- Location
- Glen Clova, Angus, DD8 4RD
The inputs industry are getting quite worried about the whole Regenerative Agriculture and farming with nature trend. They are all dusting off the tobacco industry playbook and pushing money into those methods purely to protect their future income streams.I was thinking about this post while I was doing my cattle work this morning. In a way it typifies how we, as farmers, have been conditioned to think and act over the last sixty years. Someone mentions something that’s potentially very good for your crops and farm, and straight away we look to see if it’s available to buy.
Now, I accept it was done somewhat tongue in cheek by @Bury the Trash, (or at least I guess it was), but it does sum up our mentality: the solution lies in a tin.
The thing about regenerative agriculture is that, very often, the ‘tin’ is the last thing you need. Generally, the ‘tin’ (or the fertiliser bag or the expensive cattle cake) has unintended negative consequences, even if the short term benefits appear to be spectacularly positive.
Mycorrhizal fungae would be a perfect example of something that doesn’t need a ‘tin’. Leave your FYM in a heap for a year and it will start to develop humates and fulvic acid which, when applied to your ground, stimulate MF growth; add woodchip to your FYM and turn / compost it, then leave it for a year and the levels of humates and fulvic acid increase dramatically, all for “free”, and all using your own farm produce.
Someone much brighter than me said they used to wake up in the morning wondering what they had to kill that to be a good farmer: blackgrass, intestinal worms, ragwort, thistles, etc etc. It was a constant fight with nature.
Now they wake up wondering how they are going to work with, and make use of, nature to control the thistles, why had the blackgrass appeared and what had they done wrong to their soil to cause it to become a problem, etc.
- Rubbish the opposition
- Spread doubt about the science
- Commission "science" from tame academics to use in both items above
- Attempt to distort the new paradigm to fit their existing business model (so claiming to be already doing it)
- Look for a way to turn it into a profitable product to sell (hence the tin of fungi, the emerging offers of "comprehensive soil tests", applying GM to existing natural soil biological organisms so that they can be patented and sold etc)
- Offer training in the new technique but distorted to include the importance of using their products for it to work well
- If all else fails then lobby sponsored politicians hard to restrict it or prevent policy supporting it
Sadly the NBA seem to be adopting the same general approach.
How do we support beef producers against the ongoing public attacks while abiding opening up any divisions between different production methods for the attackers to exploit?
Last edited: