# What practical benefit do organic fertilizers have?



## ryeguy (Sep 28, 2017)

Like many here, I've used Milorganite as a part of my lawn care program. I've been thinking about Milo a lot recently, and I'm beginning to question why I should keep it in my fert schedule this year.

I don't care about it being non-burning, because I know how to use a broadcast spreader, weigh my fert before applying, and don't overapply. I don't care about iron because I plan on spraying Feature biweekly this year.

The only other major touted advantage I can think of is that organic fertilizers build the microherd in your soil. Ok, but what does that mean in practical terms? What visible advantage will I gain from this over using slow release synthetics? I read about "soil building" in context of organic fertilizers all the time, and it just feels so hand-wavy to me. What actual, measurable advantage is my lawn getting from this? Are there any clear cut papers/studies on this that compare a partial or full organic program to a synthetic one?


----------



## Jon (Apr 1, 2019)

Following out of interest really, as I too am wondering also.

I originally was drawn toward organic fert because I _thought_ it sounded better for safety, with people using the lawn all summer. Nieces and nephews rolling around on the grass. Organic seemed the obvious approach. That said and if I actually use my brain instead... I suspect the fert would wash through to the soil in the first watering, and would not be an issue for people using the lawn at all.... but I'm not really sure.


----------



## Pete1313 (May 3, 2017)

@ryeguy, moved this topic to the soil fertility forum. I'm sure both cool and warm season members will weigh in. :thumbup:


----------



## Wlodyd (Aug 27, 2018)

Here's a more scholarly article with several cited references on the topic. A bit more than hand-wavy, but i must say i got weary and didnt read it all. But in large, i think from soil biologist to lawn care hobbyist agree that organic fertilizers have significant positive impacts on the soil ecosystem which help nutrient balance and availability to plants when they need it. I think of it like eating my fruits and vegetables versus taking a One-A-Day vitamin. The nutrients are there, but are absorbed in very different capacities, and at very different rates.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01446/full


----------



## adgattoni (Oct 3, 2017)

Wlodyd said:


> Here's a more scholarly article with several cited references on the topic. A bit more than hand-wavy, but i must say i got weary and didnt read it all. But in large, i think from soil biologist to lawn care hobbyist agree that organic fertilizers have significant positive impacts on the soil ecosystem which help nutrient balance and availability to plants when they need it. I think of it like eating my fruits and vegetables versus taking a One-A-Day vitamin. The nutrients are there, but are absorbed in very different capacities, and at very different rates.
> 
> https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01446/full


Something to consider: if this were a universal truth wouldn't all professional turf managers be employing this practice? Stadiums can strip out and bring in fresh soil and sod on a yearly basis, but I would think you'd see these practices being used at golf courses at least. The study indicates that in both organic and mineral fertilization cases, long term microbial populations are higher compared to an unfertilized control; just a bit more with the organic fertilizer. Also - I'm not sure how they performed these studies, but they make a lot of references to mineral fertilizers having the ability to lower soil ph and thus negatively affect the soil. I think many of us here would view that as a controllable factor (i.e., we'd monitor ph via periodic soil testing). To me this means the decision point is: does the delta between mineral and organic fertilizing result in such noticeable improvements that it is worth the cost? If there's no material difference in plant health and appearance, I'm gonna go with the lower cost option.

Plus - by having a strong turf, we're inherently depositing OM into the soil and feeding the microbial population already via the root cycling effect.


----------



## TN Hawkeye (May 7, 2018)

ryeguy said:


> Like many here, I've used Milorganite as a part of my lawn care program. I've been thinking about Milo a lot recently, and I'm beginning to question why I should keep it in my fert schedule this year.
> 
> I don't care about it being non-burning, because I know how to use a broadcast spreader, weigh my fert before applying, and don't overapply. I don't care about iron because I plan on spraying Feature biweekly this year.
> 
> The only other major touted advantage I can think of is that organic fertilizers build the microherd in your soil. Ok, but what does that mean in practical terms? What visible advantage will I gain from this over using slow release synthetics? I read about "soil building" in context of organic fertilizers all the time, and it just feels so hand-wavy to me. What actual, measurable advantage is my lawn getting from this? Are there any clear cut papers/studies on this that compare a partial or full organic program to a synthetic one?


@thegrassfactor did a very thorough video on this subject. Definitely a recommended watch if you haven't seen it.


----------

