I have some first hand experience with the adverse effects of soy. I realized a couple of years ago that I was lactose intolerant. I also have to take thyroid supplements due to Graves disease, that required the removal of my thyroid. Well I had been on the same dose of thyroid medication for almost 2 years, finally had it requlated. And then at my next appointment, about 8 months after switching to soy, my levels were completly out of whack. This led my doctor to run other tests, which came back with upset blood levels. Primarily low platlettes, which function to make blood clot. This is often caused by an auto-immune disfunction, the body actually destroys the platelletes faster then you can make them. Well it just happened that we had the day before my appointment read a medical journal that published a report about soy preventing the absorbtion of thyroid hormones. So my doctor, who I am thrilled to have as she tends to not jump to conclusions and start writing prescriptions, decided to see if quiting the soy would help. In 3 months my thyroid levels regulated. However it took much longer for the autoimmune function to stabalize, almost the better part of a year, but with small improvements almost immediately. I will occasionally eat things with soy, primarily soy beans or fermented soy products (miso etc), but in very limited quantities. I think all things in moderation is generally a good rule. My problem came from drinking a couple servings of soy milk a day (one with cereal and one with coffee). I also tend to believe that each person will react differently to soy products. It is just good to be aware of possible issues, so that if something comes up medically you can look to solutions that are simpler then taking more medications that most doctors are quick to prescribe. The hardest thing for me to find an alternative to that doesn't have soy is a good mutli-vitamin. Read your labels, most multi-vitamins these days have the soy isoflavens.

Tom: Let me give you a few more of my thoughts/observations about growing Norway spruce stands. As for provenance/variability. In addition to the general differences in the adaptation of various strains/provenances to different parts of the country, another thing I have observed in the 15 or so substantial NS stands I have seen and collected seed from in the nearby MD, WV, VA, and PA area, there is also a distinct variation in the amount of variability from tree to tree in each stand. In some stands, the trees look more like each other than in others. As luck would have it, in my own two older stands I see more variation than I have seen in any of the others I have visited--I have no idea why this should be so. The trees were planted between 1962 and 1966. But the variation is such that I can sit now and picture in my mind dozens and dozens of individual trees and the color and weeping character of their foliage, branching angles, bark color. I have quite a few special favorites. This may seem strange, but you have to understand that in addition to walking through my NS stands very often, I have pruned each individual tree in several phases up to at least 25 feet, and in some cases well over 30 feet. Anyway, one of the things I especially like about NS is this variability--with the possible exception of red maple, I have never seen another species of tree like it. For me, the effect in a forest stand of NS is glorious. Next, if you plant 6 X 6, or even 8 X 8, in about 12 to 15 years what you will have is a really dense "thicket" of NS trunks and branches that you will not be able to walk through. If at that point you want to thin and prune, you will need loping shears just to work your way into the stand, unless you have long arms, a good pruning saw, and dont mind getting scratched. I would recommend not doing anything for about 30 years, and then if you prune and thin, do it yourself by hand and leave all the wood to compost the soil and be taken up by the remaining trees. But if for aesthetic reasons you want to do some early pruning and thinning, that can do no harm. But for the long term magnificence of the forest, you dont really need to do anything. Norway spruce trees express dominance as well or better than any conifer I know. A couple years ago I called Professor Edwin White at SUNY Syracuse with a few questions that followed up on the studies he directed a few years before, and in the conversation I marveled about the stand at Glady, WV, which I had visited again shortly before--marveled at the strength and beauty of the trees that had continued to express dominance since I first saw the stand almost 20 years before. And he said he was not surprised that I was so impressed, and that if one wants to have the most magnificent stand of NS, and white pine for that matter, there was no need to do any thinning (or pruning) at all. He emphasized that both species expressed dominance over the long run very efficiently. My own observations make me think that NS is even better than white pine in this regard, but I dont have any data--just my informal observations--to back that up. One of the studies that Professor White directed was a site factors study. I will look that up for you and give you the reference--it was published in the SAF Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. If you are near the U of WI you can find it there (they do have a school of forestry?), but if you call SUNY Syracuse I would guess they would send you a copy. I am not sure how useful this would be to you in selecting a site for your planting, but I found the study fascinating. It is an observational rather than an experimental study, so it is not easy to understand exactly what it all means in practical silvicultural terms. But I can suggest that NS will grow well in soils with a pH above 4.8, and maybe 4.4 or a bit lower, but pH above 5 with some good amount of magnesium is probably best. I have soils in the 4.8 range and I experimented by broadcasting some high mag crushed limestone around a few groups of trees. No dramatic results, but perhaps some improvement--the kind of measurements really needed to determine exactly what the effects have been, were too difficult for me to do with any accuracy. One surprising finding of the study was that slope position and aspect were apparently unrelated to NS growth. For many species the lower east and north facing slopes are best. When I remarked about this to Professor White, he said that since I am so much further south, that may not be true for NS grown here. Anyway--interesting! Well, if I can think of anything else, I will come back and post it. In the meantime I will look up the site factors study and give the specific reference. Oh, I just thought--about larch. There is a professor at SUNY Syracuse who has dome some work with larch--I cant remember his name now, and he told me that larch does best where the soil is fairly deep--he gave me a number like an "A" and "B" horizon (or rooting zone) of at least 18 inches, or something like that. But then he added that if growing on a slope they can do well with less soil depth. I dont know if you have any slopes on your new land. Anyway, for what its worth --Spruce

Prejudice is an ugly thing to have. It clouds ones mind and shuts off the flow of imagination IMO. Prejudice for the most part occurs as a result of influence or experience, both of a negative nature. I wonder what it would look like to see someone with a prejudice towards compost/organic gardening? The people who are forced to tolerate this prejudice will be paying for a memory they had nothing to do with. This is not a good thing IMO. All who have read this entire thread should know there are more than 3 links total in my posts. The only way to not know this is to have not read the posts or paid little attention to what was said. To inject oneself into a conversation they know little of what has been said is rude to be kind, and insulting to say the least. There were 6 links total; three used as a reference, one used as an example of how to gather free information from commercial sites, one used as an example of humus potential, and one as an alternative watering technique. All were normal websites save one, that one was a "blog". To post a mans entire career, minus his tax returns for the last five years as a result of something posted on a "blog" is something I still dont understand. As well, my comments concerning "peat moss" are already registered as to how I handle matters I have no experience with. You would have had to read the posts to know this. My experience with compost tea does not lay in my future; it originates from my past. In late 02, early 03 aerobic compost tea became focused on message boards. On the "Dirt Doctor" forum and others sites aerobic compost tea was a very hot topic. Although there were many commercial machines, one of the first "do-it-yourself" models manifested on the "Dirt Doctor" website. "The Bruce Deuleys Little Texas Tea Maker" stepped up to the plate. A simple machine, made with parts purchased at Wal-Mart. When I saw it, I immediately made my list, checked it twice, and headed to the truck to go get my parts! In less than three hours I was brewing me a batch just like on the pictures, the rest is history. You cannot get better results for the money using "the little tea maker". I have gone on to make my own 55-gallon brewer with minor modifications to "The Bruce Deuleys Little Texas Tea Maker", with fantastic results. You can get the original link Here; it is found in the second "Dchall" post. I could sit here all day and type storied about what happens when you listen to "Dchall", but if you look at the lawn on the tea maker website you will get an idea of what can happen when you do. Organic gardening is more than research and experimentation, it is more than what I think; it evolved into what I feel. If you do this long enough you will feel when the pile is made right. You will feel when the bed is planted perfect IMO, the mulch thick enough, when it is time to go get those "cukes". Yes, eyes are important, and I use mine a lot just looking at my property when most around here are weeding. I dont post here to "be somebody", a big shot who knows all the answers. I came here to "become somebody", to become a member people trust and want to know what I feel/think about a question. I dont race to get my fruit ripe first; people race to get here first when the fruit is ripe. To gain trust takes time, but with it comes patience. Time will tell concerning all this, when that time comes I will be the last to say, "I told you so" Blutranes

This thread always strikes a powerful sour note with me. As a retired geek, I cannot more strongly suggest that folk use the more proper program for data manipulation, known as a 'database'. Yes, 'spreadsheets' have evolved to handle many 'database' aspects, but are really aimed at 'number crunching' and they do that better than 'databases'. I'll mention that data crunching and comparison and tracking is what databases are designed for, which is why when you go to any and almost all data websites, such as hostalibrary.org, the back end is a database. For reasons too complicated to enumerate here, there are many too easily fallen into pitfalls in spreadsheets that will 'munch' your data. Accidental use of sorts is the most common problem here, but again, it's difficult to explain briefly. This knowledge is gained by me from hard and expensively learned mistakes from my work as a geek before retirement. Yes, database ability is a little more difficult to attain, but eventually it will save you hours, days, even years (yes that happened to me) of lost or munged data. So please tell me you don't use your email program to file your pictures, get my point now? FWIW, hh