"Rubystars" > wrote in message
om...
> "pearl" > wrote in message >...
> > "Rubystars" > wrote in message
> > m...
> <Snip>

Why? <restore for context>

Compare the yields here; http://tinyurl.com/uvdi , bearing in mind;

'2. Lower yields are experienced during the transition to organic production

Most researchers agree that yields tend to drop for three to five
years during the conversion from industrial to organic approaches (Dabbert
and Madden, 1986; US Congress, 1983; Hanson et al, 1990; Lampkin,
1989; Smolik and Dobbs, 1991). This is because it takes time for the soil
to develop the positive attributes associated with organic agriculture. It
also takes time for operators to learn organic crop management techniques.
Some of the lower organic crop yield estimates cited in Exhibit III-1
may have been from industrial farms in transition to organic production.
<end restore>

> > Given that organic production relies on soil fertility and a healthy,
> > diverse soil ecosystem,
>
> If it relies on soil fertility how does that help people around the
> world who have to grow food in poor quality soil?

If those people have been growing their food in a sustainable manner
the soil should be fertile.

'yields tend to drop for three to five years during the conversion from
*industrial* to organic approaches .. because it takes time for the soil
to develop the positive attributes associated with organic agriculture.'

Why?

1. Industrial pesticides and herbicides sterilize agricultural soil,
destroying beneficial and harmful bacteria alike.

'THE LIVING SOIL: BACTERIA
...
Bacteria fall into four functional groups. Most are decomposers that
consume simple carbon compounds, such as root exudates and fresh
plant litter. By this process, bacteria convert energy in soil organic
matter into forms useful to the rest of the organisms in the soil food
web.
...
Bacteria from all four groups perform important services
related to water dynamics, nutrient cycling, and disease
suppression. Some bacteria affect water movement by
producing substances that help bind soil particles into
small aggregates (those with diameters of 1/10,000-1/100
of an inch or 2-200µm). Stable aggregates improve water
infiltration and the soil's water-holding ability. In a diverse
bacterial community, many organisms will compete with
disease-causing organisms in roots and on above ground
surfaces of plants. ..'
http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/soil_quali.../bacteria.html

2. Industrial fertilizers do not replace trace minerals, resulting in
nutritionally poor soil, compromising plants' health, as well as ours.

'An American study found that organically grown food contained
much higher average levels of minerals than non-organic food. For
example, there was 63 per cent more calcium, 73 per cent more iron,
125 per cent more potassium and 60 per cent more zinc in the
organically produced foods. There was also 29 per cent less of the
toxic element mercury.'
http://www.ekolantbruk.se/PDFer/Myth...%20reality.pdf

3. Organic matter levels have declined 30% to 50% in many
areas since the introduction of agriculture, primarily based on
short rotations and aggressive tillage and cultivation.
http://ohioline.osu.edu/b898/b898_7.html.

> >the yield reductions experienced in the initial
> > phases of transition from industrial practices tend to be eliminated over
> > time (Sparling et al, 1992; pers. comm. Cornwoman; pers. comm. Tourte).
>
> "Tend to be eliminated" doesn't mean always eliminated. In other
> words, there's the initial loss through a few years, and then possibly
> a longer term loss.

The opposite tends to be the case.

> > We note that the economic transition time can be twice as long as the
> > biological transition time; it can take an extra four years for the
> > farmer to fully recoup the financial losses that occurred during the
> > transition (Hanson et al, 1990). This transition period can be shortened
> > significantly with creativity (e.g. substituting crops, enhancing farm
> > gate sales efforts).
>
> All that effort just to get enough yield and to turn a profit, instead
> of an efficient way of producing plenty of produce, whether the soil
> is perfect or not.

All that effort to maintain, long-term, healthy productive soil, a clean
water-table and water-courses, a bio-diverse environment, and not
least, ag-'cide-free, nutritionally superior, taste superior, healthy food.

> <snip>
> > Based on the above, it appears that with strong farm management, small
> > scale, organic crop production can produce competitive and even superior
> > yields to industrially grown crops.
>
> Small scale? That might work if most people stop eating. I'm not sure
> how small scale farming is supposed to produce the same amount of food
> as large scale farming.

The issue is method.

> <snip>>

> > Think again.
>
> Most people in the world don't have the luxury to say no to food. It's
> a luxury to even be able to be a principled (and not by necessity)
> vegetarian, vegan, or to eat "organic only".

<restoring what you just snipped>

Farmers Throw Away Ploughs - Crop Yields Soar
1-17-01

Farmers across the developing world are throwing
away their ploughs in a dramatic example of "sustainable"
farming, a practice that is now sending crop yields soaring
on millions of farms.

The findings come from the largest ever study of sustainable
agriculture, released at a conference in London on Monday
The report's author, Jules Pretty of the University of Essex,
says sustainable agriculture is now defying its reputation as
a worthy enterprise with little chance of feeding millions
of starving people. He says sustainable farming has been
the most effective way of raising farm yields in the past
decade and that farming without tilling is among the most
widely adopted forms.

Pretty says the growth is very exciting: "If it spreads we
can make substantial inroads in reducing hunger."

Nature versus nurture

Sustainable agriculture deliberately lowers manmade
inputs such as chemicals, while maximising nature's input.
It replaces fertilisers with plants that fix nitrogen in the
soil and pesticides with natural enemies of pests.

And it is catching on. It now covers three per cent of third
world fields, an area the size of Italy. Its methods are
having big impacts on farm yields, with typical increases
of 40 to 100 per cent.

"Sustainable farming has grown in the past decade from
being the preserve of a few enthusiasts into a broad
movement involving governments and the private sector",
says Pretty, whose study collected data on 200 projects
in 52 countries and was commissioned by the UK
government's Department for International Development.
"It is cheap, uses locally available technology and often
improves the environment," he says. "Above all it most
helps the people who need it - poor farmers and their
families, who make up the majority of the world's hungry
people."

Weed killer

In Latin America, small farmers left behind by past
farming revolutions have seen yields of grain and beans
rise by two-thirds using "green" methods, says Miguel
Altieri of the University of California, Berkeley.

The most widespread new technique is farming without
ploughing. In Argentina a third of fields now never see
a plough - farmers get rid of weeds by planting off-season
crops that kill them.

Besides relieving them of one of the most tedious jobs
on the farm, abandoning the plough improves soil quality
and raises crop yields. It even helps curb global warming
by accumulating carbon in the soil.

"In a short time, farmers saw reduced costs and greater
productivity, increased income and a better environment,"
said Lauro Bassi, an agronomist from Santa Catarina in
southern Brazil, where zero-tillage has been widely
adopted "For us zero-tillage is like a social movement."

Correspondence about this story should be directed to


https://www.newscientist.com/dailyne...p?id=ns9999325

> I'm not against organic farming though at all, I think it's a good
> thing, but I don't think that most farms should take it up.

<end restore>

Seven Deadly Myths of Industrial Agriculture

Industrial agriculture is devastating our land, water and air, and is now
threatening the sustainability of the biosphere. Its massive chemical and
biological inputs cause widespread environmental havoc as well as human
disease and death. Its monoculturing reduces the diversity of our plants and
animals. Its habitat destruction endangers wildlife. Its factory farming
practices cause untold animal suffering. Its centralized corporate ownership
destroys farm communities around the world, leading to mass poverty and
hunger. The industrial agriculture system is clearly unsustainable. It has
truly become a fatal harvest.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/corporatelies.html

THE MYTH:
Industrial food is safe, healthy, and nutritious.
THE TRUTH:
Industrial agriculture contaminates our vegetables and fruits with
pesticides, slips dangerous bacteria into our lettuce, and puts genetically
engineered growth hormones into our milk. It is not surprising that cancer,
food-borne illnesses, and obesity are at an all-time high.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth1.html

THE MYTH:
Industrial food is cheap.
THE TRUTH:
If you added the real cost of industrial food - its health, environmental,
and social costs - to the current supermarket price, not even our wealthiest
citizens could afford to buy it.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth2.html

THE MYTH:
Industrial agriculture is efficient.
THE TRUTH:
Small farms produce more agricultural output per unit area than large farms.
Moreover, larger, less diverse farms require far more mechanical and
chemical inputs. These ever increasing inputs are devastating to the
environment and make these farms far less efficient than smaller, more
sustainable farms.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth3.html

THE MYTH:
Biotechnology will solve the problems of industrial agriculture.
THE TRUTH:
New biotech crops will not solve industrial agriculture's problems, but will
compound them and consolidate control of the world's food supply in the
hands of a few large corporations. Biotechnology will destroy biodiversity
and food security, and drive self-sufficient farmers off their land.

THE MYTH:
Industrial agriculture benefits the environment and wildlife.
THE TRUTH:
Industrial agriculture is the largest single threat to the earth's
biodiversity. Fence-row-to-fence-row plowing, planting, and harvesting
techniques decimate wildlife habitats, while massive chemical use poisons
the soil and water, and kills off countless plant and animal communities.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth5.html

THE MYTH:
Industrial agriculture will feed the world.
THE TRUTH:
World hunger is not created by lack of food but by poverty and landlessness,
which deny people access to food. Industrial agriculture actually increases
hunger by raising the cost of farming, by forcing tens of millions of
farmers off the land, and by growing primarily high-profit export and luxury
crops.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth6.html

THE MYTH:
Industrial food offers more choices.
THE TRUTH:
What the consumer actually gets in the supermarket is an illusion of choice.
Food labeling does not tell us what pesticides are on our food or what
products have been genetically engineered. Most importantly, the myth of
choice masks the tragic loss of tens of thousands of crop varieties caused
by industrial agriculture.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/myth7.html