What is a regenerative organic farming?Is it good or bad?What are Joel Salatin's specific ideas about it and are they tried and true or are they untested and potentially dangerous? Is he a headcase or is he legit?Are we all going to starve to death because retarded organic hippies are taking over the FDA and rolling back all the modern scientific progress in agriculture?
>>16467669>rolling back all the modern scientific progress in agricultureThey'd have to apply it first!
RFK Jr is a hippie fruitcake and I can't believe Trump is letting him have any sway whatsoever over the administration let alone with something as important as agriculture. We will all starve while the hippies virtue signal and purity spiral
>>16469053trump is appeasing the hippies, won the election because of the fucking niggers, and is going to support a nation of literal jews.
>>16467669>What is a regenerative organic farming?Regenerative organic farming is just permaculture.No fertilizers, no tilling, no herbicides, no pesticides, you use a combination of cover crops, hedges, crop rotation, mixed planting, and grazing, to restore soil health while growing whatever you're growing. >Is it good or bad?This trend was largely first introduced to the world by Masanobu Fukuoka, a Japanese microbiologists and agricultural scientists. As far as he was concerned he was looking for a minimal-effort, no-inputs, means to produce food indefinitely. Fukuoka's hypothesis of permaculture was that everything was dictated by the relationship soil had with weeds, microbes, and insects, and if he could just groom those three aspects into some kind of homeostasis that benefited him - he wouldn't have to do anything else. >Are we all going to starve to death because retarded organic hippies are taking over the FDA and rolling back all the modern scientific progress in agriculture?Yes. Permaculture & organic farming are excellent for the environment, but they're not productive, nor efficient enough, to feed the billions of people that largescale industrial agriculture does. Switching to permaculture methods would be beneficial to the environment, but it would make every single scrap of food infinitely more expensive, and meat a rare luxury.>Is he a headcase or is he legit?He's lying a little bit. -Salatin uses heritage chickens for his eggs, but industrial hybridized broiler hens for meat, as normal chickens simply cannot gain enough mass. -Likewise, he also finishes his pigs on grain he purchases. -Salatin hires hippy 'interns' that he pays very little, doesn't train (everything is a trade secret), and has them live in shacks that consistently infect them with campylobacteriosis, due to an improperly installed plumbing system in said shacks.
>>16467669Nutty low-grace /x/ tard but the "Back To Eden" gardening methods are great for individuals and small farms. It's basically just using lots of mulch along with "chop & drop" techniques to add organic matter to the soil to reduce the amount of external fertilizers you have to add. It won't "Feed the World", but if you have a yard/small farm it works great once you get the system up and running, but it's nothing all that "innovative", really.
>>16469632Feeding the world is bad.Thats what causes overpopulation.
>>16471551quality > quantity
I get really good results with organic fertilizers like blood meal and kelp meal, manures, and leaf mold. Great productivity and good nutrition and flavor profiles. I don't know how I could grow dozens or hundreds of acres of food with it, though. We need a broad scale "almost organic" system, imo. If more people grew some kind of food and kept a few animals and coordinated with neighbors we would all be healthier but less rich you can't reduce much GDP.
>>16469087This. Most of the celebrity agriculturalists are grifters, even if they have a few good ideas.
>>16469087>>16472962Try incorporating biochar into your soil. Make sure it's charged first or it will soak up nutrients from your soil and fuck your productivity until you add more nutrients. You can make your own charged biochar by crushing lump charcoal and soaking it in a nutrient solution like compost tea. If you have a compost/vermicompost pile, which everyone should, then you can put the charcoal directly in your pile at up to 20% by volume to charge it, decrease the greenhouse gases produced by your pile, and prevent the nutrients from leeching out of your pile. If you have livestock then you can add it to their feed at 2% by weight to charge it and it will improve their digestion, reduce the greenhouse gasses they produce, and reduce the odor of their manure. Amending your lawn by aerating it and filling the holes with charged biochar will save you a lot of water, especially if your soil is clayey. Amending your garden will save you water, encourage beneficial soil microbes, and improve plant growth. There's no downsides.
>>16472970You are the only one ITT talking about Ethiopia.
>>16472971My soil is loam and drains pretty well. The water table is also between 10 to 100 feet down depending on the neighborhood. It's not unusual for fruit trees and grape vines to establish into it and go months without irrigation no problem despite 100F temps. The native trees get 70 ft tall and we have no summer rain. Water is cheap too because it's snow pack melt. Slightly acidic and clean. I'm in probably the world's greatest Ag region (Sacramento, CA). For lawn i just seed in annual ryegrass and wildflowers and a bit of Bermuda persists because I don't irrigate the lawn at all.
>>16472990Try it anyways. Your soil will lose less nutrients as it drains which will help keep your aquifer and nearby waterways from being contaminated by the runoff. Even if your soil wouldn't benefit from it at all it's still great for composting and livestock and as a bonus every pound you put in your soil is about 3.7 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. That's not counting the reduction in methane and nitrous oxide from composting, livestock, and from denitrifying bacteria in your soil.
>>16472994Should I always source certified biochar or can I make it? I'm worried about toxicity from the charcoal and I'm already incorporating a fair bit of carbon without paying for any.
>>16469087>>Are we all going to starve to death because retarded organic hippies are taking over the FDA and rolling back all the modern scientific progress in agriculture?>Yes.>Permaculture & organic farming are excellent for the environment, but they're not productive, nor efficient enough, to feed the billions of people that largescale industrial agriculture does. Switching to permaculture methods would be beneficial to the environment, but it would make every single scrap of food infinitely more expensive, and meat a rare luxury.Wouldn't it be a realistic model if a much larger part of the population was dedicated to farming? I've also heard about some of these permaculture farmers claiming decent outputs but I don't know how true that was, so land usage could also become a concern, although I don't know if that was ever put into numbers
Expanding on the a political undertones/context of my post here: >>16469087The other thing I'll add is this is just another land-grab. It's always a land-grab. It's never not a land-grab. The primary benefit of "regenerative organic farming" is a greenwashing land seizure technique, used by *these people to sell you grossly inflated lean beef and to gain public/social consent to graze previously protected, inexpensive, parkland meant to house wildlife. *This is very much a status, image, "playing cowboys", kind of thing for them. There's very little money to be made in farming, but 'this' industry is populated by retirees playing the part of agri-influencer. A lot of them used to work in the oil industry. With that said, if you actually want to change anything about how Americans treat food, eat, etc.. You have to let every day people own and farm it - not let some aging white-collar hippie faggot larp on 100's of acres. >>16472962>We need a broad scale "almost organic" system, imo. If more people grew some kind of food and kept a few animals and coordinated with neighbors we would all be healthier but less rich you can't reduce much GDP.This unironically happened in Detroit. Large portions of their suburbs had become derelict and completely overgrown, but sometime in 2013 people started buying the empty houses nearby for like a buck, demolishing them, and then working the land. According to their own statistics there's around 2,200 urban farms (pic related), employing 20,000 people, across what was once suburban Detroit. Everybody is still poor, but food security isn't a problem anymore and crime has dramatically lowered. Supposedly, it's also been a great community builder: Detroit has a lot of black seniors living pension cheque to pension cheque, but now they have easy work and are engaged with young people.
>>16473246Here's another farm from above. Detroit also has the advantage that it to be at least somewhat fertile (despite its' urban history) and in the absence of development or maintenance - will become pleasantly forested if allowed to. >>16473241>I've also heard about some of these permaculture farmers claiming decent outputs but I don't know how true that was, so land usage could also become a concern, although I don't know if that was ever put into numbersThe Soviet Union accidentally did something like what we're talking about. During the 70's through to the 90's, something like 25% of the urban population owned rural summer cottages called "Dacha". Russians used them to take it easy during the summer months, but they also used them to grow like 65% of domestic produce for almost 30 years because the centralized communal farms were failing and everyone was fucking starving. Basically, you worked full time in the city, and then work a 600m2 private garden plot all 4 months of summer to grow as many potatoes and cabbage as possible. Organic agriculture 'can' meet domestic demand, but only if an entire portion of the countries' population is put to work.
>>16473257I'm pretty sure we will have to come to this (many more people being involved in farming) in a relatively near future. When energy becomes scarce, it will be primarily used to satisfy basic needs such as feeding ourselves. This would make food much pricier and small-scale farming more interesting in economical terms.
>>16473071You shouldn't need to worry much about contaminants. Biochar can even be used to absorb contaminants from soil. Just get whatever's cheapest. There's not any difference between certified biochar or lump charcoal unless they've already charged it for you. You can make charcoal yourself in a barrel or you can buy lump charcoal from the store and crush it yourself. Don't use charcoal briquettes because they have weird additives and the structure has been destroyed when the briquettes were formed so it doesn't work the same way. I've found that unless you're ordering in the cubic yard range the cheapest lump charcoal is at Walmart or other grocery stores that offer cheap products. If you decide to make it yourself, but you don't have the wood handy then call tree trimming services and ask them to dump their trucks on your property or use service like chipdrop. That will be a lot cheaper than buying anything, but making charcoal can be a lot of work.
>>16473241Personally, I think the best place for people to start is with composting or vermicomposting. It makes people really think about soil health and encourages them to start a garden, even if it's just some tomatoes or an herb garden. Honestly tomatoes are also a great place for most people to start. They're mostly water so it's better to grow them where they're going to be eaten instead of transporting them and it encourages you to learn how to store your harvest all year by canning and drying.
>>16467669Its pretty funny that the Trump administration is the one promoting healthy farming practices and the liberals, who all brag massively about being environmentalists are the ones who want to poison the planet with toxic pesticides and gmo frankenstein crops.
>>16467669>What is a regenerative organic farming?>Is it good or bad?It requires a lot of fertile land to go unused. Land naturally regenerates carbon, nitrogen, and minerals in decent soil with enough water, but you can't extract very much from it per year. It's a good thing to try and recycle agricultural waste, however a lot of that is already being done and so to go even further would mean to let land go fallow for extended periods and waste production capacity. Therefore, synthetic fertilizers are necessary and will never be replaced.>>16473241There is like 45 million acres of lawn in the US so yes people could grow massive amounts of food if they wanted to, but it's a difficult thing to make efficient and we don't have the cultural capital either. Neighborhoods could be filled with nuts and fruits and herbs and veggies but it only works if tons of people believe in it so much they want to participate extensively, which they don't.
>>16474321Retard take
>>16473241>if a much larger part of the population was dedicated to farming?Otherwise known making every single scrap of food infinitely more expensive.
>>16474321>oy vey stop noticing
>>16475006t. can't grow a plant to save his life
>>16474321What do you expect from a people who chimp out at a guy for using the slogan "make America great again"?>REEEEEE STOP IMPROVING MY COUNTRY!!!>I HATE YOU!!!!
>>16472962>We need a broad scale "almost organic" system, imo.look up Garty Zimmer. That's basically what he's all about
>>16475006The government doesn't want people growing their own food because homegrown produce is tax free, but if you buy your food at the grocery store then you have earn a taxed income to get money to get food and everyone working at the grocery store also pays income taxes so the government makes a pile of money if people buy food and none if they grow it.
>>16467669Huh, that's pretty wild. I live near to his farm and regularly drive out there to buy stuff. I didn't realize he was this well known.>What are Joel Salatin's specific ideas about it and are they tried and true or are they untested and potentially dangerous?He just does what used to be normal, sustainable farming. His eggs are fucking amazing, he brings his cows to a pasture to graze and once they've eaten the grass down, he brings his chickens in behind them and they go to town on all the bugs they can find now that the grass is short. Rotates them around the farm like this. Just sends his pigs off into the woods to forage, that sort of thing.As >>16469087 said this sort of farming is not even remotely efficient enough to replace industrial agriculture; it's very much a quality over quantity thing. But when we can't feed people without the horrible evil of factory farms then it's a sign that we have too many fucking people, not that the sort of farming practices that have been the norm for the vast majority of the past 10,000 years need to be discarded.
>>16467669salatin is a grifter promoted by a jew who doesn't understand nutrient cycles
>>16472971Thanks Styx
>>16467669Why does regenerative organic farming make people who claim to be environmentalists so upset?
you can split food production systems into two basic categories:>ones that deplete soil fertility>ones that improve soil fertilitymodern industrial agriculture functions much like mining, extracting a resource (soil) for production. tilling, keeping the soil exposed, mineral ferts and pesticides erode and kill the soil. if depends on your area how long you can get away with it. in the tropics, its often only works for a few years after clearing the forest. if you have deep fertile soil horizons like much of the US midwest, you might be able to do it for a century or two. but you always erode top soil, kill soil life, worsen water infiltration, draw down the ground water and pollute waterways with your runoff. what it does well is produce large amount of mostly poor quality calories with very few workers on a short time frame. nice if you want to feed legions of urbanite tax cattle and don't care how your country looks like in a century.if you close your nutrient cycles, add carbon back to the soil, feed your soil biology and prevent erosion, your soil will improve and become more fertile while you work it. with the right methods, you can outproduce industrial agriculture on yield/area and it will be much more nutritious and more diverse. as was already said, you will need a lot more people working the land, but I'd consider that a good thing. it creates meaningful work, improves health of the population, connects more people with the land they are living on, creates community and results in a more resilient culture that can persists on its own indefinitely. you might need to scale back a little on the number of investment bankers, marketing analysts, beancounters, tiktok influencers, telephone desinfectants and homeless junkies. oh, and your monsan.. I mean bayer stonks might not perform so well any more.
This thread is still up and I like it, so I'll comment more on the economic side of this: >>16469087The department of agriculture for the United States Government spends about 400 to 300 billion dollars on American farmers: -80% of that money goes to the 2% of American farmers, who own 42% (we're talking on average over 2,000 acre farms) of all farm land in America, to produce five agricultural products: Corn, Basedbeans, Wheat, Meat, and then I think Dairy & Eggs. The other honorary mentions are cotton, tobacco, and peanuts. -The primary economic incentive, or driver, for money-making American farmers is the production of basedbeans and corn for animal feed (both domestic and foreign markets) and ethanol, and the raising and butchering of meat animals like beef, pork, and chicken, both for domestic consumption and exportation. These businesses are also further managed by larger corporate entities that provide seed, animals, and apply strict controls and regulations - reducing even large farms to more of a factory with contracted workers. -Also, if anybody cares: the department of agriculture is also one of the biggest drivers, and advocates, for maintaining an open, border, in order to facilitate a constant supply of illegal migrant workers they can pay nothing to milk cows, chase chickens, and pick fruit. They've openly stated that they are not confident in America's ability to continue to grow and sell produce, at the desired profit margins, without cheap undocumented migrant labor. The meat and dairy industries in particular are especially dependent on undocumented illegals.-42% of American farmers own about 1 to 49 acres, occasionally get a cheque for 500 bucks from the government, and have little or no hope of ever competing with larger scale industrial agriculture. That's more or less the situation and I don't really see that changing.
>>16481714its by design. agrochemical cartels monopolizing the food production and removing competition. its not changing from the top down, because regulators and politicians are basically fully captured. but it can change from the bottom up. by people growing more of their own food or directly supporting someone who does it for them. urban gardens, food coops, community supported agriculture, gtfo the cities and reclaiming a small piece of their homeland. and the neat thing is, it is changing drastically for exactly the people who put in the work to make it happen. you learn, organize and build and suddenly you guzzle way less corn syrup and eat much more fresh produce that was grown right where you live. its an individual choice and if enough people make that choice, it changes the bigger picture. industrial agriculture is also a lot more fragile than most would assume. any significant disruption in any of the necessary supply chains and logistics can have catastrophical impacts on its actual ability to feed the urbanites. if that happens and you live somewhere people already grow 25% of their food locally without industrial supplies, its gonna be rough for a bit, but absolutely survivable. if you are somewhere people eat 100% out of the supermarkets, good luck, lmao.
>>16481808>because regulators and politicians are basically fully captured.RFK Jr isn't and neither is Trump.
>>16467669>>16469053Time to get fucked, you corporate pieces of shit.
>>16467669>Are we all going to starve to deathOf course not. In the worst scenario illegals, liberals, and neocons will be thrown into the meat grinder to feed the people.
>>16467669>>16469053>>16469087are you telling me that politics is a playground for rich kids???
>>16485783Why did you say jews twice?
>>16467669On the whole I think its a good thing. Lots of grifters involved but I can't find any serious evidence that it doesn't work. It's just more labor intensive.
>>16473246>>16473257I admire your enthusiasm but you're taking exaggerations from propaganda at face value
>>16485863Rich kids and stupid people.>Conservatives under BidenI CAN'T AFFORD GROCERIES, I'M LITERALLY STARVING TO DEATH >Conservatives under TrumpI love paying more for groceries! Low intensity farming systems and tariffs are my favorite things!
>>16486300Scientists and environmentalists have been complaining about problems caused by agricultural chemicals for decades. Trump came along and fixed the problem, why does that make you angry?
