Cost of organic grain

[parsley]

1. newguy: "But it has made our planet sustainable."

Comment: Our plant is NOT sustainable. Too many people.

2. charliep: "Directed mutagensis? Using knowledge of genes/gene
sequencing to achieve a desired result"

Comment: Are the scientific methodologies that you reference here, actually the most frequently used methods of modifying crops/grains that is utilized in actual PRACTICE in crops in farmers' fields as I write? I find gene insertion of chemicals into grain is the prominent tool used in my part of the world.

3. bgmb: "How does an organic farmer replace the nutrients they are taking out of the soil?"

Comment: Crop rotation builds soil and nutrients. Plowdowns are common. Land is often planted to forage for several years to build back nutrients. Organic fertilizers are used. Composting is practiced. Mulching. Wide variety of nutrients are put back into the soil when various methods are used.

Pars

[charliep]

I would challenge you on whether consumers want organic versus
conventional. Surveys don't necessarily back this up and behavior for
sure doesn't -organic food is available at most stores but still a small
percentage of total consumer food purchases. I recognize that organic
food sector has been growing fast. Consumers have the choice of
organic but most buy conventional product. Some of the reasons are
price, availability, convenience, selection, etc.

Not sure about strategy of associating non GE with organic. As long as
organic uses conventional bred seed, it you are at the mercy of what ever
decisions are made in the about biotechnology and plant breeding. Even
the current issues about adventitious presence of GE in crops and better
testing processes/tight tolerances put your industry at risk. The question
will be how the organic industry responds.

[gregpet]

Line up all the people you want and ask them any question you like but the fact is most people choose not to buy organic.

P.S. Silva made an ass out of himself yesterday. Bring on GSP.

[lakenheath]

All you guys have blinders on. "My way is right and your way is wrong", seems to be the resounding theme.

Both organic and convetional systems are "un-natural". Organic systems compact, erode, destroy organic matter as they rely heavilly on destructive tillage.

Conventional systems with zero till have positive effects on the health of the zone but rely on chemical fertilizers and sprays that probably are not great for everyone's health and well being.

The only truly sustainable system is seeding the whole prairies back to native grass and let the buffalo roam. Everyone would eat bison, berries and roots and grow a garden.

But, yes this will never happen. We are all out to make a buck and we will continue to operate as is.

I just get mad when organic freeks think they are these amazing stuards of the land. They have there head so far us their @ss that they can't see what they are doing is harmful in a different way. They are as brainwashed with organic bullsh$t, as conventional guys are by the chemical companies.

So let's learn to respect our differences. We will continue to harm the environment whether we are blazing tillage organic or spray happy conventiionals.

[bgmb]

I'm not surprised that you didn't answer my question Parsley. There is no way under an organic system to replace most of the nutrients you are removing.
Green manure is not adding nutrients just cycling them so you can utilize them.

Really organic farmers should be considered miners not farmers. Take out more than you replace year after year and you will end up with a depleted soil.

There will always be a small demand for organic, mostly consumers who don't understand science.

[parsley]

We've farmed both conventionally and organically. Both systems own folly.

1. Re nutrients: As I stated previously:

"ALL farming takes nutrients from the land. The nutrients end up in your body" And yes, organics dedicates particular time, a lot of it, to soil building.

2. Re sustainability: I also said:

I agree with your statement:"organic farming has always been more of a food safety marketing strategy than a sustainability tool"

No argument from me.

But the deciding factor was prob the same thought Cott expressed:

"The manipulation of science by governments and corporations is very scary..."

Some farmers appear to be 100% confident in scientists and governments. Your choice.

Of course, every time farmers parallel farming systems, farmers become defensive of their own, and that's a natural reaction. I have said in the past, that very limited spot spraying could serve organics well. I've supported biotech research, as long as our food supplies do not reflect research-experimentation.

The good thing for an organic farmer, is we can actually become a conventional farmer overnight. One spray pass on the field is all it takes. We have an immediate option. And I know what I'm getting because I've been there and done that.

Organics also deal with different consumers. They are high income and educated. So I will concede I'm not particularly up to date informed about third world buyers.

For example I just checked on the Sask website, and the major world importing countries of world conventional lentils are: Spain, Colombia, Egypt,
Algeria, and Sri Lanka, France,
Pakistan, Bangladesh.

Yes, well. Pars

[dave4441]

I fully believe that the organic industry has two major issues. The first, as mentioned is that it is unsustainable. Measure of soil health is organic carbon and topsoil retention. Top soil is being depleted in most organic operations due to erosion and organic carbon reduced by excessive tillage and soil mining (i do not buy the idea that organic farmers in Sask have any kind of balance in their nutrient removal vs application). Eventually, in a low carbon world, these practices will be of concern to consumers. Today, organics have operated totally on marketing and not science. Until organics begin to rely on the application of manufactured nutrients (that are identical chemically to natural fertilizers) i do not think they will be viewed as sustainable or even serious sources of food production. Next couple years this will be an important issue for the organic industry.

The 2nd big issue that organics have is future testing. As testing becomes more widespread (and i beleive the USA just launched organic product testing program) more evidence regarding the lack of quality or nutritional quantity that organics offer will be exposed. You can always cherry pick one study or another to prove a case, but with widespread public testing, i believe results will come out in favour of conventional agriculture. Organics have been too sucessful and increased testing will be their downfall.

[parsley]

gregpet, you are hooked on UFC! LOLOLOL. I thought Anderson an ass too, but he just didn't want to get hit. For what? He knew he'd won and didn't need to even risk a scratch.
GSP is so athletic, and such an icon for the sport. AS/GSP...that's one I look forward to. Any bets?

[parsley]

I wonder Dave, if you posted your 'run, the sky is falling for organics' message on a Chinese website if some Chinese farmer might reply that they have been farming without chemicals, with tilling, without commercial fert, with composting etc. for....hold it.....yes, more than a thousand years, and fed/still feeding more people than you are able to rote count, and they can still grow a soybean crop that can put Canadian canola farmers out of export markets long enough to be more annoying than I am. LOL Pars

[parsley]

"Organics have been too sucessful"

We view differently.

There is never too much success for any segment of agriculture, in my way of thinking. If one area does well, it rubs off on a farming neighbor/sector.

I will say this....I hope every farmer gets rich farming and does well, no matter the kind of farming, so that each steer sells for the worth of a two carat diamnond, and each bushel of barley sells for the worth of a pricey ipod. It's good for all of us. And for Canada.

And I truly wish each one of you the very best. Pars

[dave4441]

You are correct, they are big producers but they are also the biggest consumer of fertilizer on the planet. They have to be. You can not just take out nutrients without putting it back and the only way to put it back is with synthetic fertility. Additionally, much of their agriculture is sustenance farming and highly inefficent.

[parsley]

" they are also the biggest consumer of fertilizer on the planet."


Maybe the last forty years ate commercial ferilzer The rest of the ing 999,960 years.....hmmm.

"Additionally, much of their agriculture is sustenance farming and highly inefficent."

Do you mean subsistence farming? Maybe if Canadian farmers look hard and long, and with eyes that are not blinded by refusal to look or see, we will realize we can't afford the "efficient" kind of farming we prefer and have grown accustomed to....producing commodities at extremely high cost and selling them cheap. Isn't that also "inefficient?"

Kind of like, uh, the avergae American's credit card maxed out, he was so sure he could afford....he got a wakeup call. Pars

[dave4441]

So, was is sustainable in the long run?

Does not look like it.

The reality is that is does not work today? When there is 10 percent of the curent population anything works.

[checking]

Soil mining, interesting!

I wonder if someone isn't cheating by using a deep rooted plant to bring nutrients to the surface that ordinarily wouldn't be near surface available in sufficient quantities for our shallow eatable organic plants. All it would take would be a plant that could reach our potash beds, or some other fertilizing, or micro nutrient bed, and organics would say, "no problem". But, mix those same elements in an air seeder tank - big problem.

I think we all need a snippet of owl, or maybe a whole owl!!!!

[newguy]

Was at a North Dakota made trade show last fall. Tens of thousands visiters . We really eat alot of golden flax so stopped at some of the flax product booths. One booth had on package naturally grown. So I asked if it was organic? He laughed and said I was the first person to ask that. He said no it was not and he could not afford to produce it that way. His booth was selling as much product as the organic ones. So are American consumers more or less educated in organic food? There are some products that I feel better buying organic but when it comes to grain there is no differance in food safety.