Clover fixes nitrogen from the air (as long as the right bacteria are present in the soil) but it doesn't make the nitrogen available until it dies. It does well on poor soils for this reason - it doesn't need N in the soil but the grass does, so the clover outcompetes the grass. If you fertilise then the grass can outcompete the clover.
Clover does provide some soil nitrogen while growing, as it is used to undersow cereal crops in organic systems for this reason. It can outcompete grass by virtue of being more drought tolerant and/or growing faster and therefore taking up light and space, but it won't strip nitrogen away from the grass.
No obviously it doesn't take N from grass but it can grow well where grass is constrained by a lack of N (subject to the right bacteria). Studies on N moving from legumes to other plants are a bit sketchy. Most that I'm aware of don't show much of an effect. I suspect its reputation comes from being used as a ley in an arable rotation before artificials were widely available, when it would be grazed (so extra manure) and then ploughed in and break down over time.
There are studies that indicate higher protein content in cereals grown alongside legumes, but I'll allow that some of that could be the result of weed suppression, as that will leave fewer weeds competing for soil N. Personally I think there's enough evidence for some N fixation benefitting the cereal (or grass), but I'll admit it's not conclusive. Manure isn't the best source of N- it's great for phosphorus and potassium, but a lot of the N is too volatile and lost to the atmosphere, so much of the N the grazing animals leave behind will be lost.
Yes to most of that but I'd still argue that clover doing well doesn't necessarily indicate high N in soil and if people do want to suppress it in favour of grass (because it's too nutritious) then fertilising can often help without much raising the nutrition value of the sward overall. Manure obviously not much use for N per se but prior to artificials (and still now I'd argue) it's a valuable additive for other elements and soil health generally.
Definitely- and likely to become much more necessary as the phosphorus mines run low.
Yep, although I read recently some new deposits have been located somewhere (naturally in some country that we disapprove of for some reason!). I'd love to see mixed farming returning to East Anglia for that and other reasons.
Personally I'd wait until there's been a decent amount of rain before putting on fertilizer. It's rain the grass needs for growth at present. My grass is looking quite brown but the plantains etc are doing fine.
I'd definitely need a period of more reliable rainfall. Do you think nitrogen burn is a risk on established but looking dead grass? I'm hoping with roots intact it'll bounce back but so far its not bouncing very well!
Paddock fertiliser was my plan - if my rain dance ever works!!!
No, it won't give the grass a boost, it will harm it. Never fertilise artifically something that needs water.
Do you not think fertilizer would get the grass growing with a bit more oomph when there is rain though? That's what I'm trying to work out
No, it will just wash away and pollute the area because the ground is too solid to absorb it.
I think you’ll get fertiliser burn, earth needs to be damp, grass needs to be trying to grow, rather than in retreat.
I think sheep would eat the grass I'm trying to save! My neighbour had to kick them off his paddock this year it just wasn't growing fast enough.
No.
Nor do I!
Yes.
Yes.
Soil needs feeding. Best to do soil analysis and then feed according to results (including fertilizer). Adding organic matter back (muck spreading) is also important though even if you use bagged fertilizer and nutrients
I've had regular soil analyses and the muck spread earlier in the year is pretty much sitting on the surface.