Conventional vs. Organic ... An Article and a Debate

Recently on the Homesteading Today message board there was a THREAD debating (or possibly arguing about) an article titled, "Africa: Organic Agriculture Can Contribute to Fighting Hunger, But Chemical Fertilizers Needed to Feed the World." It appears the article comes from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and discusses exactly what the title implies (pretty creative title huh?). I'm not sure how many of the posters over on the forum took time to read the article or if they just jumped into to the debate/arguing because it is such a hot button issue.

One quote that was mentioned in the original post is this one from Dr. Diouf, "We should use organic agriculture and promote it. It produces wholesome, nutritious food and represents a growing source of income for developed and developing countries. But you cannot feed six billion people today and nine billion in 2050 without judicious use of chemical fertilizers." It is an interesting paradox that he throws out there. Basically it seems that organic is good for those that can afford to do it because you can possibly make more money, but for feeding the world chemicals are the key. I'm sure scholars, farmers, and wanna-be scholar/farmers (like myself) will be going round and round on this issue for quite a while. But, after reading the article and the comments on the message board there are a few thoughts that I had that didn't really come up. I will readily admit that I don't have much of a dog in this fight right now ... I don't have much knowledge ... and to be perfectly honest I don't really care from a moral standpoint whether people choose to use chemicals or not.

#1. One thing that Joel Salatin has mentioned in his books is that part of the research used to justify comments such as those from Dr. Diouf is flawed. Mr. Salatin asserts that their organic research means planting one field conventionally and then one field near it organically and comparing the results. There are two main problems with this type of experiment. First of all, most organic farmers will admit that it takes time to condition the soil and bring it back from all the chemical inputs it has become dependent upon so my just taking a conventional field and planting it "organically" you won't have taken the time to rebuild the needed organic matter in the soil. And secondly, sometimes organic farming is seen as leave alone farming and that just won't work. You still need to work the crops and do creative farming in order to produce your crop. So, there is one thought I had.

#2. In the debate/argument nobody seems to be citing real world examples. If you are a regular reader of my blog you may remember a post titled, "A Quick Saturday Morning Post..." from December, 1st. In that post I linked to an article about and gave a quick summary of Goldmine Farm which is a 2,000 acre organic farm in Illinois. Maybe that is the guy that we should be talking to?

#3. Now, I don't want to get in over my head here because I eat grain fed beef almost every week, eat lots of corn products, and fill up my vehicles with ethanol (because the word contains my name) every time they need gas ... But, could the problem be that we are trying to use grains like corn and soybeans for to many things that they aren't needed for? Would we need to farm with chemicals in order to get higher yields if we weren't feeding our ruminants corn and we weren't feeding our cars corn? I don't really want to go too deep in this subject because I could easily be shouted down by my own family ... but what if the only grain we grew was for human use? Not cattle use, not car use... Maybe the guy from King Corn who commented earlier on my blog will find this post and chime in on the subject.

Let me point out again ... I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I have answers, I'm not saying I have experience, I'm not saying much at all ... What I am doing is throwing out a few thoughts for myself and other readers...

What if?

A Quick Saturday Morning Post...

A busy day is ahead so I just thought I would through up a quick little post. Yesterday we finished getting the yard, garden, and shed ready for winter. We did a last little bit of cleaning up in the garden and then rearranged the shed so that we could get to our winter shovels and put up the garden fence and tomato cages. Also, we spent a few minutes doing a last minute upgrade to the chicken pen. We knew a potential ice/freezing rain storm was on the way and we wanted to give them a bit more cover ... so we added a nice blue tarp! Ahh, the wonders of blue tarps. So, as I type this now I look out on the sleet/ice/freezing rain coming down and I'm glad we got the work done yesterday.

I did come across an interesting article yesterday about Jack Erisman and Goldmine Farm in Illinois. It is a case study from the New Farm website that chronicles the farms transition to organic crops. It is a pretty interesting article because the transition spanned quite a few years practically starting in the early 1970's and coming to completion around seventeen years ago. It is a fairly long article, but I encourage you to check it out because it tells about a 2,000 acre family farm that moved from conventional chemical crops to a seven year organic rotation along with a cow/calf herd.

Here are a few interesting excerpts from the article to pique your interest:

• Ultimately, Jack’s education and life experiences had an impact on the way he approached farming. By the end of 1969, he had come to realize more fertilizer and chemicals didn’t necessarily mean more profit. He also began to consider human and agricultural history, and came to realize that humans grew their food for thousands of years without the benefit of synthetic chemicals.


• To this day Jack has never collected a single government payment.


• Indeed, the first years were difficult, but he had a business plan, stuck with it and made a profit.


• Jack talks to many beginning organic farmers, and recommends they put fields going into organic into a small grain—wheat or oats—then into grass/legume cover crop, let the land rest in this state for a couple years and take a hay cutting or graze if some income is needed from the field.


• Jack does not participate in government programs for philosophical reasons. He has built waterways and terraces on his farm without financial assistance from the Soil Conservation Service. “Why should I ask the government to help me with something on my own land that will bring me benefit?" He has gone to government agencies for information, but he would consider it hypocritical to accept money from a program that he doesn’t believe is right.

There is a lot to think about in these little excerpts so I hope you check out the entire article!

Organic Farmers Share Tips...

This past week at a Thanksgiving party I picked up an article from the Iowa Farm Bureau Spokesman (November 7, 2007 issue) that my father-in-law had been saving for me. It was just a short article about a conference that took place in Sioux City, IA, but it did give me some encouragement to see what is happening in my state when it comes to unconventional farmers.

The speaker at the conference was Kim Alexander who currently lives in Texas. An interesting thing about his story is that he had previously lived in Iowa and his family owned farm land. He was not able to farm on the family land because the family decided to put it into the Conservation Reserve Program (new at the time). I don't know all the details, but the article says that he then learned of Joel Salatin and his principals on "growing food people want to eat and how to direct market our farm products" so he decided to grab hold of those ideas and put them to use on his Texas farm. I wonder to myself why he wasn't able to stick around here in Iowa ... maybe this is an illustration of why it is so difficult for young farmers (even those that have farming in the family) to get started in farming. Oh well, he is a making a go of it in Texas (although I'm glad I'm up here in Iowa!).

It sounds like he is doing the Salatin thing all the way around. They have a 40-head cow/calf herd, 2,000 broiler chickens, 1,400 laying hens, 300 turkeys, and a custom poultry-processing operation (that is a good value added option). It is pretty exciting that his family (mom, dad, and eight children) are making a go of it on the farm, but it is even more exciting and impressive that they are doing it on 300 acres of land ... that they don't own! Check out what Mr. Alexander has to say about that: "We rent and lease, for $100 a year, from the city people who go out and buy this expensive $7000 an acre land and then haven't a clue as what to do with it."

That is pretty exciting. The one hurdle that most people always point to is the high cost of land and the lack of availability. I have heard lots of people criticize Mr. Salatin because they believe his ideas don't translate to other farmers because he started out with a serious amount of land. But, the Alexander family started out with nothing ... in fact they might have had a chance at family land, but ended up doing it on their own. Mr. Alexander said in the article, "The shortage here isn't land, it's the shortage of warm bodies who know how to husband the land."

They market their chickens and eggs to local grocery stores and white table-cloth restaurants, but they do other things to make their farm profitable that are slightly more "outside-of-the-box". They collect used vegetable oils to fuel their trucks and build their own equipment for the farm. What an encouraging article for me. Sometimes I wonder if the farming idea is even possible, but when I read articles like this I get another burst of energy and continue to push on.