I've been thinking of lava rock as being equivalent to granite grit. Upon further reflection, this isn't exactly true. Granite grit is relatively smooth compared to lava rock. A piece of bark, coming in contact with a piece of granite grit, could have have an extended contact surface that is relatively tight. The contact surface may have micro spaces about 1/100 to 1/10 of a millimeter, or about 10 to 100 times the size of a bacterium, or just at the size limit of human vision. Lava rock is rougher. An extended contact surface with a piece of bark could have mini spaces in a size range of 1/10 to 1 millimeter; ie., barely above (to fully within) the limit of human vision. Turface is about as smooth as granite; so micropores in an extended contact zone between bark would be about the same size as with granite. But since granite grit sometimes has angular ridges while turface is globular, any extended contact zones between bark and turface could be larger than extended contact zones between bark and granite. An extended contact zone could mean that the internal water reservoir of a turface granule (at the pseudo-dry but glossy stage) would flow into the bark (and vice versa). While I don't believe that lava rock has an internal water reservoir per se, an extended contact zone above a tide pool (a pit on the upper surface of a lava rock) would as a mini reservoir, while an extended contact zone below a pit (on the underside of a lava rock) could act as an oxygen reservoir. ------- disclaimer -------- I have observed none of this under a microscope, nor read any soil text relating to this. I am just using logic based on my memory of my naked eye observations of turface, lava rock, chicken grit and bark. ------ punch line ------- If my logic is correct, how does all of this effect drainage, the medium and long term storage of water and oxygen after drainage, and the wicking of water and oxygen reservoirs to roots in the medium to long time frames? I have no real idea, but it is fun to think about. I speculate that the mini (1/10 to 1 millimeter) water and oxygen reservoirs in the contact zone between bark and lava rock wins in the short to medium term (about 1 day after drainage). I speculate that the micro (1/100 to 1/10 millimeter) reservoirs in the contact zone between bark and turface wins in the long term (a few days after drainage). In the system bark and granite grit, grit is just a spacer that creates macro pores (about 1-2 mm) of oxygen, not having any real function as a water reservoir.

I was just thinkng about a Luau and I stumbled upon some notes from the University of Hawaii- "Amount of clay: As the amount of clay increases in the soil, the P-sorption capacity increases as well. This is because clay particles have a tremendous amount of surface area for which phosphate sorption can take place." ...Hawaii, and other tropical soils have P as the limiting reagent, the soils are very sandy... but organic matter in sand or clay does this- "Organic matter increases P availability in four ways. â¦First, organic matter forms complexes with organic phosphate which increases phosphate uptake by plants. â¦Second, organic anions can also displace sorbed phosphate. â¦Third, humus coats aluminum and iron oxides, which reduces P sorption. â¦Finally, organic matter is also a source of phosphorus through mineralization reactions." Then, I went back and looked at some notes from the University of Kansas- "A report in 1994 by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment indicated that 24 percent of stream miles and 89 percent of lakes in Kansas were impaired by excessive levels of nutrients. Phosphorus is the nutrient that is most often responsible for the impairment of surface water." Then, I reread this post from TC- "I was not aware that some states have banned high P fertlizer due to water quality issues, but it's certainly not happening here in MO. I've used quite a bit of 12-12-12 and that would work for you." Then, I thought back to my days as a youth, walking along the River on the border of Kansas and Missouri, with boyhood dreams of hitchin' a ride on a raft down the mighty Mississippi and winding up in New Orleans, like Huck did. And seein' if I might run into Tox, somewhere on Bourbon Street. Mackel

Not sure where you are... but if you have a Grange or feed supply store near you, check with them. I used to get that kind of stuff at the Grange in Redmond before they closed down. Issaquah also has that kind of stuff, but a little more expensive. Often these grange and feed stores are cheaper than the nurseries that sell the same stuff in smaller bags. But I would also question whether or not you even need it. A good seed mix doesn't need or want much for fertilizers, its more about the soil texture and drainage/water retention than it is about fertility initially. The seeds themselves provide most of what they need, and if you DO need a fertilizer, my experience is you are better with a liquid low level fert than the typical stuff you would make from these ingredients. Fish tank water worked the best for me actually. Fish emulsion or seaweed tea is supposed to work pretty well too. These will get used quickly, and flush out before building up too much. Just my two cents. I rarely do seeds though, so maybe not worth so much.

Suburbanmd, I actually did run his shirt through 3 sanitize cycles, so maybe it is the soap. Strange thing, on the 10 year old now broken machine, I only used warm/cold setting & FS. Perhaps the FS was masking the smell. Also, we have a recirculating hot water pump that was running, so basically it has instant hot water. Plus, the utility room is the first stop in the hot water loop. I can also verify this, as I just could not resist the temptation to put my hand in the flow of the water to test its temp. I have a load of linens to do tonight or tomorrow that I will do with the Kirkland HE liquid I have on hand and just let the machine do its thing as you say. The linens are not really that soiled, just one night stay by a guest, but still it will be interesting to see how it does and to check the soap level. Janet, it is ironic you mention your model number, as when the delivery folks first delivered my machine and placed it, husband looked at it and said it was not the right one. Turns out it was the WM2016CW! What I do not understand is why of all the models they took the water plus feature out of my chosen model. Do you find that the towels are actually in any water in the drum or have they absorbed it all? Mine has so very little you have to hunt for it and move them over just to find the frog puddle. Maybe this is quite normal for FL machines and being my first, I am used to the concept of water in a wash. I am still concerned about how it will do on the dog blankets and dog hair. How can it rinse the hair out when there is hardly any water? Only trial will tell. Oh, and yesterday it started leaking slightly from the front left hand corner! I wiped up water several times including when I first got up, and no, the only high water time was when it did the error code while wildly filling. I have read that over sudsing can cause leaks, so maybe this high water level reached that point? Then again, it might be something else. Do any of the FL machines actually spray the clothes to rinse them while they are spinning, much like the TL do? It seems like this would add a lot to rinsing the clothes. Thanks, Schutzhund