The future of arable farming

[JohnGalway]

Not sure what 'playing the man' means?

All I'm doing is stating that I don't agree with all of what you're saying. I make some compost, and grow some veg, I don't believe that an area of intensely cropped land can continue to be productive without continually replacing a good deal of what is removed from it.

I do acknowledge that biology reproduces, and given sufficient rest time could self sustain but I don't agree that attempts to permanently fix soil biology alone, could keep up with the demands of an intensely cropped area of veg.

Playing the man not the ball, in regards to the jibe about the course I've enrolled in, if that and beliefs is where we're at then I'm out.

I've tried to explain how this system works, not in theory but as is working on farms of all types from dairy, to cannabis, to row crops, to veg, including those up to 1,500 hectares, across the world.

 

[curlietailz]

No one has mentioned the labour requirement yet. Or water for that matter

or the fact that allotments don’t need to create buffer strips and wild flower corners

allotment labour is free and plentiful
Allotments in my opinion get watered every day in the growing season

Replicate that field scale and your sunk
There isn’t the labour or the desire to hand weed a 200 acre field it’s not the 1800’s

and the water infrastructure wouldn’t allow irrigation on all agricultural fields. It would break it and the taps and rivers would run dry ... like that one in India somewhere which never reaches the sea because it’s been drawn off all the way down

all my own musings of course

but the OP isn’t comparing apples with apples

 

[Guleesh]

Playing the man not the ball, in regards to the jibe about the course I've enrolled in, if that and beliefs is where we're at then I'm out.

I've tried to explain how this system works, not in theory but as is working on farms of all types from dairy, to cannabis, to row crops, to veg, including those up to 1,500 hectares, across the world.

Sorry John, I wasn't aiming my comment as a jibe to offend you, I'm quite passionate myself about growing food in a sustainable and natural manner, I spend a good deal of time trying to produce quality and chemical free food for my own family, I encourage others to do do the same, and that's why I don't like the over complication of a process that can be very simple and rewarding for anybody with access to a scrap of ground to get stuck into.

Whilst I agree with most of what you're saying, that compost can be of varying qualities and that a process that identifies how to make compost tailored to suit the soil it will be applied to could be a very good thing, I just don't think it's necessary in most cases, and I think that when you talk of crap compost full of human and plant pathogens, I think you could be discouraging people reading this to try making compost and growing their own food. I prefer the message that it is not that difficult, and that not a huge amount of knowledge is needed to grow healthy food - as this is my own experience.

We obviously see things differently, When I see people selling training courses for thousands of dollars per course, then what I see is people that are heavily motivated to sell courses, so when the same people make claims about what can be achieved if you follow them, that seem almost too good to be true, then can you really blame me for not believing it before I've seen it?

 

[JohnGalway]

Sorry John, I wasn't aiming my comment as a jibe to offend you, I'm quite passionate myself about growing food in a sustainable and natural manner, I spend a good deal of time trying to produce quality and chemical free food for my own family, I encourage others to do do the same, and that's why I don't like the over complication of a process that can be very simple and rewarding for anybody with access to a scrap of ground to get stuck into.

Whilst I agree with most of what you're saying, that compost can be of varying qualities and that a process that identifies how to make compost tailored to suit the soil it will be applied to could be a very good thing, I just don't think it's necessary in most cases, and I think that when you talk of crap compost full of human and plant pathogens, I think you could be discouraging people reading this to try making compost and growing their own food. I prefer the message that it is not that difficult, and that not a huge amount of knowledge is needed to grow healthy food - as this is my own experience.

We obviously see things differently, When I see people selling training courses for thousands of dollars per course, then what I see is people that are heavily motivated to sell courses, so when the same people make claims about what can be achieved if you follow them, that seem almost too good to be true, then can you really blame me for not believing it before I've seen it?

The original point I was making was that of being efficient, in an ecological way. The point I was addressing was that of resources and land being wasted, and "constant inputs" required to keep the show on the road, or sacrifice yield as the only choices.

But there is choice here for farmers. Continue on and use resources wastefully at significant cost. Or, try a different but proven system and make more money. They're difficult conversations to have as we farmers have been trained and encouraged to do things a certain way, by our peers, our regulators, industry, publications, then blamed for the consequences and hammered from all sides. This has resulted in a group that's now, increasingly, triggered by mere suggestion, hints, at other ways to do farming that might benefit the farmer. Help is now viewed as being attacked.

To recover old ground, different plants (pasture species, veg, crops, trees, you name it) prosper better at different points in the ecological succession timeline, on that timeline it begins as pretty lifeless dirt to bacterial dominated soils all the way to fungal dominated soils. The fungi to bacteria biomass ratio in the soil is how we know where we're at in succession. There are additional benefits such as the ability to select against weed germination, building soil structure, dealing with compaction, carbon sequestration, disposing of man made drought and more.

It's not humans making nature complex, nature is complex whether we want it to be or not. It's understanding nature.

To know the levels of biology in a soil, to understand what we need to add to that soil to most efficiently grow the crop we require is to work with nature while also efficiently using the resources available to use - in that general geographical area as opposed to on any particular one farm, though that's entirely possible on some farms. Using the knowledge and doing some microscope work is the route to ensuring the best possible outcome as opposed to a lesser outcome.

Whatever level of outcome is desired is up to the people involved. But that wasn't what I was addressing. I was addressing the use of land, resources, and inputs. All of which can be dramatically improved. The easiest money you'll make is what you don't have to spend.

Regarding the course and it's cost, there is an option to enroll in the course and view a particular number of lectures within a particular time frame and if one isn't happy be reimbursed. If I recall correctly it's 29 lectures, to give some sense there are I think 63 lectures in the entire Foundation Course. That's something that would need to be clarified for anyone wanting to do that rather than take my word on it.

So the option is there to feel the fibre of her fabric as opposed to being critical but refusing to engage at the same time. Yes, while I wouldn't call it expensive for what I have received, it's not a small amount of money, and not for everyone and I understand both of those things, they are valid. It's been disappointing to me to get the sense from some quarters of being judged on how I've chosen to spend my own money, particularly in this part of the forum which I must say I hadn't expected. There are reasons outfits like Catalyst Bioamendments and Todd Harringtons products and services are in such great demand - both having gained some of their schooling from Dr. Ingham.

The information is out there, but no more than the naysayers of Allan Savory, often what people trial as biological methods aren't, due to not being aware (or purpose or by accident) of what is required for success. I'll leave it at that because I didn't start this thread and never wanted to hog it like this.