Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Incentives for increasing soil organic matter
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave645" data-source="post: 3850270" data-attributes="member: 55822"><p>There is nothing wrong with encouraging farming to change, to encourage OM but if your going to use a carrot or stick to do it, you need science behind you and methadolagy to show how to do it while protecting the farmers bottom line, if it needs investment in machinery that means it will cost, if it means even short term yield reductions it means it will cost, if it means adding non productive break crops or over winter crops that too involves cost, don't forget nitrogen fixing only occurred above set temperatures, so how much benefit are over winter beans.....like anything in a business setting it has to show a return not erode them, farmers would need to see the cost benifits are worth any short term pain that implementing them may bring.</p><p></p><p>As for the main question using subs as a carrot and stick is most likely the best way to invoke large scale changes. Cross compliance has been the govermants environmental tool of choice for awhile now. It's blunt but makes changes. But any change that has a effect for even a single year on farm profits will be hard to swallow by lots of farmers, as direct drills are not cheap......and yield, and profit, drops are even harder...... to except.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave645, post: 3850270, member: 55822"] There is nothing wrong with encouraging farming to change, to encourage OM but if your going to use a carrot or stick to do it, you need science behind you and methadolagy to show how to do it while protecting the farmers bottom line, if it needs investment in machinery that means it will cost, if it means even short term yield reductions it means it will cost, if it means adding non productive break crops or over winter crops that too involves cost, don't forget nitrogen fixing only occurred above set temperatures, so how much benefit are over winter beans.....like anything in a business setting it has to show a return not erode them, farmers would need to see the cost benifits are worth any short term pain that implementing them may bring. As for the main question using subs as a carrot and stick is most likely the best way to invoke large scale changes. Cross compliance has been the govermants environmental tool of choice for awhile now. It's blunt but makes changes. But any change that has a effect for even a single year on farm profits will be hard to swallow by lots of farmers, as direct drills are not cheap......and yield, and profit, drops are even harder...... to except. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Incentives for increasing soil organic matter
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top