The future of farming, more sustainable compromise

[AlbertaFarmer5]

The future isn't in pure organic, as it is the least sustainable method(feel free to prove me wrong).
The future isn't in more chemicals because the consumer says so, and it speaking with his/her grocery dollar.
I believe there is a middle ground, but that it would require a lot of PR to get the consumer on side. Partially organic, but more importantly, the most sustainable methods possible. Convince the consumer that fertilizer is a necessary evil, at least until we disprove the laws of thermodynamics. Convince the consumer that soil loss, OM loss and nutrient loss are the most important measures of sustainability. Convince the consumer that the methods which use the least energy(diesel fuel typically) are the most beneficial to the environment and soil. Convince the consumer that GMO products have the potential to reduce the amount or severity of chemical applied, plus a host of other potential benefits.

Now this is starting to sound a lot like conventional no, or min till agriculture. But where the compromise comes in, is all of the scary sounding chemicals. Perhaps offer products that are free of chems for xx days before harvesting(no preharvest, no chems after head/pod/seed emergence), or not sprayed in crop, but still allow pre seed and post harvest.

Whether we like it or not, these things will eventually be forced upon us, and likely not backed by any logic or science. THey will take away all the tools in our toolboxes, the good with the bad. We need to take the initiative and offer a product that is as sustainable and environmentally neutral as possible, and convince the consumer that this is the only way to feed the world for generations to come. Before we are all regulated and relegated back to stone age methods, and we all starve as a result.

If the organic product is multiple times the conventional, and looks worse, but there is a product inbetween which is guaranteed to be applied chemical free, and lists the sustainable practices used, for negligibly more cost than the conventional, I think consumers would make a reasonable choice.

The producer would also have a choice. Rather than loose his crop to pests, he can spray a late season insecticide, fungicide or even herbicide, sell as conventional and not sacrifice the 5 years of chemical free status which has been built up for organic. On years when it works, sell it as chemical free. And unlike the unverifiable scam that is most organic foods, this is provable, chemical residual tests are readily available. We give up some of our tools, in exchange for a better price, but still have access to the tools when economics dictate. Then let both the consumer and the producer vote with their wallets.

There is nothing sustainable about intense tillage to allow erosion and OM lost, mining nutrients, or losing a crop to a pest when a solution exists. Even if the consumer sees an organic label and thinks that it is somehow more sustainable, environmentally friendlier and healthier. However, I fully support anyone who is willing to produce for this market, after all, the consumer is never wrong, and if you can make more money filling this need, more power to you.

[farmaholic]

If anyone here, thinks I want to spend my summers with my ass glued to a sprayer seat spending tens of thousands of dollars applying pesticides so I don't get beaten down at the grading table or penalized by a poorer price because there is a minuscule amount of fusarium damage or some midge damage is sadly mistaken. The buyers want perfection, the end user wants perfection, and mostly the consumers want perfection but don't want us to use the tools to try attain it. To me it feels we are fighting a losing battle.

You can't tell me organic crops aren't susceptible to fusarium or midge, yet does it matter to that group of consumers if their pasta has black flecks in it from midge damage or any other "quality" concern that affects the end product that is made such a big deal out of when we are getting our product graded.

Hypocrisy and double standards by the consumers, end users, and buyers?

[ajl]

I do believe the future is organic due to the fact that the wealthy will all have connections to government in the future. The customers for conventional produce are getting poorer, will continue to get poorer largely due to the burden of the debt spiral and continual transfers of wealth away from them due to financial engineering so trying to supply them at a profit for the producer is just not going to work. As to some 'sustainable' compromise: in your dreams only.

[jamesb]

I believe the organic and conventional systems will continue to operate to service separate markets as it does today. Organic markets supply a segment of the wealthy that are willing to pay more for a product they feel is better for them. The majority of the world is comfortable that conventional agriculture is safe and good to eat. Health Canada, EPA, Codex and other groups has this job of assuring the buyer that the food is safe.
As a conventional producer I don't feel threatened by the organic guys because they do several things for me, such as the more organic land going into production the problem of oversupply of commodities is less. In the end the consumer does decide and if both streams continue to be profitable then they both will continue.

[cottonpicken]

We should keep the discussion all on one thread guys.

Alberta i see you and i agree.

A good budy and i where talking about this on a combine a few days ago he was thinking along the same lines his term he used was "ethically farmed",which i really like.

The problem of course is the pr campaign and implementation and the cost and pain for you guys who do it and maybe do it all for not.

But you cannot ignore the tide that is happening.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I do believe the future is organic due to the fact that the wealthy will all have connections to government in the future. The customers for conventional produce are getting poorer, will continue to get poorer largely due to the burden of the debt spiral and continual transfers of wealth away from them due to financial engineering so trying to supply them at a profit for the producer is just not going to work. As to some 'sustainable' compromise: in your dreams only.

Realistically, how can you say that the future is organic, considering the current definition of organic. There is certainly a future for organic production, for those willing to pay for it, but anyone who can do math can quickly see that you can't mine the soil indefinitely, and that we can't feed 7 billion people using organic methods.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

If anyone here, thinks I want to spend my summers with my ass glued to a sprayer seat spending tens of thousands of dollars applying pesticides so I don't get beaten down at the grading table or penalized by a poorer price because there is a minuscule amount of fusarium damage or some midge damage is sadly mistaken. The buyers want perfection, the end user wants perfection, and mostly the consumers want perfection but don't want us to use the tools to try attain it. To me it feels we are fighting a losing battle.

You can't tell me organic crops aren't susceptible to fusarium or midge, yet does it matter to that group of consumers if their pasta has black flecks in it from midge damage or any other "quality" concern that affects the end product that is made such a big deal out of when we are getting our product graded.

Hypocrisy and double standards by the consumers, end users, and buyers?

But what if there was a premium market for grain that hadn't been sprayed pre harvest, and had a least 60 days with no chemicals. Likely their standards will have to be lower. You can still glue yourself to the sprayer in June and into July. And on the crops that justify it, spray the rest of the summer too, just not get a premium for that.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

To the average misinformed consumer, Glyphosate is evil. And we liberally apply it just days before harvesting an edible crop. This just doesn't seem like a good PR move on our part. Most of the other chems aren't even on their radar. This would be an easy preemptive measure, before it is forced upon us, or we lose Glyphosate completely to the lunacy.

[grassfarmer]

Pretty much said it all jamesb. Two systems now and likely two systems into the future. Demand will dictate whether organic increases or not.
An "in between" category for spray reduced or whatever is rather like the "Natural" beef designation. You bear the the additional cost of regulation and production with a diluted premium versus organic. As with the beef sector you would have to create a whole market yourself for this "natural" product. Cargill etc aren't going to pay you a premium for it any time soon. So faced with the reality of having to create a market for yourselves I'm sure most will opt to either stick with commodity undifferentiated products or go to established organic.

[hobbyfrmr]

If anyone here, thinks I want to spend my summers with my ass glued to a sprayer seat spending tens of thousands of dollars applying pesticides so I don't get beaten down at the grading table or penalized by a poorer price because there is a minuscule amount of fusarium damage or some midge damage is sadly mistaken. The buyers want perfection, the end user wants perfection, and mostly the consumers want perfection but don't want us to use the tools to try attain it. To me it feels we are fighting a losing battle.

You can't tell me organic crops aren't susceptible to fusarium or midge, yet does it matter to that group of consumers if their pasta has black flecks in it from midge damage or any other "quality" concern that affects the end product that is made such a big deal out of when we are getting our product graded.

Hypocrisy and double standards by the consumers, end users, and buyers?

For what its worth, I have never found any disease in my crops in 9 years of organic production. Another thing is never seen light bushel weights either. I have lower yeilds than neighbors for sure.
I sell 75% of my acres as edible/milling, and 25 % feed barley because no dockage and good prices. I treat the barley badly because hey.... Its feed .
I do understand farmers trying to rationalize a premium for making or omitting some strategic chemical applications that sounds like a raging alcoholic who thinks its ok to drink beer on Sunday.