The use of a legume cover crop will give you more nitrogen of two years than the urea. Total contribution will also vary with the quantity of biomass. Consider an alfalfa/sweetclover or field pea/hairy vetch mix; share common inoculant. "Legume Inoculant"

Be sure to include the inoculant to maximize the nitrogen contribution.

The offered link suggests potential nitrogen. It will of course vary with the quality of your soil.

Here is a link that might be useful: Forage Legumes and Nitrogen Production

What is the humus level in your soil?
Spend some time this winter with "Better Soils for Better Crops" and Magdoff and van Es will help you understand what you need to know.

Here is a link that might be useful: Better Soils for Better Crops

By shoveling in more chicken, you'll further boost the P & K. So, yes, the legumes are a good thought.

Nitrogen-fixing photosynthetic bacteria are probably the best answer. Legumes will help you in a year or two.

Ignore kimmsr at all costs. I never found his advice to be any useful past few years. His way is like saying you should live in cave or driving 1900's Ford cars. Still stuck in old time's without catching up to latest information. Maybe he just wants to stay in the cave.

Check out soil food web by Dr. Elaine Ingham. Also Texas plant and soil lab that is geared for organic practice unlike the ones that kimmsr has been preaching for us to use.

Lou -- Can you give a synopsis of the differences in organic practices taught years ago and those used today?

Are humus levels not valued by newer organic methodology? Or have they found a better way to improve soil tilth?

Also do you have a link to the writings of Dr. Ingham and which plant and soil lab in Texas do you reference? [it's a big state]

Dr. Elaine Ingham wrote "The Soil Food Web Primer" a text I have often refered people to.

Here is a link that might be useful: Soil Food web Primer

kimmsr; Thank you Dr. Ingham Was a good read I enjoyed it.

Curt :-)

I'm pretty sure Dr. Ingham would not agree with Kimmsr's suggestion on soil test from your local university as it's geared for synthetic program. A lab like Texas Plant and Soil Lab which is geared for organic program would be better. Soil Food Web also tests your soil to find out what your soil biology is like which is far more important than soil tests that's geared for synthetic programs. Soil biology is the one that's responsible for turning insoluble nutrients into soluble that can be taken by plant roots. I never saw the point in getting soil test from local university nor having a pile of compost when it's a lot easier and cheaper to just use organic cheap fertilizer like soybean meal and spray molasses to get soil biology activities going than compost. Most don't have large space to generate large amount of compost nor have the time to compost a large pile of OM to be enough to be used each year. Because, I understand how plant succession works, Kimmsr's way is to way too slow to improve soil in my case. I'm willing to spend a few dollars more to speed up the process perhaps turn 20-30 years of slow process into 10 years of faster process to improving soil. We don't have that long of a life span that is needed to see plant succession from barren ground to old forest on their own which can take hundreds of years. My ground was completely ruined so were hundreds of thousands across the USA when house was built every year or from over usage of chemical products. Fungi is very fragile and it's something that takes very long time to the point where trees can depend on them without the help from us. The bacteria part is very easy but if you want healthy trees that will perform well on their own, soil fungi is what is needed. It doesn't take much to kill them outright.

Here is a link that might be useful: Texas Plant and Soil Lab

Lou -- Does it then boil down to quick vs slow progress in repairing damaged soils? I totally understand that a busy person with a myriad of responsibilities would opt for something that is quicker than the methods espoused by Kimmsr. But your preference/circumstances are yours and Kimmsr's are his and hardly reason to get testy. They are what they are. His opinion is valid, even if stated in an arbitrary way.

My soil has been resurrected from housing tract almost sterile DG over clay. Because I had more time than money [in spite of 4 hour commute and slave-master employer for 27 years] so had to slowly ammend the heck out of every square inch. That doesn't make my way better than yours, nor vice versa. I'm proud of my beautiful soil and of the plants it produces. I have no idea what kinds of microbial critters are in my soil ... My Cherimoya is over 20 ft tall. The Avocados and citrus seem pretty happy.

I think that the science of the life within our soils is fascinating ... and may well be our salvation ....

Here is a good video on beneficial microbes in soil...

Here is a link that might be useful: Microbes...

Having a soil test done by an Ag school, a place everyone that does soil testing learns how, gives one an indication of what is going on in their soil. A soil test, no matter where it is from, is not the end of the job but is one aid in getting your soil into a good, healthy condition that should be the goal of every organic gardener/farmer. Knowing what nutrients are in your soil, so that you do not add an excess which will cause pollution, is the envromentally responsible thing to do.

Excellent points Kimmsr. I would only add, organic or not farmer/gardener.

evergreenagriculture,
video is good.

However, it looks like "science" is based only on the food chain. Why I don't like Dr.Ingham is that her "science" don't go beyond the view that she see in the microscope.
When someone asked her what does she think about the book of Krasilnikov "Soil microorganismes and higher plants" (1957) do you know what she answered? She said that Krasilnikov hadn't such strong microscopes that she has. It seems that she don't know that Louis Pasteur made all his famous discoveries in microbiology without microscopes at all.

Soil microbiology and it's action on soil fertility goes far beyond anyone see in the microscope. No one can see in the microscope chemical byproductes of microbes (metabolites), e.g.

Thus, the resultes of such a "science" are deplorable, have no practical meaning.

Valerie_ru-

I don't really know anything about Dr.Ingham and I am not touting her work. Soil microbiology is something I am interested in, but I certainly am not an expert (although I know some who are).

Do you live and garden and eat somewhere outside of the food chain.

Sorry, I guess I don't understand where this is going.

Do you live and garden and eat somewhere outside of the food chain.

Definitly, yes.
Where the food chain begins? Photosynthesis.
Where it's end? Photosynthesis too, but bacterial anaerobic photosynthesis.
This points are outside the food chain or in the ends.
But they are mostly important for gardening.

Back to the original question.

If you are looking for ways to add nitrogen without breaking your back, there are other ways. The air you breath is 78% Nitrogen.

If you have plenty of other nutrients, it could be that the microbes in your soil are inadequate. There are many on this site that think microbes will magically appear in soil if you let it alone. What they don't tell you or refuse to admit is that it can take decades for all the beneficial microbes your soil and plants need to appear in quantities required to fully process all nutrients.

You and I require microbes to process our food and it is no different for your plants. We all can live, grow and develop with nutrient deficiencies, but there are health problems associated with deficiencies.

Here is a link that might be useful: This company supplies products with beneficial microbes