4 ms·

> It takes a long, long time for agriculture methods to change My relatives, corn farmers in Iowa, have been preaching no-till for three generations now. I ask

by cvoss 2y ago

> It takes a long, long time for agriculture methods to change My relatives, corn farmers in Iowa, have been preaching no-till for three generations now. I asked my uncle why it's not been universally adopted after all this time. He said it's partly lack of awareness, which was astounding to me. I learned about the loss of our soil and the importance of no-till in the classroom in middle school in an urban area, of all places! The evangelism is occurring, but maybe it's just not reaching the right ears, or it's reaching deaf ears. The other factor, he said, was that you'll suffer lower yields for a few years after you stop tilling, while the soil builds up a proper layer of decomposing matter on top. Or at least, farmers are afraid that could happen. And it's not a risk worth taking in their view. There is a role here for government incentives to accelerate the transition. I think they already exist, but they should step it up, since we have been moving so slowly. The government is quite accustomed to tweaking the economics of farming to stabilize such an important part of our society.

kylebenzle 2y ago
Maybe a lot of farmers don't want to drastically increase their herbicide use?
- factormeta 2y ago
  >The other factor, he said, was that you'll suffer lower yields for a few years after you stop tilling, while the soil builds up a proper layer of decomposing matter on top. Or at least, farmers are afraid that could happen. And it's not a risk worth taking in their view. Maybe it has more the fact that humans are risk averse. We just don't want to make financial sacrificed in the short term to get longer term rewards. Many of us want to do good, but we also don't want our 401ks and subsidies to go down.
  - ajmurmann 2y ago
    Feels like something you could roll out to a small portion of the land and see what happens. Is that not viable? Edit: NVM, it was pointed out elsewhere that the needed equipment is different
  - watwut 2y ago
    These are low margin businesses. Chances are they can't afford it without significant pain.
    - factormeta 2y ago
      For sure, economic assessment is one way to figure out what to do. When we as a civilization making decisions ending up where we are now (depleted soil and what else not looming). It does make one wonder if the current financial incentives is NOT aligned with the incentives of living beings on the planet? How can we make it so? Where and when did that misalignment happened?
  - quartesixte 2y ago
    Farming is a low “shots on goal” business too. You only really get 1 harvest per year. In a 30 year career already marked by high variance, losing 1/6 of your lifetime profits to experimenting with methods is a huge ask.
duckmysick 2y ago
> you'll suffer lower yields for a few years after you stop tilling, while the soil builds up a proper layer of decomposing matter on top. Anecdotal, but can confirm, I observed lower yields (sometimes minimal, in the range of 5-10%) for a year or two after starting to till. But it's so much worth in the long run. Granted, I'm talking about the market-garden size yield. Could be different in multi-hectare yields, but I can see the difference on my scale. After the initial one or two years I can see increased yields with lowered herbicide use and less frequent weeding activity.
- theoreticalmal 2y ago
  What on earth is a regenerative farmer doing on HN? I’m very curious and intrigued
  - blittle 2y ago
    I'm a software engineer, but my wife runs a regenerative flower farm. So I'm exposed to both worlds
  - SEJeff 2y ago
    You’d genuinely be shocked how many hardcore tech folks own and run hobby or semi-commercial farms. I run a biodiverse fruit orchard.
  - duckmysick 2y ago
    It's funny because I learned about the regenerative farming and no-dig approach from Hacker News out of all places. A couple years ago there was a thread about soil quality and someone mentioned Richard Perkins, who runs a regenerative agriculture farm in Sweden. He also had a Youtube channel which I checked out. Then I found out about Charles Dowding from Britain who popularizes no-dig approach (don't use a spade or a fork to turn the soil, but plant directly in a thick layer of compost), also on a Youtube channel. Down the rabbit hole here we go. I was sceptical at first - it sounds too good to be true and runs against the conventional wisdom I followed. But I started experimenting with a few vegetable patches and I was happy with the results. Then I expanded over time, still amazed with the outcomes. It's more of a hobby operation, so I'm not worried about optimizing yields. To me the biggest factor is that gardening became super enjoyable. I guess it's because efforts-to-results ratio got so much better. I got many compliments from strangers about my garden (including incredibly oversized pumpkins), which made me proud. Not sure how it fits into a hacker's ethos, but there you have it.
PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
Edward H. Faulkner published "Plowman's Folly" in 1943. He revisited his analysis in 1947 in "A Second Look" in which he responded to critics, and doubled-down: "The soil which the gardener or farmer works is made up of tiny crystalline fragments. The action of soil acids, principally those released through the decay of organic matter, unlocks the minerals required for healthy plant growth. [ ... ] the continuous use of commercial fertilizers is a mistake. [ ... ] The "bank account" theory of soil is bankrtup. It holds that whatever we take from the soil in the growing of crops must be put back - usually in the form of prepared fertilizers. What the soil needs, on the contrary, is the gentle chemistry described above. If man cannot learn this, he will pay and pay, ultimately to his ruin". 1943. 1947. This is not new stuff. By the time "A Second Look" was published, there were 340,000 copies of "Plowman's Folly" in print.

by cvoss 2y ago

kylebenzle 2y ago

Maybe a lot of farmers don't want to drastically increase their herbicide use?

factormeta 2y ago
>The other factor, he said, was that you'll suffer lower yields for a few years after you stop tilling, while the soil builds up a proper layer of decomposing matter on top. Or at least, farmers are afraid that could happen. And it's not a risk worth taking in their view. Maybe it has more the fact that humans are risk averse. We just don't want to make financial sacrificed in the short term to get longer term rewards. Many of us want to do good, but we also don't want our 401ks and subsidies to go down.
- ajmurmann 2y ago
  Feels like something you could roll out to a small portion of the land and see what happens. Is that not viable? Edit: NVM, it was pointed out elsewhere that the needed equipment is different
- watwut 2y ago
  These are low margin businesses. Chances are they can't afford it without significant pain.
  - factormeta 2y ago
    For sure, economic assessment is one way to figure out what to do. When we as a civilization making decisions ending up where we are now (depleted soil and what else not looming). It does make one wonder if the current financial incentives is NOT aligned with the incentives of living beings on the planet? How can we make it so? Where and when did that misalignment happened?
- quartesixte 2y ago
  Farming is a low “shots on goal” business too. You only really get 1 harvest per year. In a 30 year career already marked by high variance, losing 1/6 of your lifetime profits to experimenting with methods is a huge ask.

duckmysick 2y ago

> you'll suffer lower yields for a few years after you stop tilling, while the soil builds up a proper layer of decomposing matter on top. Anecdotal, but can confirm, I observed lower yields (sometimes minimal, in the range of 5-10%) for a year or two after starting to till. But it's so much worth in the long run. Granted, I'm talking about the market-garden size yield. Could be different in multi-hectare yields, but I can see the difference on my scale. After the initial one or two years I can see increased yields with lowered herbicide use and less frequent weeding activity.

theoreticalmal 2y ago
What on earth is a regenerative farmer doing on HN? I’m very curious and intrigued
- blittle 2y ago
  I'm a software engineer, but my wife runs a regenerative flower farm. So I'm exposed to both worlds
- SEJeff 2y ago
  You’d genuinely be shocked how many hardcore tech folks own and run hobby or semi-commercial farms. I run a biodiverse fruit orchard.
- duckmysick 2y ago
  It's funny because I learned about the regenerative farming and no-dig approach from Hacker News out of all places. A couple years ago there was a thread about soil quality and someone mentioned Richard Perkins, who runs a regenerative agriculture farm in Sweden. He also had a Youtube channel which I checked out. Then I found out about Charles Dowding from Britain who popularizes no-dig approach (don't use a spade or a fork to turn the soil, but plant directly in a thick layer of compost), also on a Youtube channel. Down the rabbit hole here we go. I was sceptical at first - it sounds too good to be true and runs against the conventional wisdom I followed. But I started experimenting with a few vegetable patches and I was happy with the results. Then I expanded over time, still amazed with the outcomes. It's more of a hobby operation, so I'm not worried about optimizing yields. To me the biggest factor is that gardening became super enjoyable. I guess it's because efforts-to-results ratio got so much better. I got many compliments from strangers about my garden (including incredibly oversized pumpkins), which made me proud. Not sure how it fits into a hacker's ethos, but there you have it.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago

Edward H. Faulkner published "Plowman's Folly" in 1943. He revisited his analysis in 1947 in "A Second Look" in which he responded to critics, and doubled-down: "The soil which the gardener or farmer works is made up of tiny crystalline fragments. The action of soil acids, principally those released through the decay of organic matter, unlocks the minerals required for healthy plant growth. [ ... ] the continuous use of commercial fertilizers is a mistake. [ ... ] The "bank account" theory of soil is bankrtup. It holds that whatever we take from the soil in the growing of crops must be put back - usually in the form of prepared fertilizers. What the soil needs, on the contrary, is the gentle chemistry described above. If man cannot learn this, he will pay and pay, ultimately to his ruin". 1943. 1947. This is not new stuff. By the time "A Second Look" was published, there were 340,000 copies of "Plowman's Folly" in print.