[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: British Beef Situation



In article <4lhajd$jmc@news1.exit109.com>, "Nathan D. Justus"
<nathan@exit109.com> writes
>In article <flOojiAmDzexEwd7@upthorpe.demon.co.uk>,
>   Oz <Oz@upthorpe.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>I don't think the world is going to run out of fertiliser any time soon. 
>
>Probably not, however, the damage to the soil that is done when soil building 
>things like organic matter are not incorporated is tremendous.

We had a discussion on this very subject a few months ago in
sci.agriculture. Suffice to say that in practice, certainly in the UK,
this assumption is unjustified in practice IMHO. We can discuss this in
depth if you wish.

>>>I know that yields using organic growth techniques are as high as those 
>using 
>>>chemicals HOWEVER during the transition period they are NOT - the land must 
>be 
>>>able to recover from the damage done to it, and the farmer must learn 
>organic 
>>>techniques.
>>
>>Blather. A pipe dream.
>
>Not according to Rodale researches.  Or the US government for that matter.

Who is Rohdale? How are they doing it? What is their criteria? What 
crops?

With enough manure and no attacks of pests and diseases location then 
vegetable crops can be grown with little difference between organic and 
conventional. However it's as well to note some differences. One problem 
is the mismatch of nutrients in organic manures. So growing potatoes on 
a clay that liberates potassium is fine as you really only have to apply 
enough manure to provide the nitrogen for the crop. Admittedly the high 
nitrogen early in the season results in a lot of small potatoes rather 
than a few big ones and so large peeling losses, but still. Try to grow 
them on a non-potash liberating loam and you are in all sorts of 
trouble. The correct amount of potash results in a massive overdose of 
nitrogen.

Of course if you get blight then the crop is a write-off.
If you get aphids you are in trouble.
If you get Colorado beetle you are in serious trouble.
etc. etc.

For cereals there are too many problems unless we are talking extensive. 
I would define extensive these days as less than 2T/ac. Not least the 
country doesn't provide remotely enough manure to do it.

After all farmers don't waste the manure they produce now and there 
isn't remotely enough sh*t to go round. We use 2,000,000 gallons of 
sewage sludge here and to supply all the nitrogen we need would require 
all the sewage from a town of 30,000 and that's counting the offerings 
of our 200 cow herd. We are only a medium sized UK farm too. It ain't 
possible countrywide. So, someone is going to have to starve. Lots of 
people are going to starve in a yellow rust year. Nature is neither
pernicious nor benign, it just simply doesn't care.

>>Farmers in pre-fertiliser and pre-spray days farmed organically and 
>>achieved yields typically less than 1/3 of what we have today (UK). They 
>>actually knew what they were doing, were pretty smart and had 2000+ 
>>years of experience. If you think that, with much of the knowledge lost, 
>>and with little experience you are going to do any better then you 
>>merely expose your ignorance. I take it you are a practising organic 
>>farmer earning your entire income from it?
>>
>
>They may have been very smart (they were) and resourceful, but they lacked 
>alot of the knowledge that we now have.  I am NOT saying go back to the horse 
>for plowing, or using primative agricultural techniques. I'm saying that we 
>should use the best of our advanced technology with the idea of land 
>stewardship and building of the farmland quality as part of it.

Well, my farm *was* farmed semi-organically and you wouldn't have 
described it then as 'hearty land'. You would have described it as low 
fertility, low soil OM, low yielding, poorly structured and generally 
poor. Bag fertiliser over many years increased yields, and thus the 
return of OM to the soil, to the extent that the soil is now in good 
condition. One indicator is that moles, who eat earthworms, were unknown 
then yet are nowadays a plague. So the earthworms prefer it too. Nature 
can be irritating to those with pre-conceived views, can't it?  :-)

>Nor do I claim tremendous knowledge on this subject.  I am a 
>practicing software engineer and IT professional who happens to have 
>interests that deal with food, cooking, and ecology.  Not that I have to 
>explain anything to you ;  your comments are merely nasty and inflammatory, 
>rather than informative, I can obviously tell that you have no information on 
>this topic either.

Oh, I apologise if you found my reply 'nasty and inflammatory'. Be
warned though that in many groups I am considered wimpy and excessively
polite. My route to this thread is via .agriculture so it's hard to
remember that there are those posting whose knowledge of agriculture may
be limited. I don't agree with you, but that doesn't mean that my
comments were intended in a nasty fashion. Loosen up a little and have
an open mind. It's an interesting subject and worthy of discussion.

>>>Further, what do we do about the groundwater exhaustion?
>>
>>I would worry about that, myself.
>>
>Well, finally we're in agreement about something.

And why not?

------------------------------- 
'Oz     "When I knew little, all was certain. The more I learnt,
        the less sure I was. Is this the uncertainty principle?"



Follow-Ups: References: