In order to determine the actual weight of P & K in fertilizers, an extra step is required. A fertilizer formula reports phosphorus as P2O5, not actual phosphorus (P), and potassium is reported as K2O, not actual potassium (K). To convert P2O5 to P, multiply the listed P2O5 % by .43, and to convert K2O to actual K, multiply the K2O value by .83. 3:1:2 ratio fertilizers actually supply nutrients in a 3:.43:1.7 ratio, which squares rather nicely with the average actual NPK usage. Your fertilizer's NPK RATIO is a much more important consideration than its NPK %s. Al

One thing I must always keep in mind is that as it relates to gardening in general, the conditions one grows under will determine how that person views the ability to grow. While one person may be fortunate enough to get one inch of rain per week in one part of the country, another may be dealing with a two-year drought in another. One person can go for a drive for 20 minutes and get all the seaweed they want, another in St Louis can only wish, move, or break out the credit card. I always keep that in mind as I read experiences on message boards; location is not to be denied. As it relates to buying fertilizers I am fortunate enough to be able to go to many feed stores and get anything I wish to use. I too can go to a big box store and get some of the goodies they have for sale, if I am willing to pay the price they demand. My experience will dictate my opinion on weather a decision I make is worth the money. I have always wondered how adding a "ka-zillion" more microbes from a compost tea will be of benefit to a well amended soil that has already reached the maximum capacity for sustained growth? I asked that question on a message board and was accused of being a troublemaker. The question of weather buying any item online is worth the money depends on what ones intentions are. To the person that is getting great growth, plenty of rain, and a well-amended soil the answer will be "you are wasting your money". To the person that is caught in the grip of a poorly amended soil, lack of rain, and searing heat will say something entirely different. To one a soaker hose is silly; to another without a soaker hose there would be no garden. Experience, input of others a person trusts, and the lay of the land will forever play into ones answer, and only time can one give a person an opinion based on that moment in time for themselves. The risk involved in owning/planting a garden/farm will forever be in the forefront; there are too many determining factors outside the growerÂs control that can play on the harvest one reaps. This is one of the reasons I enjoy the mantle of "mad (scientist) gardener", one will never know for sure unless they try it and find out. And even then it will only hold true for that moment in time Blutranes

AFAIK the issue isn't so much that they don't need them - all plants need some - but that most garden soils contain more than enough phosphorus and potassium naturally, some contain excessive amounts. So the addition of high P and K supplements is simply a waste of money as well as contributing to the problems of run-off and ground water contamination. However plants in containers rather than in ground are a totally different matter. Standard potting mixes do not contain ample P or K and any nutrients they do contain are frequently washed out as the container of so often watered. So supplemental feedings of a balanced fertilizer is necessary. So which are we talking about - in ground plants or plants in containers? If your plants are in ground and if your garden soil has tested out as low in P and K for some reason then supplements may be needed. However, there are a number of factors that contribute to blooming or not blooming. The only way you can know if the soil is the problem is to have it tested. From the bit of research I have done on poppies - and no guarantee on its accuracy - I wouldn't expect most varieties to be blooming yet in your zone anyway. Most sources seem to indicate blooming time, depending on the weather, is 45-60 days after germination and late February to early March in zone 10. Sound about right? Dave

There is an enormous amount of irrigation employed in this country ranging from very large commercial ag. fields to lawns, gardens and golf courses, so many places for that potential loss of nutrients to be at the very least reduced. I was once part of an irrigation demonstration project in western CO, the onion and sweet corn fields were being furrow irrigated using gated pipe and the surge method. One particular difficulty the growers had was getting the water from the pipes to the end of the rows fast enough that it didn't spend too much time soaking downward at the head end of the fields, pushing the water too fast eroded both the furrows and the sides of the beds. When the water made it to the end of the furrows, the water had to be left running long enough to soak laterally across the beds, this was a problem because the head ends had been wetted long before and were beginning to erode and leach downward. So along came a combination of 2 things to greatly reduce the leaching and erosion problems that allowed much more uniform water application both laterally and downward in the fields. The gated pipe sections in each field was split into 2 sides at the heads, this allowed one side of each field to be irrigated first about 1/5 of the way down and then the water was stopped and moved to irrigate the other side 1/5 of the way down while the wet soil on the other side was allowed to "close up". this pattern was repeated in 1/5s down the field until each side was wet the full length and then the water turned on the entire field to finish wetting across the beds. This method of wetting and switching back and forth between fields was found to use considerably less water and significantly reduce erosion (soil loss from the field). And then came an impressive addition to the scheme, polyacrylamide added to the irrigation water, that stuff was amazing. The PA was metered into the head water ditch to allow complete mixing before the water entered the gated pipes at the field heads. Without the PA, furrow water was, of course, like chocolate milk with the soil particles mixed in it. With the addition of the PA, the water was perfectly clear and there was a very small number of 1/16" or less soil aggregates slowly rolling down the furrows. Irrigation cycles now took far less time and used far less water and moved laterally across the beds much faster with absolutely no bed and furrow erosion with the surge+PA combination. It was interesting stuff to be a part of. My life has been spent in the parts of the country where irrigation is pretty much mandatory but I do appreciate and understand that mother nature behaves differently elsewhere. To be certain, different tactics must be employed in different places to manage nutrients and soils.