The following was stated: "Are you just simply going to ignore it because I'm not going to go search around Google for links? You couldn't even "keep up" in that thread (because it's out of your realm of study/knowledge), yet you chose to dismiss all of it because I didn't hunt down some Google links for you." H.Kuska comment. Yes, without scientific documentation, it is merely your opinion. Please note how the Podevin and du Jardin, 2012 paper was commented on in this very recent review reported in Google Scholar: PDF][PDF] SCOPING REPORT C Marris, C Jefferson - 2013 - kclpure.kcl.ac.uk 169 days ago - ... Document Version Preprint ��" the version submitted for publication Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Marris, C., & Jefferson, C. (2013). ... This report should be cited as: Marris, C. and Jefferson, C. (2013). ... "One reason for the scepticism displayed by some actors in response to such declarations is that at the time when genetic engineering first merged, strong claims were also made by proponents of the field about the precision of the new techniques. Thus, molecular biologists in the 1980s emphasised the lack of sophistication of previous techniques to emphasise the enhanced predictability of the then new recombinant DNA (rDNA) techniques, as exemplified in the seminal OECD report of 1986 (OECD, 1986)11:" H.Kuska comment, the following is a quote from the 1986 report. "While rDNA techniques may result in the production of organisms expressing a combination of traits that are not observed in nature, genetic changes from rDNA techniques will often have inherently greater predictability compared to traditional techniques, because of the greater precision that the rDNA technique affords to particular modifications. […] It is acknowledged that additional research and experience with rDNA micro-organisms, plants, and animals, should certainly increase our ability and precision to predict the outcome of introductions of rDNA organisms into the many varied ecosystems." (H.Kuska comment, end of 1986 quote, now back to recent review quote.) "Despite these claims of greater predictability and precision, studies have now found that unintended additional fragments of DNA are often present (Rang et al., 2005; Windels et al., 2001), and that unintended re-arrangements of sections of the host genome flanking the genetic insert were present in GM crops that have been placed on the market (Hernández et al., 2003; Windels et al., 2001). Also, a recent study by scientists from the European Food Safety Authority demonstrated that some long versions of the cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter, very commonly used in genetic constructs and present in a number of GM crops on the market, unexpectedly contain an overlapping viral open reading frame which, when expressed, might result in unintended phenotypic changes (Podevin and du Jardin, 2012). This demonstrates that even seemingly well-characterised and routinely used noncoding regulatory DNA sequences can produce unpredicted, unintended effects, yet such sequences are commonly assumed to present little risk when assessed within the EU regulatory framework, and “intergeneric microorganisms resulting only from the addition of well-characterized, non-coding regulatory regions” are excluded from the US Biotechnology Coordinated Framework. Opinions among scientists and other stakeholders are sharply divided about whether any future forms of genetic engineering, including synthetic biology, could ever result in the creation of organisms with reliably predictable behaviours, especially when released into complex, diverse and variable natural ecosystems; and this is directly related to divergent evaluations of the prospects for GMMO products that would need to be released into the environment in order to perform their intended function" H.Kuska comment. Please notice the use of the word "opinions" in the following: "Opinions among scientists and other stakeholders are sharply divided........" i.e. it is my "opinion" that the public is being used as beta testers. ------------------------------------------ Here is a link that might be useful: link to above review

In an ideal world, people would not be applying herbicides and pesticides on their lawn and all that town made compost would be a great resource. I would actually feel it was more beneficial if they made leaf mold with all the collected leaves, because no one adds chemicals to their leaves. Until then I am always short on compost but if you have land to have a garden you can usually find space for a small compost pile. Even if you just have a passive one, and leave it to break down, it's a great resource. The past few years I've been building Berms. I collect branches broken in smaller pieces, grass, leaves, weeds, and kitchen scraps in two plastic bins and when they are half finished, I empty them into a wheel barrel, pile them up along the lower end of my full sun bed, and shape it like a sausage about 1.5 to 2ft high, top it off with leaves and then bagged bark mulch and it's done. I leave it in place and it actually helps keep the rainwater in the bed and doesn't allow it to run off. And I was very surprised at how good the soil was before the summer was even over. What I love about it, is it is so easy to do and I know what is in it. This past fall, I covered 3 vegetable beds for next year with it's own 2ft high berm and instead of bark mulch, I put a thick layer of salt marsh high as a topper. I'm excited to see how the soil is in the spring.

Previously we would tear a old round bale up and add manure till we had a 40 ish foot wind row about 3 feet tall by 4-5 base. We can do several of those as needed. Now we probably dump 1 24 foot trailer load to a years worth of chicken manure from about 30 hens. Sometimes there will be a couple other additions but that is about average. Consistency wise I think we put a lot more browns in now as opposed to more green before. We garden about 2 acres of veggies and an acer of sweet corn. With our clay soils even on the scale we used to make compost we were behind. We have access to tons of dairy manure but the trucking of it almost balances out to buying it cooked. Problem there is the mass quantity of determine tall bugs and trash that comes from the bought stuff.

I'm sorry to hear that your tomatoes got herbicide damage. Ours did too at a community garden. We determined that it was the soil we used that was composed of some contaminated compost. Specifically we have 2,4-d exposure. I've heard that it sometimes takes up to a couple years for the herbicide to become inactive in compost. If you want to grow veggies out of the beds with the herbicide, you might have to grow other more herbicide-tolerant veggies until the soil is naturally ammended. Good luck!