Message Board - Cricket: Kaloam

Sorry to reintroduce a subject that's already been raised, but I don't really follow the existing post.

I gather the original Kaloam producer has gone bust - I expect there will be some old supplies around but in the longer term we're going to have to switch to another loam.

Does anyone have a recommendation for what to use which will be compatible with existing pitches? Has anyone moved off Kaloam successfully?

Any comments much appreciated, we have a lot of Kaloam users here (Cheshire)

cheers

Dave

Hi Dave

Kaloam is still available in the longer term, and is already being produced by other companies. I have found these companies only too happy to provide a sample upon request.

You can of course move to a different product, but based on the samples I have received there should be no need to if you wish to remain with Kaloam.

This previous thread

http://www.pitchcare.com/message/message/46611

lists potential suppliers I would suggest you contact them to get samples to compare with your existing product, before making any decisions.

Steve

I am one of the ones whom will be changing from Kaloam this year, and the procedure will start this Thursday.

Samples are good, motties are good, analysis is good, but the one factor that is imperative, whatever loam you change to, should you choose this direction is how well you integrate it into the existing soil profile... do not underestimate the importance of this.

Mike

Dave, I have only had a few short years experiance with cricket groundsmanshaip, so please don`t quote me if I`m wrong here. I`m in the process of changing from Kaloam and currently have in my spare room some mottys of Kaloam halved and bonded with GSB County and GSB Kaloam (or similar) and there seems to be no differance in shrinkage or any signs at all of seperation. In fact it`s quite difficult to tell where the join is now they`re dry.
Hope this is of help, James.

I had exactly the same results as above using Boughton County and Kloam.

Dave

The samples I had from Roffeys and GSB ... both Kaloam replacements ... look just like the original Kaloam. I'm waiting for results for full analysis but it looks like they will be fine on Kaloam squares.

You will have to probably get the GSB stuff direct from GSB but you can get the Roffey stuff ( in plain white bags ) from Taylors in Crewe, Cheshire and from Rileys in Halmerend, North Staffs/Cheshire border.

Not sure where you are in Cheshire.

HTH

Hi All,
This was the article featured in the Pitchcare magazine, it details the availability of Kaloam this year (see below link):

Kaloam: What is Going On

We have samples of Kaloam 2011 produced by Binders and we will happily send out to any club that wishes to receive.

Dan

Go over to Ongar or Surrey GOSTD. It will take two years but now is the time to start.
Anyone agree?

Andy - i'm changing to GOSTD. Reason why - trust in the supplier, based on respected references, and getting a 'feeling' for the people. I learned a lesson with the last batch of Kaloam, though not nearly as bad as what happened to you, but nevertheless, I am a lot more careful about whom I do business with nowadays.

Mike

Thanks for that guys - some good stuff there.

If no-one objects I'll stick some or all these comments on the Cheshire Groundsman's website (www.cag.org.uk)

I'm pretty much with Mike on this one. For the record, below are my comments on the Kaloam subject in response to the Pitchcare article as highlighted above by Pitchcare Danny. I had direct experience of the problem on two grounds, although neither, fortunately was my own. I remain unconvinced of any improvement because the new suppliers (connected, not incidentally, with the previous company that went into voluntary administration) are not indicating any form of correct specification, analysis or certificated product. Indeed, they are not even indicating held stocks have been rescreened. It appears to be 'you are buying a pig in a poke' but there you are, your choice guys.....

If the industry does not start to organise a correct and industry approved specification for each of the regional loams pretty soon, then we will be seeing more and more of this problem. An investigation of the former directors of Monro also provides a trail of business success..not. Here's what I posted a couple of days ago........




I have a small financial interest in all this business having done an analysis and report on some Kastone and control material in the Autumn of 2010.

If it wasn't so serious for the victims of this mess, the whole thing would be quite funny really. It rather reminds me of those telly programmes like "Cowboy Builders" or whatever they're called. Every time the little old dear tries to complain, the builder disappears after demanding another cheque. He then pops up running another firm somewhere else and doing the same thing. He is always protected by the asinine company laws of this land where a Limited Company basically means the directors have limited liability.

Details are here if anyone's interested:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_%28law%29#United_Kingdom

What is patently obvious from the product supplied last Autumn is that Monroe Horticulture and/or its subsidiary companies had no effective quality control procedures in place at all, or if they thought they had, then their operatives were either unsupervised, unmanaged or duplicitous. If I were buying any varient of what was Kaloam, I would want a standard analysis on the bag and a certificate of compliance with every delivery to boot. You wouldn't buy fertiliser or seed like that, nor flour, sugar, cement or petrol. The loam industry lives in the stoneage in terms of quality control.

There is no way I would sell ANYTHING these days, either as a manufacturer or a merchant without a specification and a certificate of compliance.

If Pitchcare wanted a new campaign, could I suggest a defined standard for all the traditional loams in this country. Not much to ask really seeing as everything else in the machine shed is so defined and regulated.

2 minutes ago by Chris Thornton Edit Reply

Right lets have some sound advice please:- I have to order stuff early next week for delivery the week after.

Next week I have use of a Sisis 600 and intend to scarify all but next Saturday's pitch, then do that one on Sunday. On the Monday after I have the local golf club coming to spike, in two direction, at two different depths. 5 inch then 4 inch in line of play.

Obviously this all depends on the weather but if it's dry then I will be well in front by Tues or Wed after the league ends.

So if you were me would you take the plunge and introduce a new loam. The Kaloam on this square is no more than 1 1/2 inch deep on top of 1/2 inch of red marl which I have spiked through several times and the roots are now going through that layer.

Which loam would you put on? Should I bother changing??
Can we trust the new supply of Kaloam???

I want this to be my last season and want to leave the square in good nick.

Come on lads and , unlike me, be positive.
Cheers Chris

"He not busy being born is busy dying

Hear hear Chris

It's not just a pallet load of whatever to chuck on, loam is our lifeblood. Suppliers please give the groundstaff some feedback, some spec and some form of communication.

Pitchcare who have taken one variant of Kaloam into their sales stable might well like to take a lead on this. The old Kaloam had a good reputation and was a tried and tested product. Manufacturing problems turned that end up in just one month.

Nobody buys a pup, so surely the manufacturers have to do more than what we've seen in the industry press in terms of smug assurances and veiled comments about layering and damage to your square if you change.

Why not try speaking to the current suppliers. You now have a choice of three, and ask them for there latest soil testing analysis carried out at Aberistwyth ? i believe.
I shall be using Kloam again this year and with the upmost of confidence.

Grassman, in respect,

I would suggest the 3 suppliers talk to the users, not vice versa. and provide data sheets and guarantees with each delivery. There are now three suppliers of the same 'alleged' product. Who is to be trusted after last years debacle. If the Bow Street site at the University of Wales near Aber, or their labs have done the business then why is there not a STANDARD GUARANTEED SPEC for every bag you recieve. Everything has to be <4mm guaranteed and then with an appropriate loam analysis that matches the original Kaloam. End of story.

Chris, alot`s been going on up here since we met at your place last year........... to cut a very long story short, I`m changing onto GSB County. I`ve done alot of trials with compatability between the County, Kaloam and my native stuff and I`m happily going for it.......... with the help of some hollow coring.

Go for it James! Anyone who can drive a car like yours can do a little job like that. All the best.

Eddy, if you have always been a kloam user, then it is within your interest to find out what is going on. As a pitch advisor for my county i have made it my business to find out. All three suppliers have had there products tested idependantly and i have made my choices. I am sticking with the Kloam material with the upmost of confidence. Do not always rely on suppliers of everything to give you the correct answers. There business is selling, it is your business to know what you want to buy. Build a raport with your pitch advisor, he might have the info you require.

Grassman - I admire your stance with this, however, with respect, how do we know that the future supply will be of the same standard? Once upon a time, the original kaloam was a 'clean' product with a good reputation... look what happened to that. The 'new' kaloam's may well have been tested, and come through the tests okay, but how do we know that will be the case next year, the year after, or in ten years time - i'm not putting my faith in those supplying now, given the previous issues.

Eddy has a valid point - if the suppliers had some sort of guaranteed, acceptable parameters, with some comeback for the customer, I might just have stuck with it. Furthermore, whilst it is the companies business to sell the product, it is also the companies responsibility to produce a product that is fit for purpose - something that clearly didn't happen in the past. We all know what we wanted to buy last time around - clean kaloam - we got gravel... that is in no way the customers fault. If there was a 'STANDARD GUARANTEED SPEC' before this whole debacle kicked off, would this situation have ever arisen?

Mike

Do not want to argue with any one, but does any one offer cast iron gaurentee's with there products? I dont know, but cannot remember being shown one.
One of the new Kloam suppliers actually supplies an awful lot of a very fine product to the first class game. I would certainly put my trust in them. Just imagine the fall out for them if they were to get it all wrong. We are all bound to be very concerned about the quality of any soil/loam we buy, but trust has to play a part somewhere. There was nothing wrong with loam product supplied last year, it was the stone in it that was the problem, surely that was then a problem of a lack of quality control within that company. That company is now defunct and others have taken up the supply, surely they need to be given a chance, perhaps not, you can make your choice.
As far as continuity of supply is concerned, we use a natural living product, these varieties of soil will not be there forever. There will almost certainly be slight changes to the loam make up over the years as each new site is excavated.
The analysis of the three Kloam products that i know are available, show very slight variations in each of them, each come from different sites, but they are close enough that there is unlikely to be a compatability issue. Last years Ongar and Boughton, for two,may not be exactly the same as last years or the years before that, but it will be very close.
One company that many of you appear to be happy to change to had a major problem several years ago with the quality of supply, i cannot name names obviously, but it shows that anybody can make mistakes.
Incidently, i have not heard of any pitch problems where the contaminated Kloam was used, it appeared to get rolled in and we have heard no more. One club local to me raked up what they could in the early spring and then gave the square a stiff brush, no problems this summer at all. How about the rest of you?
Another reason for me to put my trust in the product is two fold, one i would rather keep to a very similar product than change, especially when that product has proved to be very successful in the past and two its price. On average about a pound cheaper per bag to me than most others. That equates to approx £160 to my local club. Thats the eqivalant to two bags of grass seed, enough said.

Each to their own, Grassman - if you have done your research (which you clearly have), stick with it. No arguments, far from it, just a discussion and exchange of opinions... nothing wrong with that.

Few suppliers do offer cast iron guarantees with their products (there is the Higher Voluntary Standard for seed breeders - this from the Barenbrug website - "Certificates of purity and germination can be supplied on request.") - I believe that this is what Eddy was referring to, in that if this was introduced, it might make for a cleaner supply chain, a better end product, and peace of mind for the customer - not a bad thing in my books. The one issue that I can see with this is that there would be an inherent cost implication which would ultimately get passed on to the customer.

As for the company that had problems a few years back. I am unaware of whom this is, but I am assuming that they are still around, trading under the same name, and they got through the difficult period? Yes, mistakes do happen, but shutting up shop and resurfacing without any explanation to the customer is what has riled me, and probably a fair few others.

For info, I left one wicket untouched following the contaminated dressing, to use as a comparison - two things happened - pretty severe cracking, and our teachers went nuts at me - neither being something that I like to see.

Mike, it is good to exchange views, but as far as i am aware, the company has not resurfaced, it has gone. Other companies have taken up the reigns. The other company is still trading, i think you will find that things were hushed up and most would not have got to hear, good business or a little devious?
You left one pitch untouched, that says it all, no attention paid to it, i guess your others were all right, or was it only one pitch that was dressed with contaminated dressing?
It would be good to hear from Pacman and Chris Thorton as i beleive they were both affected.
Hope your reno's go well this time.

This will be the 20th consecutive season that we have dressed our square with 2-3 tonnes of Kaloam. Prior to that there was a bit of marl mixed with the indigenous soil the odd year but that was it.

I certainly have no intention of changing. My batch of Kaloam last year was stone free and my supplier is selling Roffey Brother's Kaloam, but to be honest I would have been happy with the other two.

I am also curious whether three suppliers selling Kaloam will have any effect on price in future years. This batch for me was actually slightly cheaper.

Poor terminology on my part, Grassman - I meant that the people that were 'the face', if you will, of the original company disappeared without an explanation or any support (certainly in my case), and then reappeared, with a 'new' product. Clearly, GSB weren't involved in any way with the initial issue so this doesn't relate to them, but Alan and Phil were, to a lesser or greater extent - I spoke to Alan when the problem arose, and just got fobbed off, which i'm very annoyed about. With respect to Phil, though I don't know him nor have I spoken with him, at least he did make a statement a short while ago - personally, I wasn't satisfied with the points raised, but he did make an effort, which is fair enough. What gets me is that our batch was delivered in Jan and was sat in our shed, in bags until renovation time, so this problem must have went on for many, many months as the contaminated loam was still being supplied in September - that's not your average lack of quality control, it's just flat out disgusting - how this could go unnoticed, or unresolved by the supplier for so long is beyond me, it really is. That also blows Alan Ford's explanation to me out of the water, which was that "as it's been so wet through the summer, the stones have been sticking to the loam" (or something along those lines anyway) - if it was the "wet summer" that caused the issue, how on earth does that explain my problem as mine was delivered before the so called wet summer had even arrived... someone was telling porkies, and I don't like that...

As for things being 'hushed up, or 'devious'... all i'll say is that I think it was a disgrace, and i'll continue to think that until someone who was/is reponsible/accountable is prepared to come clean.

To clarify what I done upon discovery of the problem. I spent all day, every day for a good two weeks on my hands and knees, with a little screwdriver and a selection of brushes, working the stones out of the surface. I then adapted ous Sisis TM1000 by having a brush made up for it, and swept the surface - this all came at a significant cost in terms of man hours and additional equipment. I left the one pitch untouched to use as a comparison to the ones that I 'decontaminated' - the fact that each of the decontaminated pitches played fine, but people refused to use the pitch that I left untouched goes on to suggest that if I didn't decontaminate the rest of the wickets, we may well of ended up having no cricket - if that were the case, I would probably be out of a job right now.

For those who are sticking with the Kaloam, from either supplier, good luck - I hope that things work out.

Pitches have played ok, a lot of hard work though, scarified early spring & then with the dry spell had to manage the drying out as increased cracking.

Also spent time pre season picking up stones on hands & knees. Also picking up stones in pitch prep & still stones around.

BTW sticking to a kaloam product due to club finances not allowing work to change loam.

MIke point about the Jan 2010 Kaloam being contaminated is interesting as my batch was May 2010 and that was stone free. I specifically made a note after reading what some people had experienced on this board.

As for the stones sticking to the Kaloam, if the loam is correctly screened at say 4mm, that should mean nothing bigger than 4mm in the bags and that clearly was not the case.

pacman, welcome back after a long lay off. So you are not attributing the teams poor batting to the stones then?

definitely not I am guilty as any & definitely & nothing to do with the pitch, even with the stones has still been flat resorted to shaving grass off in 2nd half of the season to help batters.

Also with stones was still by far the best pitch in the division.

On CofA / CofC:
My club and another have just received a delivery of 5.5 tonnes of Ongar from Binders. Which 1kg should Binders have tested for our Cof A?

Having hand-balled our 120 bags into the store, only one bag felt wet, and that one only slightly.

The events of last year clearly point to a severe lack of quality control. However, it was not only the suppliers who failed in their inspection duties. Some of the stories we have read suggest to me that whoever was applying these loams failed miserably in their own quality control procedures.

Jon, the way the gravel was delivered, the individual stones were encapsulated in loam. It was only after rain the problem became apparent. Having worked with loam for 17 years and never having to check before, why start now? Do you put your sugar through a strainer in the morning before adding it to coffee 'just in case there's a rock in it' although it's never happened before?

Jontaylor
That is a disgraceful,ignorant thing to say, I am disgusted that you should accuse everybody affected by this debacle as being incompetent.

What you need to consider is "chocolate raisins" and then consider the process of putting two bags into the drop spreader and then walking behind the spreader applying said loam.

If the stones had been separate from the loam they would have been apparent immediately but they were not because they were covered in loam. Just like "Chocolate Raisins"

I also wonder why it has taken you 11 months to raise this observation when my wife asked me that question the evening I discovered the stones.

Maybe you are just being miserable for the sake of it.

Goodbye

Hi folks,

Just to get some positivity and confidence going here.

As you guys prepare for your autumn renovations,(Good luck). Especially the Kaloam users, who like myself would have started their inquires / Research into the availability of "K" as early as possible. I`m not just saying that because we carried out our renovations in july, i also renovate a few others squares, in sep/oct. So, in a way my own employers and myself became guinea pigs like we did along with other school groundsman when it was first apparent last July /August that there was a evidence of grit popping up to the surface after rain fall? And was well noted on here to inform others.

Once i was satisfied who`s product & suppler we were going with.
The Graden was ran over in three passes down to 7mm. I should note that we also ripped the squares apart with our own scarifier prior to this. Then spiked down with verti-drain with 1/2" tines down to 100mm. We did remove a few stones and i do believe a coin was also found?
This was always going to be a concern because of the machinery but we got through it ok.

Seed went down and top dressed by hand with new batch of "K" and luted in. Straight away you could feel the difference of the loam (compared to last years.) as it was spread and luted in. Felt finer in quality and was easier to work into the holes.

Germination was quick and even, and loam has integrated well into the profile. I've since spiked twice with needle tines, and have weekly pulled cores to monitor moister and root development. Our two new tracks either end of the square from last season were hollow tined last week, over seeded and dressed again. Considering how dry it was up here in the summer. I've somehow managed to maintained a good moisture content to depth on our squares, along with a big water bill.

But i can now take this confidence along to my other clubs starting next week and do it all again. Like i've said before, It may take a wile to gain the trust and confidence in the product/supplier? But hey, it`s a kick up the **** for all us and learnt me not to be to complacent.

Jon, As a volunteer, you are very knowledgeable like so many on here. but your last comment was a insult to our fellow professionals' and volunteers.



All the best guys.

Andy.

JT - got to agree with some other comments... that was out of order. Let us not forget who purchased materials in good faith, only to get shafted... there was only one group of victims, and one group of people responsible, and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to work out who falls in to what category. You have not been affected by it as you seemingly don't deal with the product, and as many noted, this problem didn't show up until it rained for a prolonged spell. We sift through every bag looking for any anomolies and breaking up clumps of loam whilst loading the dresser, and have done since I started in this game...

BJD - Interesting on the timing, and I did refer to this when the issue first arose. From what I have seen many of the stones in the later batches were an awful lot bigger than what we received. Perhaps a faulty/worn screen would explain this, as it has worn more as the season has went on, letting bigger stones through? Who knows?

AJ - bloody good to see such a positive spin and viewpoint. I wish that I could find the faith that you have, but that isn't in my nature i'm afraid... once bitten, twice shy and all that. Also good to hear that the product which you are using seems of a good quality - out of interest, I would like to know who's product that you are using.

Mike

Some people are very very lucky. They go through their whole life seemingly being right and never having a problem.
Or perhaps it's all just a matter of quality control
All I know is, when you buy something in good faith, the product should be fit got purpose.
Last year for example, I got so far behind due to machinery breakdown and knew rain was coming, I was whacking in bags of loam into the spreader without barely looking at them in the panic to get it all on before it hissed down.
If I had bought that cr&p some guys got lumbered with, I would have been in the same boat probably.

Moderators. If you feel the need to remove postings, is it really necessary to state why or advertise it? Can you not just simply remove it and e-mail us personally asking for a change to the post?
It especially looks bad when it is simply a duplicate error.
In this case though, I hope people it makes people realise how high feelings are running.
I noticed Chris had his removed after following my post. I believe it was he that gave me the perfect analogy of 'Chocolate coated Peanuts' and was a great source of help on the end of the phone when all this was going on, giving up his time to do so.
Simply removing the post and putting such a message up implies something more likely to have come from a teen dating website and not an intelligent, although severely stressed proffesional who is at the end of his tether.
Do we really want to lose his experience?
Please feel free to remove this post but PLEASE take heed.

Just off to bed now after a great night in with friends and had a peek at the M B only to find my message has been removed for being "offensive" . Just can't see the offensiveness in me post P C.
What is very offensive however is the comment about our (the victim's) lack of quality control.
What was also extremely offensive to me was P C running an article about the suppliers of said Kastone who seem to be back in business and no hint of an apology from them.

Ah well ..................

Chris

Yes Chris, the guilty party is the company that supplied the rubbish not the poor lot who had it delivered to them.
I sat through a cringing presentation at the Surrey Groundsmens Association meeting last winter from the guilty company , whose representative blamed the workforce and then dished out small sample bags of their new batch "proving" how good it would be again. It was pitiful and a waste of our time.

Andy,

Thanks for your comments, someone here had removed Chris's comments, rather than editing out an expletive.
We wouldn't want to cull a thread such as this. It is relevant and emotive.

I think it's important that when threads are removed for a reason, that people are aware of why that's so, and said individuals have then, the opportunity to speak to us and change the wording appropriately.

With the greatest respect we can't notify everyone as to why threads are being moderated.

9 times out of 10 we will edit and remove offensive material and email the said person about it anyway.

Chris, your post has been reinstated.

Cheers,
Dave

If a similar contamination had happened in the food or pharmaceutical industry then there would be questions asked in The House, full media coverage and a public outcry. Not so for stones in Kaloam, but then again it's only a game.

Hi Mike,

It will be a learning curve that's for sure. After topdressing with kaloam for 26yrs and until last summer no issues with "k". So my "faith" has to be a positive one in that lessons are learnt in all partys.

Will PM you the rest.

Cheers

Andy.

Certainly a learning curve, harsh lesson to learn.

Trust in a product that was purchased as screened no obvious signs that anything different.

But we move on just feel sorry for everyone that has suffered from extra stress & additional work from the position that they have been placed in.

BTW: they knew but never provided warnings that could product could be effected.

Cheers Andy.

Pacman - your last sentence pretty much sums the whole debacle up for me...

Mike

I have just read on the Cornwall cricket web site that kaloam supplied by one of the 3 suppliers is not compatible due to excesive shrinkage as tested by the Aberystwyth university. Your comments please.

Interesting...

Found the link for those interested, though I would like to see something official from Aberystwyth Uni...

For link, click here

It is correct that one of the three Kloams shrinks more than the other two. I am not prepared to name names though. Rollerman and Mike now know. I have seen the official specification from all three and one does shrink more than the other.
Not for Aberystwyth to comment Mike, but the company concerned might have said something, but then that would only hurt sales. Not having tried that particular sample of Kloam i cannot comment on whether it would be ok to use or not.

Fair point, Grassman - again, credit to you for doing your research and establishing the facts for yourself.

Personally, I would just rather have some sort of official clarification or comparative figures before making any sort of judgement which could be based on factual, or incorrect information i.e. from the Cornwall Cricket Club website - I couldn't realistically base a conclusion on information taken from a website without some sort of substantive proof. agreed that it is not necessarily Aberystwyth's responsibility to make the information readily available - one would hope however, that the information was made available to potential customers, given what is already a troublesome and stressful issue for many - it goes without saying that the customer should also be doing their own checks. I would also refer to an earlier comment from myself:

"If in doubt, do your own tests or, even better, consult with a respected, independent agronomist. If you are not 100% sure what is in the bags, don't put it on your squares."

"For many of those who were hit with the 'Kastone' (myself included), you already have enough rubbish in your square - why add another potential problem - know the product that you are putting on your square, and its compatibility with the material that is already there. The only way anything goes on my squares, amidst the current confusion, is if each product has been tested by myself (motties), and independent lab analysis - and suitable results are achieved with all tests. If suitable test results aren't achieved, it isn't going on my squares, regardless of what type of loam, or 'name' it has."

This issue is clearly, still a bit of a sticky one, though some early comments are looking favourable. I do feel that there is still a fair bit of mileage to run in this one however, and I wold again urge everyone to be vigilant with their checks before putting anything on their squares - something which Grassman has clearly done.

Thanks Dave.
I think we should lighten up on Jon. He didn't see the stuff and has no understanding of how well hidden the gravel was.
One bad posting in many good ones is just a mistake.
We all make them!
Regarding mixing loams, I am sure some guys on here have looked into the properties of Kaolinite (Aluminium silicate) loams and the differences between these and Illlite loams.
However, it's my opinion that despite all this, shrinkage rate is the most important factor.
I found the following an interesting article.
http://www.groundscience.com.au/sportsfield.html

Re: Rollerman2's excellent comment above about Kaloam variants:

And without a national standard specifiction, mythology persists on which variant is best. When we can buy a sack of any loam with a guaranteed analysis then we can have confidence in? PLEASE PITCHCARE start the ball rolling because the other industry bodies have not done so and this would be a feather in your cap. A quality control standard for each individual cricket loam. Cost? say 10p per bag maximum and pressure on the suppliers to up their game from shabby and rather arrogant attitudes that belong in the 1970s.

BTW,

Spoke to Alan Ford at Saltex last week, gave his version of what happened last year.

Anyone who wants to know PM me

Currently on with this year's renovation. The quality of Roffey's Kaloam is very good and the loam is screened to a higher degree making it easier to spread/ level and get washed in better.

Just out of interest - does anyone know of anyone who has successfully migrated off Kaloam by gradually introducing a different loam - rather than digging out the old surface.

Done it before with great success Dave.

just wondered if anyone has changed from kaloam to boughton county for their topdressing and how compatable was it?
we have been offered the choice and i need to decide pretty quickly-

what did you change to vic?

Ongar + for 3 years, then straight Ongar. Also my current square was changed from Kaloam to Gostd Supernatural before I arrived and I am very pleased that it was!!

I think you need to look underneath Ebony, i dont think that just changing your dressing will achieve anything. Could be wrong of course.

I'm with Vic on this one. The change to Gostd seems to be the way to go.
Also, I can't believe Mr Ford had the bare-faced cheek to show his face at Saltex.
Wish I had been there.
Would have been the only time he would have had to answer my questions instead of hiding.

I have just done my squares with roffey's kaloam and found it very good. some lumps in some of the bags but overall much better quality then ive had from Monro's for years.

I have specifically registered on here today to make the following statement for GSB Loams and to set the record straight on our KL product.

We have received an email claiming that our KL product had been tested along with tests of Binder and Roffey products at Aberystwyth University. No tests of any of these products have taken place in Aberystwyth University in 2011.

We are trying to trace the person who posted this information on the Cornwall Association of Groundsmen website so we can take the appropriate action.

GSB KL product is sourced from Goundrey's original sources, is milled and screened to produce a much finer product than ever came out of Enstone.

If you wish to discuss this further with myself I can be contacted on gsbloams@hotmail.co.uk or 07736 022400 any time.

john
hope you find the so and so who posted the article,ive used gsb kl on all my renovations this season and the product has been great

Sorry John, noone has come back on this one. I will. I find the response rather disturbing within the context of your message ie 'appropriate action' . Is this a veiled threat of recourse within the courts? Possibly not a great marketing strategy?

Your pitch is:

"GSB KL product is sourced from Goundrey's original sources, is milled and screened to produce a much finer product than ever came out of Enstone."

But I would say, where is the guarantee or a specification that would give the customer confidence in the product being used? What was the true story of all those stones that went through the screen and could it happen again? Why did Goundry not honour it's customers and compensate them for damage rather than taking a less than gentlemanly option ? Why did they not hold their hand up and say "Sorry, mistake, send it back?"

EDIT Peter sent his reply as I was typing

Are you absolutely sure John? I was under the impression all three had been tested as well. Perhaps they have all been carried out independantly, without your knowledge ?

This whole circus is a mess.

It would probably be beneficial to all if some independant body could analyse the new products.

We have a company that, in the end, supplied a problematic product that has now stopped supplying it. This left loads of us with tainted views on anything to do with Kaloam. Now we have a couple of new suppliers trying to pick up on the old Kaloam customers ... plus a revamped original.

Like many others I have received small samples from the new guys. The samples that I received from Roffeys and GSB and the motties that I did suggested that both would be fine on existing Kaloam squares ( one was noticably finer screened than the other ... in my samples ).

Another loam supplier then offered to do a full analysis on these samples for me and report back within a week. That was months ago and I've still not had a reply. So I'm not delighted with that supplier either ... which means I probably won't use them either for my eos.

The other issue of course is long term confidence.

It's not an easy answer to any of your questions regarding compatability.

I can’t give you all a precise answer on how different shrinkage needs to be before getting worried about it. The good thing about the split motty test is that it provides a fair simulation of the practical field situation. I would not worry about a 2-3% difference in clay content but would begin to at around 5% or greater.

If the new topdressing is well worked in to the existing surface and is fairly light in amount it helps avoid sharp difference in soil materials so good groundsmanship can prevent potential problems in changing topdressing sources.

A bit about the background about all this shrinkage stuff andsoil mechanics:

First of all soils that shrink crack. With regard to the mineral component all clay types shrink so in general the greater the clay content the greater the shrinkage. This means that soils with clay contents less than the upper teens in clay % don’t crack to any signif icant extent. Organic matter also shrinks a lot so soils with more OM shrink more. Next component is soil binding strength which also depends on clay content. The stronger the soil is the bigger the blocks and the wider the cracks that develop. OM generally weakens binding strength so this is why you often get wide deep cracks on a newly constructed pitch but over time as OM builds up cracks tend to be narrower though of course there may be more of them. Vertical cracks frighten batsmen but provided the edges hold its not a problem. Horizontal cracks that are encouraged by any kind of change in soil character with depth are more of a problem. They deaden bounce and once formed tend to occur every time a pitch is prepared and dried out

Minerology:

A little bit about minerology as it's important in how much this dictates how soils behave. As well as the amount of clay the type is important. Smectites have two swelling components. One is swelling between layers within a crystal and the other is between crystals like any other non-expanding clay. The within crystal swelling is affected by saturating cation. Na sat clays swell more than Ca or Mg or Al sat. The swelling between crystals is high in smectites because they are so small. The non swelling clays like kaolinite and illite swell less than smectites and vermiculite is intermediate. Most clay soils in the UK are composed of mainly kaolinite and vermiculite so exhibit less shrinkage overall.

A bit about change if you want to go down this route:

Bit tricky this! I would suggest doing what you intend but going in stages. I think it would be very difficult to avoid some topdressing remaining on the surface even if most was brushed into core holes. The best compromise would be to use in the first instance a 50: 50 mix . Then possibly 25:75 or go straight to the prefered loam for subsequent topdressing but the former is better. In any case, it's important the material is ameliorated and mixed into the existing soil matrix rather than in layers on top, this will reduce potential layer development. I don’t know of any better method than the split motty and you can do it yourself without depending on someone else.

I hope there is some usefull information above, even if most just pick bits out but i have tried to cover everything mentioned.

Anthony

Eddy

Was John Goodjohn originally at Goundrey/Binders?

For what it's worth I've been a little annoyed this year with loam suppliers not getting back to me. However I rang GSB and John got back to me within a day and I had a sample on my doorstep within a couple of days.

I'm not actually on my Kaloam square anymore so I don't have to worry about who I get my Kaloam fix from.

However I'm still wondering who to go to to change loam on my newly acquired Mendip square.

No Pat, as far as i am aware JG has not had any part to play with the above mentioned companies, nor has any body else as far as i am aware. Goundrey's, Binders, Roffeys, wessex horticultural all seperate companies in there own right, all bought up over a short period of time and traded under the Munro banner. Munro go into administration, Binders and Roffeys at least bought out by seperate companies and now trading idependantly. GSB have seen a business opportunity and grasped the nettle, they now produce a Kloam product. Goundry, from where the problem started no longer exists. You pays your money and you take your chance, but both Binders and Roffeys reputable companies as far as i am concerned. Your choice, your decision.
As for you changing your loam, you should use what is considered to be the nearest in particle substance to your Mendip, not by company supplier.

Cheers Grassers

I was sort of being Devil's advocate there ... I knew GSB have been supplying independantly since September 1994 so Knew John Goodjohn had nothing to do with the Kastone saga. I was trying to suggest to Eddy that his questions re Kaloam and the stones/quality were probably ill directed to John Goodjohn.

There are interconnections re staff with these companies but it's not for me to comment.

Re me and my Mendip change ...

I would not have gone to a Kaloam type loam as I don't think that is the best option re binding with Mendip. I've done it with success but have also seen problems and I think there are better options.

I have a number of options that I'm confident will be fine. What I was saying is that one of those companies has proven to have pretty poor communication with me this season. GSB make a very similar product and the one dealing that I had with them was very satisfactory.