Slashdot Mirror


Facing Soil Crisis, US Farmers Look Beyond Corn and Soybeans (csmonitor.com)

Corn and soybean crops have been good to farmers in the American Midwest and Plains. But these staple crops have taken a toll on the very earth they draw nourishment from. Now, a new generation of farmers is looking underground to try to replenish their soils in a way that both restores nutrients and reduces chemical runoff into the environment. From a report: "Mainstream agriculture, they just don't get it," says North Dakota farmer Jerry Doan. "You have got to feed the biology of the soil." Some farmers are experimenting with growing cover crops on their fields. Devoting valuable land to new crops can be risky for producers, whose thin margins make them reluctant to make big changes if their yields are going to fall, even temporarily. But in some communities, such as Washington County, Iowa, farmers are taking the leap together.

6 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. It's called sustainable farming by Pollux · · Score: 5, Informative

    I listened to a local farmer talk about it. With industrial farming, you pump the soil full of chemicals, plant your seed, harvest, wash, rinse, repeat. He said it works, but it takes a terrible toil on the soil and surrounding environment.

    He's now gone to a sustainable farming model. He said it's completely 100% against what industrial farming is all about. He doesn't till the soil, he uses lots of cover crops, doesn't harvest all of it each year, lets his cattle free-graze his fields, and he makes more money doing it. I've heard people say his beef is the best-tasting in the county. Here's a neat write-up about it.

    Another neat benefit he mentioned: He got an 8" rainfall last year, and his fields soaked it all up. All his neighbors had run-off into the river valleys, taking all the chemicals with it, but his fields are full of decomposing tillage that took it all in like a sponge.

    1. Re: It's called sustainable farming by peragrin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why just one?? Saving labor. Saving labor, saving chemical costs, saving feed for animals, and still maintaining a viable yield is the goal.

      It is also a lot harder, and varies by location which is why commercial standardized farming companies don't like it.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  2. Outdated News by deKernel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Farming has moved so far beyond this article that I am not sure why it was even published. No-till farming has been in use heavily for over 30 years. For those that don't know what this means, farmers don't continuously plow their fields before planing and after harvest. This keeps the topsoil in-tact and far more healthy as well as promotes the worm population which is very important and a key sign of the health of the soil. These are just a few of the major items because there is not enough space to fully elaborate. In the last 10 years, the use of cover crops alone has become the normal here in MI which reduces herbicide use and promotes organic material in the soil. Bottom line: the farmers of today are far better maintainers of land than then used to be and there is no worries that the world will end or another dust bowl is in our future.

  3. Re:Republicans don't believe in biology by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not surprised that they're this stupid.

    But I am surprised that there are people in the world who are aware enough about the existence of farming to talk about it, but think that cover crops are an "experimental" idea.

  4. Re: Republicans don't believe in biology by crmarvin42 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Itâ(TM)s not experimental. Itâ(TM)s common practice on many farms, and has been for a while. The fact that they refer to cover crops as experimental proves the authors have no fucking clue what they are talking about, or what modern farming actually looks like. Just an ignorant twit spreading FUD.

    --
    Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
  5. Re: Republicans don't believe in biology by crmarvin42 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not sure where you are getting your information, but the vast majority of farms are still family owned.

    Yes, big farms are getting bigger, and they get subsidies. The thing is, the small farms are doomed for reasons that have nothing to do with subsidies or price supports. They lack economies of scale. Simple as that. When prices for their inputs go up, larger operations are more resilient to prolonged losses, and better positioned to capitalize on good prices. Thus the smaller guys go out of business.

    It’s the same basic economics that mean most mom & pop business of any kind is more likely to fold during a recession than a national chain.

    --
    Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde