Get a soil test and add only what is missing or just use generic organic matter like compost. Adding a concentrated source of any micro nutrient to soil is a mistake without a lab recommendation.

Boost magnesium too high and your plants won't get calcium. The micros have a habit of sticking around virtually forever so it is best to be cautious about adding them.

Have done the soil test.
That's what's giving me the low potassium and magnesium at the border between sufficient and high (99lbs per acre).
Greensand didn't bring up my potassium levels this season, and I'm thinking granite dust won't either (minimal microbial activity because of condition of soil.... basically pure sand).
So, I'm thinking to bring up the potassium levels (until I can get organic matter incorporated) I was going to give it a shot of either sulfate of potash (no magnesium) or potassium magnesium sulfate (magnesium contained also). The sulpomag is more readily available to me, so was hoping I could use that without taking my magnesium levels up to high.

So, what I'm hearing you say is there is a danger that the quantity of sulpomag required to take my potassium levels from low (21 lbs/acre) to sufficient or high, would also take my magnesium levels into the excessive range (currently everywhere from 13 lbs/acre (very low) to 107 lbs/acre (between sufficient and High).

Another question is does sulpomag (langbeinite) and or potassium sulfate contain sulfer? My soil test does not include sulfur results. Apparently it's a separate test.

Another question is does sulpomag (langbeinite) and or potassium sulfate contain sulfer? My soil test does not include sulfur results. Apparently it's a separate test.

sulpomag contains sulfur, potassium and magnesium in a drastically unbalanced ratio. I would not advise anyone to use it unless they had a soil test showing it's need and I doubt anyone has soil that would benefit from it.

Potassium sulfate is potassium and sulfur. Unfortunately the makers of this fertilizer can't seem to agree upon it's source. It might contain a ton of magnesium (ties up calcium) or none. It might contain a ton of aluminum (toxic to soil above small amount) or none. I can't really comment unless I know the product you are considering and research it.

Greensand and other rock based fertilizers are not going to do anything for you in the short term because they are rock powders. They take many years to weather and release their nutrients. These are not organic materials in the usual sense where bacteria and such break them down in a single season. It takes years. So, what I'm hearing you say is there is a danger that the quantity of sulpomag required to take my potassium levels from low (21 lbs/acre) to sufficient or high, would also take my magnesium levels into the excessive range (currently everywhere from 13 lbs/acre (very low) to 107 lbs/acre (between sufficient and High).

Yes, that is what I am saying. With that large a range in your soil's magnesium content I would ask the testing lab for advice and post it here as a sanity check. If you are planning on growing some annual plant that gets pulled up every season you might need to be concerned, but for perennial plants you can just add homemade compost or manure from a farm and call it a day. It really is that simple (usually). Another question is does sulpomag (langbeinite) and or potassium sulfate contain sulfer?

Yes. The sul in sulpomag=sulfur and the sulfate in potassium sulfate=sulfur.

Thanks for the clarification on sulfer. Didn't realize that sulfates translated into sulfer. So, it's some kind of combination of potassium and sulfer? Naturally occuring however?
Am I wrong in remembering that sulfer is used to lower ph? If so, I probably want to stay away from any of the fertilzers containg the word sulfate if I already have low ph.... correct?

Note that the large range I gave for my phosphorous levels was from three different soils reports. One for my garden, one for my lawn that's doing well, and the other for my lawn area that has zero growth (compacted). Was hoping to find something. The Garden and good growth lawn were similar results (150 & 238).

You could just use potassium chloride (muriate of potash)
It's in the neighborhood of 0-0-60. It's certified by OMRI for organic production but it's restricted. I'd tell you what the restrictions are but I'm way too freakin' lazy to look it up.
Sure, you'll add some chloride but hey, big deal. As long as you don't over apply you should be fine. Besides, chloride leaches out quickly with regular irrigation.

I know that the above advice is well meant, but I advise never to use muriate of potash (or super phosphate for that matter) because it is much too strong. If you aren't impatient, how about using a straw much? That will increase your potash year by year, and do all sorts of good things as well. An organic gadener, which I assume we all are, is best advised to get the macronutrients in balance before even thinking about micronutrients. For those, you will need a claasy soil test anyway. The macronutrients I like to concentrate on first are calcium and phosphate, because they relate directly to the efficiency of photosynthesis and, therefore, food nutrient density. But then magnesium, sulfur, and potash are not really less important. Balance is the be all and end all. Regards, Peter.

Gargwarb-
Thanks. It's a possibility and I'll look into it some more. I was thinking I had looked into it previously, and for some reason, decided against it, but can't remember why.

What's your take on why I would want to use muriate of potash rather than sulfate of potash (they are two different things correct? I actually have some sulfate of potash coming (a sample) but it's REALLY difficult for me to obtain here (at least an "orgainic" variety.

Peter-
Thanks for the heads up too. Questions above for you also. Always good to get different opinions.
Secondary elements is probably the wrong terminology from my side. I get primary, secondary, micro, macro all mixed up. Basically what I was talking about was anything that's not NPK.

Anyway, I'm definitely considering straw as a mulch. From your perspective, why would I choose straw over hay or ground up leaves? Would the straw add more potassium than other mulches? What about Phosphorous? My Phosphorous is already high, and although my "fears" about adding too much through other incorporations have been somewhat alleviated, I'd still like to know.

Calcium and Phosphate (as in phosphorous? are they the same?)

Balance is what I'm trying to get at.

Thanks again.

I mentioned muriate of potash because you sounded like you wanted a potassium only fertilizer with no sulfate. Muriate of potash was a custom fit and I like to give people the answers they are looking for.
That being said, would I sweat the sulfate in potassium sulfate in regards to pH change? No. Sulfur changes your pH primarily because of the bacteria that eat elemental sulfur and water. They poop out H+ ions (which lowers the pH) and sulfate (which is a sulfur atom with four oxygen atoms attached to it: SO4). They don't go back and eat their poop (SO4) For that reason, sulfate has to be reduced (oxygen removed) through other reactions before it can effect the pH to any degree. Sulfate is negatively charged and with regular irrigations, will generally leach out of the active root zone before that can happen.
Now...THAT being said, I read another post from Nandina in one of your threads that said, "cool your jets. Add some compost and don't freak yourself out over the details" Okay, so I paraphrased. Anyway, I agreed with that post 100%. I think you may be over-thinking it a bit. Improve your organic percentage with a nice compost and you should be alright. If you want to feel better about the nutrient ratios, stick with a pure greenwaste compost. They tend to provide a lot more potassium compared to phosphorus and nitrogen. It takes some time, but it really is easier and more effective in the long run.

gargwarb.
Truthfully, I don't know if sulfur would be an issue for me or not. But what I'm hearing you say, that although sulfur CAN be responsible for lowering PH, it's unlikely that it will actually affect my ph.

Yeah, I realize I'm overthinking things, but to me it's really just a learning curve.... trying to be responsible and it just kind of took me to here. Learning a lot in the process and I think it's helping me to come full circle to where most everyone seems to be on here. FWIW, I keep trying to work myself down to respond to Nandinas post etc.... I'll get there.

When you say a pure greenwaste compost, what exactly do you mean? I'm assuming like grass clippigs, or hay or any normal "green" part of the compost heap? What I don't understand, is that you're saying the greens provide more potassium vs phosphorous and nitrogen. I was of the impression that the greens provided PRIMARILY nitrogen. Where am I missing the boat.

Am I hearing you say, that I would be better of (because of my low potassium levels) to use some sort of green mulch also vs shredded dried leaves? I had mentioned a while back about the possibility of using some sort of mulch that was composed of shredded leaves and alfalfa meal. Would the alfalfa meal not be in effect some way similar to the greenwaste portion of the equation.... allbeit, not providing as much bulk/ organic matter? Basically looking for a mulch I can use that would be more likely to contribute to the low potassium levels I have, while I start making compost.

Then there's the question about sheet composting.
Have kind of been thinking about that. Would that be basically just composting in your garden? Mixing browns and greens on top of the soil, letting it decompose, then turning it in later? I like the notion of that possibility (if in fact that's what it is).

I wouldn't worry about the sulfur one way or the other right now if I were you.
When I say greenwaste compost I'm talking about a compost made exclusively from plant materials.
The 'Greens' are a higher in nitrogen than the 'browns' but all of the ingredients contain both carbon and nitrogen for the purpose of decomoposition. OIf the nutrients supplied, potassium is generally the most abundant in a greenwaste compost. Keep in mind that all of the nutrient values and salts, etc. will vary depending on what plants and plant parts go in to making it.
To break it down, here is what I would do if I were you. I would till in about 5 cu. yds. of green waste compost to a 6 inch depth. for every 1000 sq. ft. of new planting. Yeah yeah, there's a whole till or no till thing that folks love to get into but seriously, it'll work either way.
In existing turf areas I would topdress about 1/3 cubic yard per 1000 sq. ft. with the compost.
Then I would grow plants. After growing plants for a year maybe re-test the soil. That is unless everything looks like it's doing great. In that case I would save my money.

muriate of potash is not an acceptable organic nutrient.
emyers, I think you are spending too much time and energy on specific nutrients and not enough on getting sufficient levels of organic matter into your soil and that will balance your nutrients so you need not overly concern your self about them. Use the results of your soil test as a guide and a basis for future reference, build up the organic matter in the soil and in a couple of years retest to see what has been happening.

kimmsr, I do agree that organic matter is going to be the best thing in this case. However, muriate of potash is a certified organic product by the Organic Materials Review Institute. I un-lazied myself and spent the 30 seconds to looked it up. Here's the link:
Muriate of potash according to OMRI
and just for kicks (in regards to another thread)....
Sulfate of potash according to OMRI
So yes, as a matter of fact, both of those are acceptable organic nutrients.
That is unless "not an acceptable organic nutrient" means "not acceptable to kimmser".

{{gwi:154743}}

I completely disagree; you should sweat the details of your soil test. Except keep in mind they are only medium accurate.

The concern with magnesium and the other basses is not how much you have; it is how much you have in relation to the other bases. Your soil test should have a percent base saturation section so you can compare. Ideally potassium should be 2-7% of the bases, magnesium 10-15% and calcium and 65-75%. For example, if the ratio of potassium to magnesium (in ppm) is greater than 3 to 1 you can have magnesium deficiencies even though you have magnesium.

Sulfur will acidify your soil. But the potassium and magnesium in the sulfates are bases and will raise pH. I am not sure if they are exactly balanced, but it isnÂt like adding strait elemental sulfur. Also, sulfur leaches and can be lost as a gas in water logged conditions and is therefore often low in soils. In the past sulfur came falling out of the sky in great quantities (ie acid rain) but since they did away with the burning of high sulfur coal deficiencies in soil have become common.

I completely disgree with the disagreement ;)
Basing nutrient availability primarily on base cation ratios is out dated and poorly supported by research. There is something to competition of nutrients, but it's not nearly as important as making sure that you have sufficient amounts of each nutrient. That (and the fact that the BCR method results in over application much of the time) is why most labs have gone to a sufficiency factor system in favor of base cation ratios.

Boat loads of studies have been done to support this. Here is a discussion which sites a good amount of support from a University of Wisconsin study:
Oh look. Here it is.
Note that the highest corn and soy bean yields were in soils with Ca:Mg ratios which showed magnesium at approximately 3 times higher than calcium (Holy cow! Can that be?!?) and potassium as much as five times higher than magnesium. (Whaaaa..?!?!)
And there is plenty more out there showing the same stuff.
The BCR stuff was championed by Bear et. al. (read: quacks) and their ideas have been all but dismissed except in myth, lore, and comedy skits.

Oh yeah, all I said was not to sweat the sulfur in potassium sulfate in regards to pH. That sulfate is not going to have a huge effect on pH (if any) I say again, don't sweat the sulfur in potassium sulfate if that's they way you want to go. You may note that I recommended the greenwaste compost to bump up primarily potassium. I think that would be prudent for this year, based on the test.

Actually, I never said don't sweat the soil test before, but you know what? I'm gonna say it now. Take note of the fact that you could use some potassium. Put in the compost, plant some plants and test again next year. Use this year's test as a base line and adjust from there. Yes, use the tests as a guide but don't freak yourself out over trying to get everything perfect in one shot. Although some adjustment certainly may be warranted after you've gone through a crop or two, plants tolerate very wide ranges of nutrient and chemical conditions and they might do just fine.

By the way, if you depend on potassium and magnesium to increase your pH, you're gonna wait an awfully long time for very little change.

I completely agree with your disagreement of my disagreement.

I normally advise people that first and formost they need to have nutrients available, and then worry about the ratios. But if you have a soil test and are going to be adding nutrients to your soil, it makes sense to try and add them with balance in mind.

Oh man, be careful. Agreeing with a disagreement is like dividing by zero. You could totally open up a black hole.

And yes, I agree with what you just said. I feel like we should hug or something. Well....maybe we should just high-five. You know, keep it casual.

I feel a headache coming on. It started with 'the flow chart'.

lololol

Ya know rhizo_1, I get that a lot.
In person, I usually start conversations like this:
"Here, have an Excedrin. The point I'd like to make is....."
;)

Although Potassium Chloride, Muriate of Potash, does occur naturally, and even though it is listed by OMRI, some of what they do permit is a compromise and would not be acceptable to real organic gardeners/farmers, it is not an acceptable product for organic gardeners/farmers to use because it is too readily available and the chloride will, far too easily, do harm to the soil. Note that OMRI has a statement that if this is used due care should be taken to be sure that chloride does not build up in the soil.

So...."according to Kimmsr" it is then. You know what, I know a fair number of both gardeners and farmers that think they're organic. I'm not sure if theye're "real" organic farmers and gardeners though. Do you have a P.O. box or something they can send their "Certified Kimmsr Organic" applications to? You know, so they can be "real".

Tell me one single solitary fertilizer, OMRI certified organic or not that does not warrant a cautious and common sense approach for application.