach to reclaiming and recycling "waste" products. If you don't take an "extreme" view of things, you don't see the possibilities. So, like happens in my county, the pile of cow crap isn't compost waiting to happen, it's something to be hauled off and dumped somewhere.

Is extreme composting "natural"? Yes and no. Nature composts material regardless of the size of the pile. It's the way God made things to work. However, it's rare to find large stores of compostable material naturally occurring. You also need to realize that for the material to be collected at the sale barn or at a yard waste dump is unnatural. It is also unnatural for it to be hauled off and dumped in a ravine or over a ridge after being unnaturally collected. At least when we haul it home, let it compost, and then spread it on our fields, it is no longer a wasted resource, and it is returning something to part of the land in our respective counties.

No one claimed that what we're doing is sustainable. Composting is sustainable, but using trucks and tractors to haul in and build compost piles is not something that can continue indefinitely. While the opportunity exists and the material would otherwise go to waste, I'm going to continue collecting it and composting it. To let the manure from the sale barn, the leaves and grass clippings at the yard waste dump, the sawdust from the sawmill, etc. go to waste and not become a useful resource to help restore the fertility of the soil because it is "unsustainable" is an idiotic notion. It is a more sustainable practice than what would happen (and what does happen) to most of the compostable material around here, I'm afraid, because I can only haul so much.

So, to recap. Your issues are your own. Deal with them. I think they are silly and not founded in the reality of the situation in my part of the world. If you wish to investigate the situation so that you can comment on it with knowledge, please do so. Perhaps then you won't have the same issues.

mudburn

I see I struck a nerve by calling it hoarding:viking:. Tell me, how much IS enough, and how much is redundancy and "waste" that could have been helpful somewhere else. Do you know? That's great you give it away, really.

I'm beginning to think I live in some sort of eco-nirvana, however. I'd think since you're so into composting you'd be interested to hear how it works and what the public vibe is in a place where it is communally respected and used, and learn how people got involved and lobbied to make government do compost and how it got to this lovely valuation of poop and slash. But I suppose that's just idiodic to think on a community level. You're right, I dont' know what the situation is in your community(like, how would I?) it sounds very sad. Hopefully someday y'all can be like Oregon(that was supposed to be a joke). SOunds like we're a lot further along the compost continuum as a people(would that be, uh...more "extreme"???).

BTW your hoarding def you chose says "often" secret, meaning hoarded piles are sometimes indeed "not secret", and hoarders do indeed hoard things that aren't of value to other people. So yeah, you do fit the definition of "storing a supply for the future".

And now you can attack me on accusing preppers of hoarding.

I agree that they are hoarding. Who cares? If no one else wants the stuff and they do, hoard away. It's not their job to change the world, country or even their county.

When I see old appliances out on garbage day, I'll pick them up and bring them in for scrap. That's not sustainable if everyone did it, but so what? I can make a buck and I enjoy doing it. It's sustainable for me, and stupid for the people throwing the stuff out. By Wild Things logic, I should educate them, tell them how to make a buck off their junk and probably even share the cash with them.

Good luck with that philosophy in life.

Pete

Granted, by the definition, I'm a hoarder. However, it seemed that you were implying certain negative connotations.

How much is enough? When will it, if it will, reach a point of redundancy? I don't know. I'm only beginning. Right now my intent is to keep hauling it in as long as it is available. It would be great if others wanted to do the same and had the ambition to do so. It's available, and it's free. I'll be sure to let you know when/if I reach the point of diminishing returns (I'm not even to the point of appreciating returns yet, unfortunately :sob:).

I'd love to see the people in the community/county more interested in composting and working to utilize the resources available. That doesn't mean that I believe the government should do it, though. Why should any gov't bureaucracy "hoard" the resources? :shrug:

I've contemplated ways to coordinate a simplification of the process on a larger scale to benefit more people, but my thoughts are only in the beginning stages and may go nowhere. I may apply a traditional viewpoint, economic analysis to such an endeavor and conclude that it makes no sense whatsoever. :hysterical:

Oregon is an extreme state.

mudburn the hoarder

well since appliances don't grow on trees, what you do is "different" RNP. You fully deserve to make money for cleaning up. I'm not sure how you got I think you should pay people out of what I said, but whatever, good for you)

BUT, I think I'm figuring out what Mudborn and Forerunner's problem is with starting a composting revolution in their county(or wherever it is they want to). By taking some righteous moral highground and dismissing the economic value of composting they're missing out on a huge "bargaining" chip with farmers and more importantly the government. Both are a group that toe that bottom line, money talks, especially the prospect of making or saving money in these times. Economics sure do trump some hippy dippy better peace love way. How do you think they got it through here in Oregon? sure there's a bigger appreciation here of the environment and concern about sustainability and quality of life for all, BUT the people who got city hall to tumble made their business plan and showed how it would be economically(and conservationally) feasible to keep stuff out of the landfill and to sell compost. The gov's hands are tied by their budgets(esp local gov, and yeah I already hear all the wasteful gov spending yeah-butts)--if they can't make it work then good luck trying to get them to spend money being righteous.

As long as economic considerations are considered "low", tainted with some sort of moral failing, composting is going to be considered a backyard oddity by the general public, and unworkable by local government.

re: "what if everyone did it"
the assumption is that earth fertility should be evenly distributed. why? does the area beside roads need to have the same fertility as gardens? does the pasture for your recreational horse need to have the same fertility as your garden which feeds your family? the point is, there are valid reasons to shuffle fertility around, to make the most critical areas more fertile than other less critical areas.

even in the old sustainable days, i assume many a farmer put most of the manure on only some parts of their farm, leaving other parts with less fertility. if ya gotta get the most income from the market garden, you're gonna put most of the compost there, not in the pig-pen which you only use for home consumption. over time, some areas of a farm would be more fertile than others, even if they started out the same. same thing on a community scale.

re: "not economic"
our current economy is uneconomic. right now, we print little slips of green paper for free, and the rest of the world busts their derrière to give us oil, trinkets and baubles, etc. how much would your "limited edition" collectible art poster be worth, if the artist lied and didn't limit the production run to 5,000 units as promised? how much will the dollar be worth with the trillions of new money bernanke is printing and congress is spending? what "uneconomic" activities will become economic at that point? what activities will become important? how much is the option value worth to you, to already have the fertility in place, and the skills, to grow nutritious food?

as hockey star wayne gretsky says, his greatness is due to: "i don't skate to where the puck is, i skate to where the puck is going to be." where is the current unsustainable US economy going? where do you need to be when the music stops? my guess is forerunner and mudburn will look mighty "lucky" at that point.

--sgl

why shouldn't the gov have a hand in making legislation to protect habitat and work with private companies to do things a better way(I know here that the waste management and landfills are run by private companies, but are tied into local gov because we vote on measures dealing with their issues). Local government/city/county stuff is "different" than the uber ebo fed gov anyway, and it's different everywhere how utilities(which wastemamnagement falls under), I was just relating how it works here.

Our local waste management does not "hoard" the yard debri--it sells the finished compost, and applies the finished compost in various roadside projects, land reclamation projects and city parks. It all goes somewhere else. (gee, more of that extreme weirdness that we the people care about the land and seek to improve it, even, OMG by gov means)

Right now as you keep applying more and more ad infinitum you WON"T know when you can stop bringing in outside resources and let the natural cycle(aided by informed planting of a combination of plants) do it's thing. Seriously, what would nature do without us piling compost all through out the forest/prairie/desert to "help" it? Obviously there IS a point of equilibrium--and obviously the plants you WANT to grow will affect that. But I certainly think "enough" is a good thing to learn about, because there will be a day when we'll have to know what enough is to "share the wealth". (yes I'm using that inflammatory commie phrase to make a point). YOU don't have to figure out what that is if you dont' want to, but I think the concept of "enough" is an important one to consider even with compost.

(good lord, I do confess I forgot who I was talking to, smacks forehead--of course you couldn't care less about the Oregon gov and local gov and private companies do to compost...no DL/SSN!)

Wyld Thang:

It sounds like there's a GREAT system in your area! Unfortunately, here's what happens in my town:

If a tree is downed in a storm (like happened a lot this past month), the city will come along and chop it up and turn it into mulch. This may get hauled to a point where it can be used (like the municipal yard waste dump forerunner mentioned).

If someone else takes care of the limbs (like the guy I know who is wheelchair-bound, and another friend came with his employees [he runs a lawncare business] and pruned back the messed up tree), then they usually go in a dumpster. This particular fellow put some in a dumpster at his day job (filled it up), and another in someone else's dumpster (about half a dumpster...but he did have permission).

Unfortunately, I have no way of chewing through the material, or I would gladly take it. As it is, I only have (occasional) access to a small leaf vacuum/chipper/shredder with about a 1.5" throat. Took me about 3 hours last night to chew through the smaller diameter portions of some mulberry limbs I trimmed.

This small scale works for us, on our tiny city lot (our compost pile, doubled last night with the fresh carbon, could almost fit in the trunk of our car). But it still bothers me that all this other compostable material is going to waste.

So, the issue here is that the "extreme composters" who have giant piles (or are they hills and mountains at this point :D ) are utilizing stuff that would, otherwise, go to waste. It wouldn't simply rot where it falls, as it's fallen and moved somewhere else. In theory, that would be the most natural method, but I don't know anyone who, after buying veggies at the farmer's market, would clean them and take the scraps back out to the farmer, spreading them on their respective fields.

I'm trying to be silly here to prove a point. The goal is to (beneficially) reduce or eliminate the waste of these valuable resources. They're going away. A compost pile is a better destination than the landfill.

surprise! the hedgerows along the rural roads here support a variety of feral fruit trees left over from the homesteaders. Which right now support wildlife. Wildlife includes polinators BTW.

I'm not talking on a scale of a farm. Of course a farm raising diverse product and rotating fields will have varied areas of fertility. A smart person will know different plants LIKE different amounts of "fertility", and hopefully will give plants that want more, more, and those that like it scrabbly, less. I'm talking about taking resources from a county wide area and concentrating it on a few acres, and the concept of "enough"(why do I keep repeating myself?)

How does the old-fashioned concept of "fallow" fall into this.

so far the point of all this seems to be "get yours while the gettin's good".

Seriously, doing this on a community level(or horrors, "state" wide) is a non-issue?

BTW I've noticed on some parts of the roadside they are throwing the chipped slash down on the ground--I'm thinking the owner requests this.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I'm not saying composting is bad!!!!! I'm talking about the effects of (now I'll throw in "long term" for good measure) taking resources from a large area and concentrating them on a small area(how many times do I have to repeat myself). Scale! Now I'll throw in the rich get richer, the poor get poorer(however moral that may or may not be, you can't get around "consequences" of that equation, like it or not).

At some point here in Oregon, yard waste stopped being waste and became a soil amendment to better tilth and fertility in the mind of the general public. IT HAPPENED. I find it really weird that the general response is "that's cool but that's not reality". yeah, okay, whatever, stay in the dark ages(that's a joke).

Those limbs are totally usable for you sg. Check out "hugelkulture", or if you are allowed to burn, burn them and add the ash to your soil(as long as your soil isn't uber sweet). Hugelkulture can make gardening on boggy soil possible.

Or there is always firewood, like I said, regular people in my county snap up any downed wood like that for firewood. Lots of old farts that sell firewood for pin money too.

ANd yes, your vegetable peeling analogy is silly, it is nowhere near the scale I'm talking about:)

I'm also beginning to think the Oregon redneck is the epitome of industriousness and thrift!

I have mostly heard of hoarding in the sense of filling your house up with useless items and not allowing others to take those items away. But to say adding to the fertility of ones soil using what would only go to waste is hoarding is not right. There is no one using these products. These products have been thrown away. If a person feels an item has no use and tosses it and another person finds that item and has a use for it then why should they not collect it and use it. On top of this the people you accuse of hoarding will give anyone free compost if they just ask. How would this be hoarding.

I Don't know how the system works where you are but what we have here is a bit of a joke. We have to pay to have curbside pick up of compostables twice a month in a wheelie bin that only fits some weeding and the prunings from our self pruning willow. No grass clippings or others. That material is taken to a dump where it is dumped in a pile to compost or it is given to composting companies that turn around and sell it. In the end the compost turns out to be more expensive than chemical fertilizers and so everyone goes with the chemicals leaving a large surplus of unsold compost. (also sale barns, woodmills etc need to pay big money to send they materials off to compost.

Not a very effective system if you ask me.

Okay, I take it back. I'm not really a hoarder. I don't take the majority of the available material -- only a small percentage of it. I don't sell compost but am willing to give it away to others and to help others build their own piles. If a local municipality collecting (that's the definition we agreed upon) most of the available material isn't hoarding, then what I'm doing certainly isn't.

In the morally superior stance that has been posited, extreme composting isn't sustainable, it is unnatural, and it represents an elitist hogging of resources that should be more evenly distributed. That viewpoint misses something vital: the material is being collected unnaturally and unsustainably at the sale barn or sawmill where I pick it up, completely apart from my intervention. These resources being concentrated in a single place in an unnatural way has nothing to do with me. I take a small percentage of that material in order to spread it out over 20 acres or more, not all on my land. I'm not going out in the myriad cow pastures to scoop up the resources dropped out there -- I'm retrieving some of the minuscule percentage of the resources in the county which the cows living here excrete out of their backsides while at the sale barn for one or two days.

I have no problem with starting a composting revolution in my area. This whole discussion has been based upon your contention and issues with the notion of hoarding as you see it relates to extreme composting. I believe you are wrong in your assessment. You are welcome to believe however you wish, of course. Your moral superiority does not trump mine. The two are incompatible in many areas. So be it.

Sharing the wealth of composting (not just compost itself) is a process because it is a foreign concept in an agricultural world focused on chemical amendments and treatments. I don't know what role you had in establishing the composting programs in your municipality and the state of Oregon -- you haven't told us. You have no idea what I have or am doing in this area besides hauling some available "waste" material and building compost piles. Don't assume it's nothing. Don't assume your way is the best way, either.

You said I WON'T know when I can stop bringing in outside resources. Your assumption is not well grounded. I have not discussed my gardening/growing principles and practices. You don't know what baselines I have established and what variables I am and will be tracking. I honestly answered your question that at this point I don't know when I'll have enough -- I have not spread any compost yet. How could I know at this point? I also do not assume that all things of value can be quantitatively measured.

One more thing. I don't feel sorry for those individuals who know the resources that are available locally but who are unwilling to get off their backsides to collect it and compost it. The natural tendencies and aptitudes of individuals account for much of the diversity in compost accumulation and utilization we may observe. There is no inherent right or requirement for an even distribution of compost. Individuals are inherently unequal in matters of composting. The wealth of compost is naturally distributed throughout the community, but it would only be in an unnatural situation that we would experience an equal distribution of compost.

mudburn

Oh, btw, upon what do you base your assumption that I have no DL/SSN?

man wyld thang you're a trip.

Instigate controversy :soap:

Hover for reply

Play victim :awh:

repeat.....:clap:

Realistically, if we get to the point where people are fighting over compost then I'll believe America JUST MIGHT survive.

Few people even garden. Fewer people yet even compost. I don't believe anyone is doing anyone any harm by collecting organic material in their community. Heck, people are HAPPY to bring Forerunner dead cows and horses. They might be more inclined to fight over where to park their trailer to unload rather than fighting over the finished compost.

Thanks. I was trying to find a way to say that, but you've summed it up rather well.

I have been hovering and watching this thread for a while and can't believe this latest twist in drama that has been inserted into this fine thread. Personally, I think the discussion of hoarding is preposterous to anyone who ACTUALLY READ THE THREAD! 1)How do you even start to hoard something that is being potentially thrown away. ("Oh, some other person may wants some of it!!!!!" >>Well, then they need to get off their duff and get it. <PERIOD!!> 2) "The municipality needs to...." >>But they are not likely too, AND why do we need government to do the work of private citizens again....>>Getting in line for my free compost handout.... Made by Mr. O himself! ROTFLMAO Give us a break! 3)"The municipality needs to...." >>>Ohhhh, I bet they can be more efficeint at it tooo.... Arent all governments??? lololol

The sad truth is that if every municipality DID compost, it wouldn't be long until it was illegal for Joe Citizen TO compost because it could only be done safely (Etc Etc ad nauseaum) by the governments because as we all know quiet too well, private citizens cannot and should not think or do anything for themselves. BEWARE WHAT YOU WISH FOR!

I couldn't agree more. I also believe that extreme composters draw more people to composting (as this thread shows) and that the municipalities are more likely to get on board if they can go and see how it is done.

If anyone is looking for bulk compost supplies, try your local university. We have been contacted by a couple who were looking for a farm to collect and compost the waste from their cafeterias. Unfortunately we did not have the time, space or equipment to take them up on it. If they were able to deliver it I would have found the space!

Mudborn, again, I am not "against" composting. I simply am asking the question is the ongoing collection of mountains of stuff neccessary(why must I keep repeating myself...). I'm not the only one thinking it's troublesome--the EPA has their own questions about large concentrated amounts of animal/human waste as well. Probably why the sale barn loves for you to take it away...I know here that if one has huge mounds of manure(even composting manure), the EPA would be FAST on my doorstep.

DId I set up recycling composting in Oregon? nope. But I USE the resources "religiously" and tell other people about the resources available too. I take their free classes and learn all I can. I think it's cool what the people/government have set up here to make this land healthier.

So, if you are interested in the health of the land, and how a government body is dealing, check this out
http://www.yamhillswcd.org/
The Yamhill Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) is a subdivision of the state government, led by a locally elected board of directors who serve without pay. The district's charge is to help conserve the land, water, plants, and wildlife resources in Yamhill County. The Yamhill SWCD directors are joined by associated directors, staff, and volunteers to carry out the district activities.

Much of the district's work involves matching governmental assistance with local conservation needs and encouraging land managers to use conservation practices. As a resident of Yamhill County or the surrounding area, you have the opportunity to participate in the Yamhill SWCD and take advantage of the many services we offer.

There are lots of pdfs you can read to see a model of studies and resources they have to help landowners improve/restore their lands and the waterways that go through them. And it's not (cough) just compost.

Compost is part of a whole. If you are concerned about the health of the land you own then you *should* also be concerned about the health of the entire watershed--you can't be an island in a wasteland and continue to grow lots of stuff--eventually the water is tainted, the polinators die(you could keep buying bees I guess). Since you dismiss doing things through government channels, that it's even possible (which I have provided proof it WORKS through government channels), you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.

My "assumption" of when enough is enough is grounded in many people's work studying what is enough, it's not some whackball idea dreamed up to annoy you.

Controversy? so it's not good to ask questions, nor keep restating my question when it gets reworded and misinterpreted and dodged? Or question the "it'll never work" reaction when I suggest working to change local government to use composting materials(and provide examples of where it HAS worked, so it's not some pipe dream). Seriously what IS the vision here? Who is indeed the one sounding more "extreme", saying it CAN/IS be done on a county/state level???

Sure Mudburn, I dont' know exactly what you're doing, I will give you that. Forerunner has set the example here in this thread with his mountains of collected stuff, which is labeled the Good Thing Extreme and THAT (again, the ongoing concentration of huge amounts of stuff on a few acres) is what I question--how does that affect the health of the community. IF it is redistributed, good--it works to bring up the health of the entire ecosystem which is a good thing for everyone. If a farmer has no care for the health of lands surrounding him he is a shortsighted farmer(I would call it worse).

(but...I will confess, when my question keeps being reworded or twisted into something different such as I'm saying "composting is bad" I have the personality flaw that makes me want to keep asking mY question until I get an answer. Which the answer appears to be "I don't know"...which is an alright answer)

If you really are interested in how it works here, here it is. There are three bins for pick up, within city limits(or county limits, depending on how urban). A small bin for garbage(about two medium size laundry baskets), and two big bins(about 1 1/2 big garbage cans worth size) one for recycling(glass, metal, metal scrap, paper, newpaper, magazines, plastic) and one for yard debri(grass clippings included, the only thing you cant put in there is ashes because of hot ash fire danger). If you don't have recycling pick up in your area, you can drop it off at the recycling center for free, in any amount(which we do, or I drop it off at my sister's house who has curbside pickup). Though if you are dropping it off you have to sort it there(oh wah!). Yard debri is taken by separate trucks to composting places the county has set up. Here in my county it's next to the recycling center in town. In the fall they have curbside scoop up of leaves and whatever amount extra yard debri. There is also a recycling center at the dump(and you take big scrap, tires, and apllainces there--they dont' put that stuff into the landfill. they will check your garbage bags going over the edge and if you dump something not allowed you get in trouble).

The compost sold by the county is cheaper than the compost in bags at Home Depot/Lowes etc, and for a reasonable fee they will deliver and dump it where you want(within reason of course, they dont' want to get stuck).

It is "assumed" that rural people compost their yard debri/manure(which they do or else they give it away to people who want manure). They are also free to burn it outside of the summer burn ban.

Again, I'm not saying "composting" is hoarding, I was asking about the giant piles of it. Scale.

How would anyone even go about explaining the entire holistic viewpoint of proper land management and stewardship? What one post would ever possibly contain the info you need to learn that?

I think what the OP was doing here was taking ONE element of proper land husbandry and explaining it. There is a certain assumption that someone who cares enough about their soil fertility to learn composting will ALSO care enough about the rest of it to seek out the other information they need.

As for the scale of "giant piles of compost", I don't know why there's a problem with that. You'll have to explain to me what the potential harm is, or perhaps be more specific about what question you're asking.

Realistically, WT, I think you just don't like Forerunner for some reason and are looking for reasons to attack him. That seems to me to be more what this is about.

He's just talking about compost. He's not giving you his religious beliefs, his political ideology, or trying to convince you to like his favorite food. If you don't want giant piles of compost on your property then don't do it.

If anyone else were to have giant piles of compost/manure sic ongoing concentration on a large scale I would ask the same question. My questions have been about practicality of execution and science. "Hoarding" was an unfortunate choice that carries a lot of extra connotation on this board by it's demographic, but certainly applicable by definition. And I assumed that the health of the surrounding landscape would be at least a tack on concern, but that's fine, it's clearly not something valuable discussing here so "I get it".

Forerunner and I have already agreed to disagree--and believe it or not we two are probably closer in a lot of ways than one would think, and I suspect if we were to get together in real life as real people we'd have a lot of things to discuss in a beneficial way. He hasn't been here to say anything, which is fine, the discussion is with other people. I've made it really clear my question involves "enough" or scale of concentration/application, and that yes the gov is quite capable(with the right people in the mix of course) of implementing a composting program(to which the general reply has been "that's silly/impossible"). I think it's really weird that extremeliness is next to godliness, and when I take this to the next level--community--that's just knee jerk untenable. What, that's too extreme? If Forerunner does indeed have a vision for practically changing the community's mindset about the value of compost, then I'd love to hear it. As it stands now that mindset of "waste" is to his and Mudborn's etc benefit, sure. How to win the hearts and minds...obviously it can be done. Is it even worth doing? (I'm having a hard time deciding if y'all think so)

This is a gargantuan thread now, it can stand some flights of tangent exploring "what does composting mean". Things dont' get discovered by staying home in your closet doing the same ol.

I for one am very interested in this thread as it was. While I will never compost to the extent that some on here do, I have learned alot and hope to continue to. I have a large pile thanks to my five equine that I am supplementing with kitchen and yard "waste", wood chips via my awesome chipper, and the occasional bale of hay that may go moldy. I know lots of gardeners but very, very few composters. It's like anything else, each to their own.
My community doesn't and likely won't ever compost the materials it collects. There is a yard waste dump area which is scavenged by others primarily for wood. When the pile gets big and dry enough the town workers unfortunately burns it.

I don't understand WT's motive for the postings. I understand what you are saying, so don't need anything repeated. It just seems that the postings are somewhat hostile (maybe not the right word) and argumentative and I truly don't understand the rationale for that. They certainly are veering from the original spirit of this thread.
Composting in any form utilizes materials that might be wasted otherwise (burned, thrown away, etc.) and that's always a good thing IMO.

Large private piles of compost versus large community compost piles would have the same effects on local water tables. Being a community endeavor doesn't change the fact that on a big scale, the piles can be huge, sit on the bare ground (the ones I've seen) and potentially produce runoff. The EPA surely doesn't have one set of standards for private composting and another for community composting. Regarding taking materials away from other areas and possibly depriving those areas of necessary materials, that view seems like speculation and would need scientific studies to prove that there would be some sort of cause and effect.
Anyway, I think anytime something is reused rather than thrown in a landfill can't be anything but beneficial, no matter what the scale or method.

Wood ash is still a valuable garden amendment.

One fringe issue that may explain a basis for my speculation(and I wasn't the first...) on the imbalance of nutrients is the 100 years of fire suppression in the west. It used to be fires went through and burned up the fallen dead stuff and dry lower limbs of biger trees, and too thickly sprouted young trees. Big enough trees were unaffected, and the fire kept down the competition for resources and returned nutrients to the soil that were sucked up out of the soil by the trees and deposited in dead stuf--it was all part of the cycle. Fire also kept pests under control. Now we've got thick undernourished trees competing for nutrients that are lying on top of the soil taking longer to leach down (because rot is slower than ash). Undernourished trees get sick and harbor pests. Pests thrive because the fires don't burn them. When fire does happen, the fuel is so thick the whole forest burns and everything starts from scratch.

It's not a long leap to apply this to nutrient cycles being applied to farm fields, and to question the impact on the greater ecosystem.

Here the giant community piles are redistibuted back "out". If the piles are just sitting there they just become a monocultured landfill.

WT, are you trying to compare wildfires to burning compostable materials and trying to say it is the same?

It's a good thing in your community in OR that they are well advanced in their composting skills, this is not the norm in most communities.

Could you spread some light on why you think a large community compost pile would have a positive effect on land, water, plants, and wildlife resources where as a large private compost pile would not?

Who 'assumes' this and why are you certain that it is composted or given away? You must be one busy lady to keep tabs on the whole county and what the rural residents are doing with their compostable materials.

I'll see if I can do this and make sense.

Thank you for asking :goodjob:

there is really no reason why people can't be taught to change their minds. The time is ripe for people to really value the land and learn to care for it, and learn news ways of not consuming so much and making so much garbage. I confess I am pretty insulated, I dont' get out of OR/WA much. I did go to CA some but it was a culture shock to see how water was wasted, and the amount of garbage along the roads, and the amount of nest-fouling going on--despite CA's prideful facade of being "green" and eco conscious blah blah.

That isn't to say OR can't be a model for preserving the health of farmland and wild lands. It took some rather "progressive/draconian"(however you choose to see it) land use legislation to do so way back when nobody was into conservation, but we're sure reaping the quality of life results of less sprawl, clean water and good farmland today.

Seriously, around town the pig farmers are all over that kind of waste to feed their pigs. My friend who runs a bread pantry used to give her moldy bread to a pig farmer(I think he died though, that's why the "used to"), and I could take as much as I wanted for my chickens. People scoop up all the icky produce at farmer's markets and roadside stands for their livestock. It's quite competitive.

WT thinks the government need to manage and lead the composting charge. If the government isn't leading it, it's not being done right.

Kind of weird for someone who is leading the drive for Palin as president.

Pete

Wow, I was just going to brag that 2 months into our arrival at the farm we have gotten 2 large piles of compost to completely break down into black rich fully composted goodness and that our gardens are thriving in our rocky Ozark lime rock soil. :thumb:

I think some of it depends on where you are, I live in an extremely rural area surrounded by farms and you can get all the composting materials you want just for the asking and we compost everything. I can even get firewood for free if I yard it out and haul it off because people cant give it away unless its cut and neatly stacked (lots of lazy people looking for free handouts with no effort but thats another thread).

I understand what your trying to say WyldThang but I think your debating a non-issue and are on the wrong side of this. I still dig your posts though...you have a convoluted way of getting to the point sometimes but I always enjoy the journey!!!

wyld thang, perhaps you might be interested in this link. I don't know if it will answer any specific questions you raised or not as I haven't gone back through this thread to read the whole progression.

I did have a chance to see Rodale's composting first-hand. They have large tanks to collect leachate "compost tea" to not only make use of the valuable liquid but also to contain the run-off. They only apply compost to their fields every 5 years or so due to the potential build up of phosphorous levels. A quote from the article: "If you've got too much, you're probably better off selling it than over-applying it."

http://newfarm.rodaleinstitute.org/f...st/index.shtml

It would behoove us to go back to the beginning of this thread to see the intent and purpose:

Notice, from the beginning (and those who have read this thread already know this), the point has been made that 'extreme composting' is a utilization of what is otherwise being thrown away and wasted. The desire and efforts are for others to catch the composting bug and participate in the process. Several posters on this thread have shared how they've been inspired by the examples and information shared. A great impact and difference is being made by sharing our individual efforts and educating many about the possibilities that exist. It would be great if everyone would recognize the value of compost and get involved; that is one of the stated desires Forerunner posited on February 22, 2010, when he started this thread.

Can a government entity do the same job? Sure. There is ample evidence of this. However, as has been stated (and miss-characterized), the government, local or otherwise, is not necessarily the best, and certainly not the only, entity to undertake "large-scale" composting. There are plenty of individuals and private entities fully capable of doing so. Why should anyone wait for the municipality to do what he/she can do? If individuals can accomplish "large-scale" composting for their own and others' use, there is no need for tax-supported government efforts. If the local gov't here was involved in composting, that would be fine, but they aren't. And, I don't believe I need to put forth effort to get the gov't involved -- it's people being involved, especially of their own volition not by compulsion, that is important.

Forerunner has described some of what he is doing. He hasn't described all of it. Some people will take exception to what they think he is doing (maybe even without reading what he's described in this thread). Composting is the focus here, not other efforts associated with responsible land husbandry/sustainability/conservation.

WT wants to know "how much is enough?" I've already answered her question from my perspective: I don't know since I haven't begun to apply compost yet. There is not an across-the-board quantifiable amount because there are many different variables involved. It is the responsibility of the individual to determine the amount and frequency of application. This is dependent upon the amount of compost one has, the type and condition of one's soil, the plants to be grown, weather, etc. A simple answer is unrealistic at this point, and even if I could provide the answer, it wouldn't necessarily apply in other cases.

Using ashes from burning biomass does provide some essential nutrients and definitely has its place. I use my ashes. I do not burn things just to produce ashes, though. Around here, the forests do not historically burn on a regular basis. They drop their leaves every year which, along with other materials, naturally breaks down and composts under the canopy. Building compost piles with unnaturally accumulated materials (i.e. concentrated at the sale barn, sawmill, horse farm, etc.) and spreading that in needed areas more closely replicates the natural process as it occurs here. The piles just allow more control and speed up the process, making it more manageable. I don't consider ashes and compost as equivalent -- compost provides humus that ashes do not.

To return to the original topic and purpose of the thread (not that some of the tangents aren't beneficial), last week the guy who runs the local sale barn asked me about their dead cows. A rendering plant has been taking them (the sale barn pays for the disposal), but as of July, they will no longer be taking dead cows. No one else in the area (a wide area) will take them. They're not wanted. The other option (what they used to do) that the sale barn has is to pay for a backhoe to dig a hole to bury the dead cows. So, I've agreed to begin composting their dead animals, in essence, burying them in sawdust. I didn't ask for this opportunity; he offered it because of my efforts in hauling off their "waste", and it's a service I can provide for them. He wouldn't have even asked if I hadn't previously told him about composting animals, something he did not know anything about.

mudburn

Mudburn,
Is the sale barn transporting their dead animals to you are will you have to transport them? Awesome to get a rich N supply.

WT: I live in an areas that historically was a summer fire area, and then pine monoculture replaced the old virgin long leaf pine/Oaks of days gone by. Unfortunately, the timber companies do not Prescribe burn as they used to which leads to a build up of combustables. I asked a timber company representative why they rarely burn anymore and he answered 1) Liability: fire can get out of control and burn private land, houses, or cause smoke dangers to motorists; 2) Carbon issues: Burning releases carbon and the EPA is leaning on them to reduce carbon in the air, and by letting the debris rot, it puts more of the carbon into the soil. I fear we will see more decisions based on carbon in the air arguments.

So, while I like a lil ash spread on my garden areas, I'd prefer a nice rick compost to lock the carbon in the ground where it belongs.

ALL: I think the answer to how much is enough resides in the owner of the property where composting is being done. If something becomes detrimental to my farms existence, then enough is enough. I am not talking about ivory tower beauraucratic legal detriment, I am talking about I honestly see an issue.

Boy that's sure a loose paraphrase of what I was saying!

Personally I think the demonization of an entity is a distraction and the lazy way out. Look at how many people paraphrase/misquote the bible verse about money as "money is the root of evil". That is NOT what the Bible actually says, what it says is "The LOVE of money is the root of evil". THat lazy easy half-butt demonization of a thing completely misses the REAL problem--people with priorites in the wrong place who misuse a tool. Totally applies to government too.

And yeah, I'm willing to bet Sarah Palin(and the founding fathers for that matter) would agree with me on that one. She used government to enact good change, just like government was a tool to enact change in composting values and practice on a wide community scale in my state.

THANK YOU BGG!!!!!!!!!! that is EXACTLY what I'm thinking about!!! I hope other people will go read that.

It's also a very good point mentioned in the article in defining compost as a soil amendment rather than a fertilizer. THat was totally my experience, I got crap trying to use compost as a fertilizer--I wasn't understanding how my soil was made up and was in the mindset of fighting it by basically making new soil with compost. Nope, it didn't come together till I worked with the soil and used compost as a part of the whole. (that's a whole nother tangent)

Just sayin, I have an inbred knee jerk "whoa" of my own when ANYTHING is used, praised, whatever, to excess. Most of the people here would say off the cuff "moderation in everything" but that obviously doesn't cover certain sacred things such as compost (:D).

Yes, I know about the liability and carbon issues. BUT the simple out of whack fact is this, by far more carbon gets farted out by industry that forest fires, so carbon in regards to forest fire is a non-issue, and liability(including people who build out in the forest whining about bad luck of getting burned out) and public misinformed sentiment drives the carbon thing. And plants breathe in carbon stuff as well--if there was no carbon in the air what does THAT do to plant health? What would we do if there was no oxygen(or any other element was missing from the mix)? D. I. E.