Organic Farming

Cliffy
Avatar
#1
By Paul Hanley, Special to The StarPhoenix October 17, 2011
The results are in from a 30-year side-by-side trial of conventional and organic farming methods at Pennsylvania's Rodale Institute. Contrary to conventional wisdom, organic farming outperformed conventional farming in every measure.


There are about 1,500 organic farmers in Saskatchewan, at last count. They eschew the synthetic fertilizers and toxic sprays that are the mainstay of conventional farms. Study after study indicates the conventional thinking on farming - that we have to tolerate toxic chemicals because organic farming can't feed the world - is wrong.


Full story: --
 
Cannuck
Avatar
#2
Would you really expect a study done by an organization that promotes organic farming to come up with a different finding?
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
+1
#3
I wouldn't particularly expect them to say any different, but whether they would say that or not is irrelevant. If they farm cheaper organically than other farms, they did. If they didn't, they didn't.

I have to say that wife's chickens are cheaper and more nutritional than storebought chickens and her eggs are only marginally more expensive but they are larger and more nutritional than storeboughts and she doesn't use pesticides and crap either.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
+4
#4  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Would you really expect a study done by an organization that promotes organic farming to come up with a different finding?

Would you expect Dow Chemical to publish the results? Would you accept their version as more valid?

It comes down to, would you prefer to eat food grown with chemicals and toxic pesticides or would you prefer your food to be naturally grown?
 
Cannuck
Avatar
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Would you expect Dow Chemical to publish the results?

No

Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Would you accept their version as more valid?

That would depend. If I was given as much information from Dow as I got from the Rodale Institute, I certainly wouldn't

Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

It comes down to, would you prefer to eat food grown with chemicals and toxic pesticides or would you prefer your food to be naturally grown?

No, it doesn't come down to that at all.
 
damngrumpy
Avatar
+1
#6
There is a lot to be concerned about when it comes to organic farming. First of all
organic farmers use some sprays, Entrust is one of them, and one cannot say they
are not toxic they kill pests. There are other things they use as well. True the do not
use conventional fertilizers. In many cases depending on crops they use up to four
times more sulphur than conventional farmers do. Even that is not a problem for me
The problem is the whole system of verification. The certification and inspection
system is primarily honor based. The farmer knows in most cases when the inspector
is coming to check the paper work and no real substantive soil tests are done.
Organics is now a religion more than a way of farming. I have immediate family who
used to preach the gospel of organics and even they are starting to catch on.

I believe we need organics and conventional farming, both have their place and both
are perfectly safe if we follow the rules. That is the problem. As a conventional farmer
I likely come under more scrutiny than the organic folks. I live close to a main road
and the Feds come every year for leaf samples and so on. In addition I have on farm
food safety. I have full inspection of my practices, what I use how its stored, how much
I purchased and used and so on.
We have to be careful here even certified organic is not fully and tightly inspected.
I think Organic inspections should include soil and leaf samples, inspection of sheds and
storage areas and so on looking for illicit product. I know a former organic inspector
I agree with some of what he says but not all but his critical view of the present system
certainly raises a lot od doubt. Read the book Is It Organic and give it some thought.
You can get it on line. There are many questions to be answered.
Remember my chemicals are registered and logged, what are those who are not honest
in the organic area using and we don't know about?
 
Cliffy
Avatar
+1
#7
Organic food: what our grandparents called food.

Without oil, so called conventional farming would be impossible. The farther away from oganic farming we get, the more we set ourselves of a massive die off if anything should stop the flow of oil.
 
bill barilko
Avatar
+2
#8
I had an 100% organic garden here in the city for a number of years-what I produced was many times tastier than the crud on offer in mainstream outlets.

It would be tough to produce the same food economically on a larger scale that I now understand.

But studies paid for by chemical companies are worth the paper they're written on.

Garlic 'n the 'hood

 
damngrumpy
Avatar
+2
#9
If you got rid of oil you would need to use horses and that is not productive.
farmers can prepare a lot of acres in a day with a tractor. The term acre
is a sign in itself. An acre was determined as one good man with one good
horse and plow could cover one acre in a day.
Besides once animals become the order of the day, you have to use about
half the farm to grow pasture for the animals and that reduces the food that
can be produced.
On the local level or specific customers on a smaller scale that is fine, but we
cannot feed ourselves and export to with only organic farming. Hey, I represent
both organic and conventional farmers. I am not in favour of one kind or another
but, it should be pointed out that organics is a lifestyle a business specific area
and in some cases a religion without the science and that has draw backs too.
On the other side its making sure that those who use chemical methods use
them properly.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
+2
#10
As the cost of oil goes up, the cost of chemical fertilizers goes up with it. Farmers are starting to re-acquaint themselves with good old composted manure in many areas. That is a good sign.

Best pork I ever ate was some pigs we turned loose in the forest and hunted them in the fall. Couldn't get more organic than that.
 
talloola
Avatar
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

If you got rid of oil you would need to use horses and that is not productive.
farmers can prepare a lot of acres in a day with a tractor. The term acre
is a sign in itself. An acre was determined as one good man with one good
horse and plow could cover one acre in a day.
Besides once animals become the order of the day, you have to use about
half the farm to grow pasture for the animals and that reduces the food that
can be produced.
On the local level or specific customers on a smaller scale that is fine, but we
cannot feed ourselves and export to with only organic farming. Hey, I represent
both organic and conventional farmers. I am not in favour of one kind or another
but, it should be pointed out that organics is a lifestyle a business specific area
and in some cases a religion without the science and that has draw backs too.
On the other side its making sure that those who use chemical methods use
them properly.

shouldn't this conversation be divided into two parts, organic farming and 'certified' organic farming,
as they are not the same, the rules are stricter for the certified organic farmer, and it is also very
expensive for him to acquire that title.
 
Cannuck
Avatar
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Farmers are starting to re-acquaint themselves with good old composted manure in many areas.

Starting to? Really Cliffy? Maybe you should learn something about agriculture before you start spouting. You are as bad as some of the other religious nuts on this forum.

--
 
Tonington
Avatar
+2
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Would you really expect a study done by an organization that promotes organic farming to come up with a different finding?

They did in the first years of the study.

The longer term data show equivalence in many measures, and superiority of the organic crops during stressful periods. That's what we should expect considering organic farming will increase soil biodiversity. A robust soil community should be less sensitive to stresses, that's a hallmark of biodiversity.
 
taxslave
Avatar
+1
#14
Along with all the chemicals we have seeds from Monsanto. That is the real problem.
 
Cannuck
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

They did in the first years of the study.

The longer term data show equivalence in many measures, and superiority of the organic crops during stressful periods. That's what we should expect considering organic farming will increase soil biodiversity. A robust soil community should be less sensitive to stresses, that's a hallmark of biodiversity.

Don't confuse biodiversity with organic farming.
 
taxslave
Avatar
+2
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by talloolaView Post

shouldn't this conversation be divided into two parts, organic farming and 'certified' organic farming,
as they are not the same, the rules are stricter for the certified organic farmer, and it is also very
expensive for him to acquire that title.

Certified is largely a paper work thing. Not necessarily relevant. I had a fair amount of involvement in certifying logging several years back. Contrary to what one might think it is not always about best logging practices but a paper trail that would make a bureaucrat orgasmic.
The same goes with safety where one would expect certification to be important. Problem is that the rules are often written by bureaucrats that have little or no experience in the industry they are forcing rules on. In BC they are pushing certification for equipment operators. Unfortunately there is no correlation between certified and qualified. As an example we recently had our whole crew certified on manlifts. The guy who taught the course has never worked off a lift but spent 20+ years renting them out. We all certified now and therefore legal but who do you think knows more about elevated working, us or him?
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Without oil, so called conventional farming would be impossible.

Nope. It'd just be scaled down. Wife could manage quite well without using any petroleum products in her farming. The only things she uses petroleum products for in her venture is getting feed for checkins in winter. If she didn't farm organically, she'd be still only using petroleum to get stuff for the chickens.

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

They did in the first years of the study.

The longer term data show equivalence in many measures, and superiority of the organic crops during stressful periods. That's what we should expect considering organic farming will increase soil biodiversity. A robust soil community should be less sensitive to stresses, that's a hallmark of biodiversity.

Yep.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Along with all the chemicals we have seeds from Monsanto. That is the real problem.

Monsanto is just one of them.

Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Don't confuse biodiversity with organic farming.

He didn't.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Certified is largely a paper work thing. Not necessarily relevant. I had a fair amount of involvement in certifying logging several years back. Contrary to what one might think it is not always about best logging practices but a paper trail that would make a bureaucrat orgasmic.
The same goes with safety where one would expect certification to be important. Problem is that the rules are often written by bureaucrats that have little or no experience in the industry they are forcing rules on. In BC they are pushing certification for equipment operators. Unfortunately there is no correlation between certified and qualified. As an example we recently had our whole crew certified on manlifts. The guy who taught the course has never worked off a lift but spent 20+ years renting them out. We all certified now and therefore legal but who do you think knows more about elevated working, us or him?

Yep. There are a whole pile of people around here that are simply ignoring the stupid crap about certification for equipment operators.
 
Tonington
Avatar
+3
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Don't confuse biodiversity with organic farming.

I'm not confused at all.

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

They did in the first years of the study.

The longer term data show equivalence in many measures, and superiority of the organic crops during stressful periods. That's what we should expect considering organic farming will increase soil biodiversity. A robust soil community should be less sensitive to stresses, that's a hallmark of biodiversity.

My emphasis of my original post. Slow down and take your time reading. Or better yet, go read the results for yourself instead of the casual dismissal you lead with.
 
Mowich
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Along with all the chemicals we have seeds from Monsanto. That is the real problem.

Bang on, taxslave.

Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Monsanto is just one of them.

Novartis, Agrevo, and DuPont can be added to the list.
 
talloola
Avatar
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Certified is largely a paper work thing. Not necessarily relevant. I had a fair amount of involvement in certifying logging several years back. Contrary to what one might think it is not always about best logging practices but a paper trail that would make a bureaucrat orgasmic.
The same goes with safety where one would expect certification to be important. Problem is that the rules are often written by bureaucrats that have little or no experience in the industry they are forcing rules on. In BC they are pushing certification for equipment operators. Unfortunately there is no correlation between certified and qualified. As an example we recently had our whole crew certified on manlifts. The guy who taught the course has never worked off a lift but spent 20+ years renting them out. We all certified now and therefore legal but who do you think knows more about elevated working, us or him?

but the organic farmer, who is 'not' certified, can do whatever he wants, and still sell as organic,
whereas the certified guy cannot, so one is assured with the certified label, that it is legit and
the proper protocol has been followed.
the label that just says organic, is full of holes.
 
mentalfloss
Avatar
#21
I would actually have no problem with industrial farming as far as food quality goes.. but it eventually kills the soil and makes the land useless. Hopefully at some point, the supply can catch up with the need to switch to organic farming so that people aren't paying through the roof for that kind of produce.
 
Tonington
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by MowichView Post

Novartis, Agrevo, and DuPont can be added to the list.

Novartis? What's a pharmaceutical doing on this list?
 
damngrumpy
Avatar
#23
Commercial farming does not have to kill the soil, if we don't use certain methods that
are up front cheaper but in the long run do serious damage. The problem is not farm
practices, its industrial farm practices. There are many non organic farmers that do it
right. The large scale corporate farm organizations have little to with the operation of
family farms.
Talloola raised a good point, certified is harder to get, but that does not mean it has
actually been inspected because in many cases it is not, in fact in most cases it is not.
The paper trail has been inspected the actual crop and and farm is not the whole thing
is an honour based system. Soil testing and spot unannounced inspections are the only
way to keep everyone honest. Just organic, means take my word for it, ya right.
Again the real organic farmers and the good intentions and respect they had is being
eroded by the certifiers and the importers. Real organic farmers are business people
and I have a lot of respect for them. Their view is since organic, became a religion,
things are not as good. Too many people blindly defend the system they know little
about, and no criticism is welcome. When that happens the shucksters move in and
they quickly misrepresent the profit to make a buck and when its exposed they make
off with the cash and leave the honest people holding the bag and they have to build
the reputation back. A whole lot of serious policing of the industry has to be done.
The other problem is, the higher cost is not reflective of the food value or the growing
method. Much of that additional cost comes from the multiple commissions made
by the certifiers, every time the product moves to the next part of the process. For
example, farmer sells to broker, commission, Broker sells to Wholesaler, commission
Wholesaler sells to retailer, commission, and retailer sells to consumer commission.
That commission is anywhere from one and a half percent to three percent. With that
much money involved, what incentive would the certifier have to reprimand a dishonest
farmer. Its about paper work and money, the consumer and believer in organics be
damned. I say it is not fair to honest organic growers and many have problems paying
the fees, because they are following the rules.
 
talloola
Avatar
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

Commercial farming does not have to kill the soil, if we don't use certain methods that
are up front cheaper but in the long run do serious damage. The problem is not farm
practices, its industrial farm practices. There are many non organic farmers that do it
right. The large scale corporate farm organizations have little to with the operation of
family farms.
Talloola raised a good point, certified is harder to get, but that does not mean it has
actually been inspected because in many cases it is not, in fact in most cases it is not.
The paper trail has been inspected the actual crop and and farm is not the whole thing
is an honour based system. Soil testing and spot unannounced inspections are the only
way to keep everyone honest. Just organic, means take my word for it, ya right.
Again the real organic farmers and the good intentions and respect they had is being
eroded by the certifiers and the importers. Real organic farmers are business people
and I have a lot of respect for them. Their view is since organic, became a religion,
things are not as good. Too many people blindly defend the system they know little
about, and no criticism is welcome. When that happens the shucksters move in and
they quickly misrepresent the profit to make a buck and when its exposed they make
off with the cash and leave the honest people holding the bag and they have to build
the reputation back. A whole lot of serious policing of the industry has to be done.
The other problem is, the higher cost is not reflective of the food value or the growing
method. Much of that additional cost comes from the multiple commissions made
by the certifiers, every time the product moves to the next part of the process. For
example, farmer sells to broker, commission, Broker sells to Wholesaler, commission
Wholesaler sells to retailer, commission, and retailer sells to consumer commission.
That commission is anywhere from one and a half percent to three percent. With that
much money involved, what incentive would the certifier have to reprimand a dishonest
farmer. Its about paper work and money, the consumer and believer in organics be
damned. I say it is not fair to honest organic growers and many have problems paying
the fees, because they are following the rules.



yes, many, probably most are following the rules, but some won't, and the buyer is tricked by that.
but with anything, it is always buyer beware, and one should look into the source of his purchases
when buying organic, or anything else for that matter.
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Novartis? What's a pharmaceutical doing on this list?

They go hand in hand. Sometimes they merge, sometimes the pharmceutical company develops a subsidiary because of the similarities in research, etc.

--

--
 
dumpthemonarchy
#26
On small plots of land, backyards, in Vancouver East especially, you see very intensive gardens (farms?) growing a large amount of food. They don't use chemicals or anything toxic as far as I know. This is the kind of farming that is European, small scale, but successful. The food tastes better than store bought and is very productive. They use a lot of animal manure.
 

Similar Threads

80
FARMING & FOOD – Is it all fouled up?
by countryboy | Dec 12th, 2009
0
Organic Farms in Canada increase.
by dancing-loon | Mar 28th, 2008
19
Organic foods helpful or hype??
by peapod | Feb 12th, 2007
0
CODEX plans to destroy organic food
by dumpthemonarchy | Feb 6th, 2007
no new posts