Abstract
© 2006 clipart.com |
This
publication provides an overview of the key concepts and practices
of certified organic crop production. It also presents perspectives
on many of the notions, myths, and issues that have become associated
with organic agriculture over time. A guide to useful ATTRA resources
and to several non-ATTRA publications is provided.
Table of Contents
What is Organic Agriculture?
Over the years, it has become commonplace
to understand
and define organic agriculture as farming without synthetic pesticides
and conventional fertilizers.
This should not be considered a definition but a characteristic — only
one characteristic of a socially and environmentally conscious
approach to agriculture that is currently experiencing rapid growth
in the U.S.(1)
A more suitable definition of organic agriculture
is provided by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) — the
federal advisory panel created to advise the USDA on developing
organic legislation.
"an ecological production management
system that promotes and enhances biodiversity,
biological cycles and soil biological
activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and
on management practices
that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony(2)."
The NOSB definition, not surprisingly, is similar to many definitions
of "sustainable" agriculture. Research on organic farms,
done over several decades,
has revealed characteristics usually associated
with sustainable farming, such as reduced soil erosion (3), lower
fossil fuel consumption (3), less leaching of nitrate (4), greater
carbon sequestration (4) and, of course, little to no pesticide
use.
Back to top
The Origins of Organic Agriculture in the United States
As close
as anyone can determine, the first use of the term "organic" (in
this country, anyway) was in 1940. J.I. Rodale coined it in an
article for the publication Fact Digest.(5) Shortly thereafter,
he launched Organic Farming and Gardening (OFG) magazine — for
many years the flagship publication of Rodale Press. Along with
OFG, Rodale Press published (and continues to publish) a large
number of books and booklets on organic agriculture. For a long
time the publishing house was the most highly visible and accessible
source of information about "non-chemical" farming
and gardening in the U.S. As such, it was probably the single greatest
influence on the shape and underlying philosophy of mainstream
organics. J.I. Rodale drew his concept of organic agriculture from
a number of sources, including Louis Bromfield (the author of Malabar
Farm and other books on conservation farming), Dr. William Albrecht
(from the Department of Soils at the University of Missouri), and
the Biodynamic movement. However, his key ideas about farming came
from the British agronomist Albert Howard. Howard worked in the
foreign service in India during the first quarter of the 20th century,
and much of what he preached about agriculture came from his observations
and experiences in that part of the world.
In his landmark books,
An Agricultural Testament (6) and The Soil and Health (7), Howard
pointed to emerging problems of animal and plant disease, soil
erosion, and similar conditions. He laid the blame for these on
mismanagement of soil. Howard specifically cited the failure of
modern civilizations to properly return wastes from cities and
industries to the farms. Sustainability issues were at the top
of the list for this man, now considered the "father of organic
agriculture."
Clearly, Howard did not believe that reliance
on chemical fertilization could address these concerns. He thought
it a misguided approach —the likely product of reductionist
reasoning by "laboratory hermits" who paid no attention
to how nature worked.
Howard promoted a natural approach to building
soil and fertility. He wrote in great detail about the use of deep-rooting
crops to draw nutrients from the subsoil, about managing crop residues,
and about green manuring. However, Howard gave the lion's
share of his attention to composting. The Indore Process, which
he was responsible for popularizing, is exemplified today by the
basic layered, bin composting system that is the standard in organic
gardening.
In America, Rodale expanded on Howard's ideas.
In his seminal book on organic agriculture, Pay Dirt (8), he identifies
a number of other "good farming practices" — like
crop rotation and mulching — that gave further definition
and clarification to what have become accepted organic practices
and inputs. This is important because organic farming embodies
the elements of a sound agriculture — traditional practices
that have been proven over time. In fact, a good, convenient, working
definition for organic agriculture is good farming practice
without using synthetic chemicals. This working definition
distinguishes organic practice from the general milieu of agriculture
that existed in the pre-chemical era, much of which was exploitative
and unsustainable. Organic farming was never intended to be a "throwback"
or regressive form of agriculture.
A truly significant event in
the history of organics took place in 1962, with the publication
of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring.(9) Silent Spring is a strong
and dramatic statement about the impact of pesticides
on the environment. It was one of the key documents that gave birth
to environmental consciousness
in the 1960s and 1970s.
When environmentalists and others began
looking around for an alternative to pesticides and industrial
agriculture, organic farming was there. Not only was it an approach
that did not use synthetic pesticides, it also had an attractive
counter-culture name that grew to signify a philosophy of living
as well as a method of farming.
While Silent Spring and the environmental
movement
were not about organic farming per se, they brought it to public
consciousness on a vast scale. It is not uncommon, in fact, for
some writers to suggest that organic agriculture began with Rachel
Carson's book. Though this assertion is untrue, the book
clearly played a major role in stimulating industry growth and
in altering public perceptions.
From the mid-1960s onward, organics was increasingly identified
with pesticide issues. It became
the idealized alternative for providing clean, healthy food and
environmental protection.
Back to top
Notions of Organic
As organic farming and marketing entered the 1970s, it began to
develop as an industry. As a result,
a clearer definition was needed to distinguish it and its products
from conventional agriculture. This was no straightforward task.
Environmental issues and other alternative agriculture philosophies
had created diverse notions about what organic agriculture was and
what it should be.
A particularly problematic image grew unexpectedly
from the anti-pesticide movement of the 1960s. This was the romantic
notion that organic
simply meant "doing next-to-nothing." In this exploitative
approach, not only were pesticides
avoided, sound farming practices that built the soil were also
largely ignored. The results achieved on such farms were predictable,
as yields were low and the quality poor. These approaches
became collectively known as organic by neglect and are a far cry
from the responsible farming models proposed by Albert Howard and
J.I. Rodale.
It is unclear how many farmers actually chose to farm "by
neglect" and advertise themselves as organic over the years.
However, this extreme representation of organic agriculture was
quickly taken up by critics who tried to characterize all of organic
agriculture as soil depleting and unproductive.(10)
To counter this, current standards
for certified organic production require an "organic plan" outlining
the use of soil building activities and natural pest management.
There
is a further notion that organic farming also describes farm systems
based on soil building, but that continue to use some prohibited
fertilizers and pesticides in a limited or selective manner. A
USDA study of U.S. organic farms (11) made note
of many such individuals who readily and sincerely referred to
themselves as organic farmers. While these growers were largely
conscientious and would, in most instances, fall under the modern
umbrella of "sustainable
farmers," industry standards evolved to preclude all synthetic
pesticides or commercial fertilizers. The approach to farming by
this loose-knit group of growers and their supporters has come
to be called "eco-farming" or "eco-agriculture"
— terms coined by Acres USA editor Charles Walters, Jr.(12)
A
further notion of organic agriculture that bears addressing is
the persistent image of organic farming as being possible only
on a very small scale. This impression has been enhanced by the
high visibility of organic market gardens. These, of course, are
small because market gardening — conventional or organic
— is usually done on a smaller scale. Also, some organic market
garden systems, such as Biointensive Mini-Farming, use highly labor
intensive/low capital investment technologies. These have become
popular among U.S. gardeners and, more importantly, with those
concerned with Third World development, where such systems are
especially relevant. Focus on these systems has, unfortunately,
distorted the picture of organics as a whole.
Traditionally, organic farms truly have
been smaller
than conventional operations. This has been due in part to
labor requirements. Organic systems are generally more labor
intensive. Studies done in the late 1970s by Washington University,
for example, found that about 11% more labor was required per
unit of production where agronomic crops were concerned.(13)
This difference can be much greater where horticultural
crops are involved, and farm size may be limited accordingly. However,
technological innovations
in organic horticultural production are helping to narrow the gap.
Organic systems are also more information intensive, requiring
additional
management time in planning, pest scouting,
and related activities. For this reason, organic management can
be better done if a farm is not too large.
Essentially, the notion
that organic systems are only possible on very small farms is
a false one. Both the Washington University and the USDA studies
confirmed this.(3, 11) Given the range of acceptable technologies
available, organic agriculture
can be sized to fit a wide range of farms and enterprises.
Landmark Research
Throughout its early history, organic agriculture was treated
with either hostility or apathy by the USDA, land grant universities,
and conventional agriculture in general. Fortunately, the
atmosphere for discussing and investigating organics has
improved considerably. While it did not become boldly evident
until the 1990s, the tide actually began turning in the late
1970s and early 1980s.
A number of factors precipitated
this change, among them the growth in the organic industry.
Serious money demands serious attention. Also critical,
from the perspective of the research community especially,
were some landmark studies that lend credibility to organic
farming as a truly viable option for American agriculture.
The first of these "landmarks" was a
series of studies done by Washington University. Funded by
the National Science Foundation, this research was motivated
by the energy crisis of the 1970s and the effect that higher
energy prices would have on agriculture in the nation's
Cornbelt. When researchers learned that there were commercial
farms that were not dependent on the high-energy inputs of
conventional farming, the focus quickly shifted to the study
of organics.
In addition to the documentation of practices, crop yields,
attitudes, and the sustainability indices (cited elsewhere
in this publication), the researchers made what was certainly
the most astounding discovery of all, that commercial organic
farms could be competitive with conventional farms in the
conventional marketplace.(3)
Arriving
on the heels of the Washington University work was another
study of great significance done by the
USDA. In contrast to the Washington University effort, these
researchers chose to extend their survey of farmers nationally
and over a wide range of enterprises. The findings
of the USDA study, which were fair, largely positive, and
encouraging, kicked open the door for future organic research
in ways that a non-land grant/non-USDA entity like Washington
University could not. The final report – bound
with pastel green cover sheets — was a conspicuous
object at alternative agriculture conferences and field
days throughout the early 1980s.(11)
Also of particular
note was a symposium on organic farming held in Atlanta,
Georgia, in late 1981. The meeting was sponsored
jointly by the American Society of Agronomy, the Crop Science
Society of America, and the Soil Science Society of America — traditionally
very conservative entities. It brought together not only representatives
of the Washington University and USDA teams, but a surprising
number of other researchers clearly interested in the same
issues of sustainability and finding a glimmer of hope
in organic agriculture.(14) |
Back to top
Organic Certification
In 2002, when the USDA adopted the National Organic Standard
that spells out what farmers and food processors must (and must
not) do to be certified "organic," the organic
industry already had a long history of relying on third-party certifiers
to ensure the integrity of their products and practices. Under
this system, a state-run or accredited private agency (the third-party)
evaluates farmers and processors to see whether they conform to
the standards of the National Organic Program (NOP). Those who
do can then market their products as "USDA Certified
Organic" and display the official USDA organic seal on their
packaging.
In essence, certification is largely about integrity — assuring
that the buyer is getting what he or she is paying for. Certified
organic production, then, means production by approved organic
methods, with additional pains taken to eliminate contamination
with prohibited materials and commingling with conventional products.
There is a common misconception that certified organic
means "pesticide residue-free." Consumers have a right
to expect little or no pesticide residue on certified organic
crops because none are used in their production. However, ours
is a dirty world in which pesticides and their break-down products
are ubiquitous. This is only to be expected in a national farm
system where more than 99% of all applied farm chemicals miss the
target organism.(15)
The principles, practices, and tools discussed
in the remainder of this publication reflect the guidelines
recognized by the NOP, though minor details may vary among third-party
certifiers.
It is important, therefore, that producers understand their certifying
agency's standards well and keep in close touch with a representative.
Note that these principles and practices also provide a foundation
for other sustainable approaches to crop production, perennial
or annual.
Back to top
Organic Principles
There are several compelling principles that characterize
certified organic farming. They include biodiversity, integration, sustainability, natural
plant nutrition, natural pest management, and integrity.
Most organic operations will reflect all of these to a greater
or lesser degree. Since each farm is a distinct entity, there is
a large degree of variation.
Biodiversity
As a general rule, diverse ecosystems in nature have a higher
degree of stability than those with only a few species. The same
is essentially true for agroecosystems. Farms with a diverse mix
of crops have a better chance of supporting beneficial organisms
that assist in pollination and pest management. Diversity
above ground also suggests diversity in the soil, providing better
nutrient cycling, disease suppression, tilth, and nitrogen fixation.
Good organic farmers mimic the biodiversity of nature through
practices like intercropping, companion planting, establishment
of beneficial
habitats, and crop rotation (sometimes referred to as companion
planting across time). The effort to increase biodiversity works
hand-in-hand with enterprise diversity, which is often (but not
necessarily) an objective on organic farms.
Diversification and Integration of Enterprises
The drive to build biodiversity in organic systems encourages
diversity among enterprises, but not as isolated or independent
entities. Good organic operations integrate their various enterprises.
A good example can be seen among Midwestern organic crop and livestock
operations.
The typical Midwestern organic operation ties the needs of crops
and livestock together in a practical and elegant way. The
forage and grain needs of ruminant livestock make for a diverse
mix of crops. Particularly valuable is the inclusion of legume
forages for ruminant feed. Forage legumes in rotation fix
a sustainable supply of nitrogen in the soil that feeds subsequent
non-legume crops in rotation. Manure from the livestock enterprises
is conserved as a nutrient resource and recycled back to the crop fields.
Farms
such as these have the additional advantage of greater economic
sustainability, as their risks are spread over several livestock
and crop enterprises.
Sustainability
In addition to the greater economic sustainability afforded by
enterprise diversification, organic farmers are often able
to reap market premiums for certified production. However,
since many organic enterprises realize somewhat lower marketable
yields, this has not always translated into higher profits
or greater economic sustainability. As more and more organic growers
enter the marketplace, it is likely that premiums will stabilize
at modest levels and may vanish for some crops. Organic producers
need to look well ahead and be aware of shifting trends.
As alluded
to earlier, many U.S. organic farms perform well
on many of the measurable indicators associated with sustainability,
such as energy consumption and environmental protection. However,
sustainability is an ideal, and the best that can be said is that
current organic farms are closer to the ideal than most alternatives — certainly
closer than comparable conventional farming operations.
The extent
to which traditional organic agriculture philosophy influences
the adoption of sustainable practices has only been touched upon.
For example, during the Washington University studies of midwestern
farms in the late 1970s, researchers observed that organic farmers
had embraced conservation tillage technologies at a much faster rate
than their conventional counterparts.(3) Conservation tillage was
not and is not considered a traditional practice of organic farming,
yet its ready adoption points to the dynamic nature of organic agriculture
and offers clear evidence that the underlying philosophy of sustainability — strongly
championed by Albert Howard — remains a vital part of organics.
Given the option of a sustainable technology that fits the
constraints of certified organic agriculture, it is natural
for most organic farmers to
choose it.
Natural Plant Nutrition
Even though we require the same basic "stuff" to live,
it is somewhat challenging to draw simple comparisons between the
nutritional needs and processes of plants and those of animals.
Plants are able to photosynthesize to make sugars, which are ultimately
synthesized into proteins and other plant constituents. Humans
and other animals, by contrast, can obtain energy foods, proteins,
and vitamins only by consuming plants or other animals.
Both plants
and animals also require minerals. Humans and other animals extract
minerals, along with sugars and proteins, from the food they eat.
Plants, too, obtain minerals — and a wide range of vitamins,
antibiotics, and other useful compounds — through digestion.
However, plant digestive systems are not internalized as they are
in animals. Plants must rely on the external digestive processes
of the soil system within reach of their roots — a zone called
the rhizosphere.
Nutrient Absorption
Critics are often under the illusion that organic farmers
believe plants obtain all their nutrients from an organically
managed soil in a chemically organic form. While a few organicists
may believe that, the majority recognizes that digestion
processes in the soil release minerals in forms similar
to those applied as commercial fertilizers. Unfortunately,
the notion that organic farmers are naïve and ignorant
about basic agronomy is a red herring that has often foiled
intelligent discussion about the pros and cons of the system.
Among the facts that are often obscured is that plants
can and do absorb significant amounts of large organic
molecules from the soil; herbicide and systemic insecticides
are among these. In healthy soils they also absorb vitamins,
chelated minerals, hormones, and other beneficial compounds.(16) |
The organic philosophy of crop nutrition begins
with proper care and nourishment of the organisms responsible for
the soil digestive process. Organic farmers believe this is best
accomplished by avoiding toxic chemicals and practices — like
excessive tillage — that are harmful to soil organisms, as
well as by the addition of organic matter and natural rock minerals.
Conventional systems, in contrast, try to circumvent the soil's
digestive process and provide needed minerals to the plant directly,
in a soluble form.
From the organic perspective, the conventional
approach
has several flaws.
- Applying large quantities of soluble
fertilizer to a crop only one, two, or three times per season
floods the plant with those nutrients, causing nutritional imbalances
that lead to crop diseases, insect infestations, and reduced
food quality.
- Failure to support and care for soil biotic
life, along with other practices that are downright destructive,
ultimately leads to
its decline. As a result, plants lose out on the vitamins and
other beneficial products these organisms produce, tilth is reduced,
and the soil becomes increasingly dependent on synthetic inputs.
- Conventional
fertilization tends to concentrate on a limited number of macronutrients,
even though the need for at least 13 soil minerals is scientifically
recognized. This skewed focus is also responsible for generating
imbalances in the plant.
- Application of large amounts of
soluble nutrients can stimulate certain problem weed species.
- Soluble
nutrients — especially nitrate — are prone to leaching,
which can cause a number of environmental and health problems.It
is organic farming's approach to soil building and plant
fertilization that is the true basis for the belief that organic
food and feed has superior nutritional
value, much more so than the absence of pesticide residues,
which has drawn the spotlight ever since the 1960s.
Natural Pest Management
Whether conventional or organic, all farmers
are concerned with pests. They spend a lot of time and resources
controlling them. However, in the organic "world view," pests — whether
weeds, insects or diseases — are not simply scourges. They
are indicators of how far a production system
has strayed from the natural ecosystems it should imitate. Certain
weeds, for example, tend to predominate when soils are too acidic
or too basic; some become a problem when soil structure
is poor and conditions become anaerobic; others may be stimulated
by excessive fertilizer or manure salts.
Organic proponents also
believe that insect pests are attracted to inferior or weak plants — the
result of poor crop nutrition. Their logic continues
by asserting that pests are naturally repelled by vigorous, well-nourished
plants. This belief is often challenged, and significant research
remains to be done.
As scientific understanding has grown, insect
pest outbreaks are also being understood as imbalances in the
whole agroecosystem and how it is managed. In nature, massive pest
outbreaks are relatively rare and short-lived, due to the presence
of natural predators, parasites, and disease agents that quickly
knock the pest numbers
back down to a moderate level. In farming systems that inadvertently
destroy or otherwise fail to support the natural control complex,
pest problems are routine and, typically, worsen with time. The
farmer becomes increasingly addicted to costly and extreme control
methods to produce a crop.
Most organic growers consider pesticides
to be a cause of agroecosystem imbalances and employ allowed
natural pesticides as little as possible.
Integrity
Integrity refers to the systems in place and actions
undertaken to assure that consumers of organic products get what
they pay for. Consumers have a right to expect that the organic
food they buy not only be raised by organic methods but be protected
from contamination and from commingling with non-organic products.
While the responsibility for much of this rests with others in
the organic marketing chain, many certified organic growers
need to incorporate additional
practices that work to assure the integrity of their products.
Proper record keeping is very important in this regard, though
growers are often reluctant to spend much time on it. Among the
more important production practices in the field are buffer strips,
which reduce chemical drift from neighboring fields and roadsides,
while also serving
water and soil conservation objectives.
Back to top
Tools and Practices
The tools and practices of organic agriculture
include traditional alternatives — crop rotation, manuring,
liming, etc. — long recognized as important
to a sound production system. They also include more contemporary
practices and materials
that research and keen observation over time have contributed.
The following list of tools and practices is not intended to be
comprehensive, though the primary options are addressed. Note,
too, that each farm operation will employ its own combination of
tools and practices to build a working
organic system. There is no simple cookbook formula for combining
them in ideal proportions.
Planned Crop Rotation
Essentially a
tool for annual cropping systems, crop rotation refers to the
sequence of crops and cover crops grown on a specific field.
Particular sequences confer particular benefits to long and short-term
soil fertility, and to pest management.
Agronomic operations are
especially dependent on crop rotations that include forage legumes.
These provide the vast majority of the nitrogen required by subsequent
crops like corn, which is a heavy consumer of that nutrient.
Even when livestock
are present to generate manure, the animals are largely recycling
the nitrogen originally fixed by legumes in the system. An
example of a basic agronomic rotation, typical of that found
on midwestern organic farms, is shown in Figure 2.
The basic Midwestern rotation demonstrates the elegant way in
which a whole farm system can function:
- Legumes fix nitrogen
in the soil, providing for subsequent non-legumes in the rotation.
- Several
insect pest cycles are interrupted, especially those of the
northern and western rootworm species that can be devastating
to corn.
- Several
plant diseases are suppressed, in cluding soybean cyst nematode.
- Weed
control is enhanced as perennial weeds are destroyed through
cultivation of
annual grains; most annual weeds are smothered or eliminated
by mowing when alfalfa is in production.
- Livestock manures
(if available) are applied just in advance of corn, a heavy
nitrogen consumer.
- All crops can be marketed either
as is or fed to livestock to be converted into value- added
milk, meat or other livestock products.
Ralph and Rita Engelken,
widely respected organic
pioneers in the 1970s and 1980s, used a similar
rotation that suited their hilly northeast Iowa farm and supported
their main livestock enterprise,
backgrounding beef cattle. (Backgrounding is confined or semi-confined
feeding of young range stock to increase their size before
final finishing in a feedlot.) The feed ration the Engelkens
relied on consisted mostly of haylage, corn silage, and ground
ear corn. The 6-year rotation/crop mix that allowed them to
produce virtually all their own feed on 410 acres was
oats/hay→hay→hay→hay→corn→corn→ [cycle
repeats]. (17)
Another example of an agronomic crop rotation — this one
suitable to drier, western climates
— is typified by the Quinn Farm in North-Central Montana and presented
in Figure 3.
Bob and Ann Quinn's rotation begins with the
most reliable cash crop, hard red winter wheat,
fall-seeded after alfalfa. Weeds are controlled
following harvest and the land reseeded to lentils,
kamut, or durum wheat the following spring.
Switching from a winter grain to a spring grain
helps to break weed cycles and optimizes soil
moisture. In the next year, another spring grain or
buckwheat is planted and undersown with alfalfa.
If the alfalfa
survives the winter, it is managed as
a hay crop for a year and incorporated in April
prior to seeding winter wheat. If the alfalfa is
winter-killed, peas are planted in spring, followed
by winter wheat in the fall — shortening the rotation
by one year.(18)
In vegetable crop rotations, nitrogen fixation and
carry-over is also important, though it plays second
fiddle to pest management. The well-known market
gardener Eliot Coleman recommends an eight-year
rotation, as shown in Figure 4.
The rationale for Coleman's eight-year rotation follows.
Since he gardens in the Northeast, some of the
details reflect those constraints.
Potatoes follow sweet corn…because
research has
shown corn to be one of the preceding crops that most
benefit the yield of potatoes.
Sweet Corn follows the cabbage
family because, in
contrast to many other crops, corn shows no yield
decline when following a crop of brassicas. Secondly,
the cabbage family can be undersown to a leguminous
green manure which, when turned under the following
spring, provides the most ideal growing conditions for
sweet corn.
The Cabbage Family follows peas because the pea
crop is finished and the ground is cleared [early] allowing
a vigorous green manure crop to be established.
Peas follow tomatoes because they need an early
seed bed, and tomatoes can be undersown to a nonwinter-hardy
green manure crop that provides soil
protection over winter with no decomposition and
regrowth problems in the spring.
Tomatoes follow beans in the rotation because this
places them 4 years away from their close cousin, the
potato.
Beans follow root crops because they are not known
to be subject to the detrimental effect that certain
root crops such as carrots and beets may exert in the
following year.
Root Crops follow squash (and potatoes) because
those two are good "cleaning" crops (they can be
kept weed-free relatively easily), thus there are fewer
weeds to contend with in the root crops, which are
among the most diffi cult to keep cleanly cultivated.
Second, squash has been shown to be a beneficial
preceding crop for roots.
Squash is grown after potatoes in order
to have the
two "cleaning" crops back to back prior to the root
crops, thus reducing weed problems in the root crops
(19).
Georgia growers Ed and Ginger Kogelschatz use
a somewhat simpler rotation scheme that divides
most garden crops into four basic classes that are
then sequenced for a 4-year cycle.(20) They have
adapted this concept from Shepherd Ogden, the
author of Step By Step Organic Vegetable Gardening.(21)
Ogden's basic rotation scheme is
leaf crops→fruit crops→root crops→
legumes→[cycle repeats].
Green Manures and Cover Crops
Green manuring consists of incorporating into the
soil a crop grown for the purposes of soil improvement.
It is a practice with a long history. Green
manuring has been ignored in recent years as a
serious option for soil improvement because the
traditional practice entailed planting a full-season
cover crop. This removed the field from commercial
production for a whole season. Interest has returned,
however, since green manuring strategies have been combined with
cover cropping schemes.
Cover cropping is growing a crop for
the purpose of soil and nutrient conservation. It is a more contemporary
concept than green manuring, in crop agriculture. The two concepts — cover
cropping and green manuring — go well together, as most
cover crops are easily used as green manures prior to the planting
of a commercial crop. The combined
benefits become economically feasible when the cover is grown
during the off-season or inter-seeded with the main crop. It
is made even more desirable when the cover crop includes nitrogen-fixing
legumes.
Manuring and Composting
Livestock manures are the most traditional
and widely recognized organic fertilizers. Under ideal circumstances,
livestock enterprises are integrated into the whole farm operation,
and manuring becomes
part of a closed system of nutrient recycling. This is still
strongly encouraged in organic operations.
In reality, however, crops and livestock production are often
divorced from each other, and manures must be imported.
This
has created some concerns in the organic community, since much
manure is now generated by large, industrial agriculture feeding
operations
called CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations). Not only are
there concerns about contaminants (heavy metals, antibiotics,
pesticides, hormones) but many in the organic community also
object to any "partnering" with this segment of conventional
agriculture, which is considered at odds with the environmental
and social values represented by organic farming.
Nonetheless,
the National Organic Program does not differentiate between CAFO
and other livestock
manure sources. However, the NOP regulations
do require that livestock manure not contain any synthetic substances
not included on the National List of synthetic substances allowed
for use in organic crop production.
Another issue that has grown
up around manure use in organic farming relates to food safety.
At a time when concerns about microbial contamination
are high, there are questions about the risks associated with
manure use on food crops. A focus piece on the February 2000
television news program 20/20 was especially controversial. The
segment suggested that organic foods were more dangerous than
other food products in the marketplace
due to manure fertilization.(22) The reporter ignored the fact
that conventional farms also use manures. Were all the manure
generated annually in the U.S. (about 1.4 billion tons) applied
only to organic farm acreage (estimated at roughly 1.5 million
acres in 1997), each acre would receive about 933 tons.(23) Furthermore,
certified organic producers
have strict guidelines to follow in handling and applying manures.
The National Organic Program regulations require raw animal manure
be incorporated into the soil not less than 120 days prior to
the harvest of a product whose edible portion
has direct contact with the soil surface or soil particles, and
be incorporated into the soil not less than 90 days prior to
harvest of a product whose edible portion does not have direct
contact with the soil surface or soil particles.
One of the best
means of handling manures is composting. Composting stabilizes
the nutrients in manure, builds populations of beneficial organisms,
and has a highly beneficial effect on soils and crops. Compost
can be produced on-farm by a number of means. Additional products
from composts, such as compost teas, have special applications
in organic agriculture.
Human manures are expressly forbidden
in certified
organic production. This includes composted
sewage sludge (also called "biosolids"). The organic
community made its opinion on this quite clear when the USDA's
first draft of the national rule (December 1997) proposed allowing
the use of sludge in certified production. It was counted as
one of the "big three" targets of protest, along
with food irradiation and genetic engineering. The prohibition
of biosolids would have been disconcerting
to Albert Howard, who decried the failure of cities to return
their organic wastes to the countryside.
Such recycling was, in his mind, a key aspect of sustainability.(7)
Livestock on Organic Farms
Among
the thorniest of issues swirling around the edges of organic
agriculture is the role of livestock. The disagreements
arise because of the diversity of people and philosophies
in the organic community. Organic agriculture can usually
count vegetarians and animal welfare proponents among its
more vocal supporters. Many of these people feel strongly
that animals should not be exploited. Their rationale often
goes beyond emotional and religious beliefs; convincing
human health concerns, social issues, and environmental
reasons are commonly cited. On the other side of this argument
are those who feel that an organic farm cannot achieve
its full potential or ecological balance without livestock
manure; that it is essential to nutrient cycling and to
the finer aspects of soil building.
Excellent soil fertility
can be built in the absence of farm livestock and livestock
manures by using vegetation-based composts (25) and by
harnessing the livestock in the soil — earthworms
and other soil organisms. However, it is clearly easier
to design a contemporary, low-input organic farm when traditional
livestock are integrated. The biological and enterprise
diversity that livestock can bring contributes enormously
to stability and sustainability. A good example is provided
by Rivendell Gardens in Arkansas, which began integrating
livestock enterprises after several years as a solely horticultural
operation.
The owners of Rivendell, Gordon and Susan Watkins,
now rotate their strawberry and vegetable crops with grass-fed,
direct-marketed beef and pastured poultry. Ideally, poultry
follows beef on pasture to reduce cattle parasites. The
seasons in mixed legume/grass pasture leave the soil quite
mellow and well-manured for subsequent high-dollar horticultural
crops.(26)
The Rivendell operation demonstrates the sort
of organic management where a large number of organic farmers
and many animal welfare proponents find common ground.
The Watkins' animals
are all raised with minimal confinement and generous access
to sunshine, fresh air, and free-choice foodstuffs. While
domesticated and destined for slaughter, they lead low-stress
lives in conditions much closer to natural than the conventional
alternatives. This is the antithesis of industrialized factory
farming systems, which are increasingly becoming the norm
in livestock production.
Many in both the organic and animal
welfare communities are working to prohibit factory farming
of livestock in organic systems. Many of the difficulties
revolve around the fine interpretations of language in various
organic standards. Wording
such as "access to fresh air and sunlight," for
example, can be construed to mean nothing more than opening
the door on one end of a large confinement poultry house
for a couple hours a day. |
What Howard had not taken into account is the almost universal
contamination of urban wastes with heavy metals and chemicals
that are not eliminated
by composting and may even be concentrated.
Perhaps this was not yet a serious problem in his time; it is,
however, in ours. Organic farmers and consumers concerned about
contamination of soil and crops with agricultural pesticides
and synthetic fertilizers would be remiss to ignore the contamination
hazards of even well-composted sewage.
Fred Kirschenmann, a farmer
and former NOSB member, has written eloquently about the progress
of the National Organic Program. In a critique of the March
2000 draft of the proposed rule (24), he pointed to another reason
why the use of biosolids ought to be prohibited in organic
production. Because
of the manner in which biosolids are generated,
they are easily hauled and land-applied on an industrial-scale
to industrial scale organic farms. Furthermore, since biosolids
can essentially supplant
animal manures as a source of organic matter and nutrients,
their use would allow some very large farms to circumvent the
traditional practices that promote biodiversity and enterprise
diversity
and integration. What Kirschenmann fears from biosolid use
is technology that would nudge organic agriculture down the
same road of industrialization
taken by conventional ag.
Intercropping and Companion Planting
Interplanting two or more
mutually beneficial crops in close proximity is one strategy
for increasing
biodiversity. In large-scale mechanized crop culture, this is
called intercropping. It typically involves alternating rows
or a number of rows of compatible field crops, like soybeans
and corn. It also applies to sowing multiple forage crops, like
alfalfa, bromegrass, and timothy, when these are grown together.
When
interplanting is done on a smaller scale, it is often called
companion planting. A classic example of companion planting is
the inter-planting of corn with pole beans and vining squash
or pumpkins. In this system, the beans provide nitrogen; the
corn provides support for the beans and a "screen" against
squash vine borer; the vining squash provides a weed suppressive
canopy and discourages corn-hungry raccoons.
Biological Pest Control
Organic farming relies heavily on populations
of beneficial insect predators and parasites, pest disease agents,
insect-eating birds and bats, and other creatures, to help manage
pest problems. These biological controls help keep pest numbers
at levels where further cultural activities or relatively
mild pesticides are (usually) adequate to assure a crop. In some
instances, biological control can be so effective that no additional
action is even needed by the farmer.
Some see biological control
as a default benefit of the soil fertility practices of organic
farming. The diversity of crops in a soil-building rotation,
the use of cover crops, and other practices build a diverse soil
biology that works to keep soil pests in check. They also provide
substantial above-ground habitat for beneficials. The absence
of pesticides also favors biocontrol.
In many organic systems,
farmers sometimes purchase and release control agents like ladybird
beetles, lacewings, trichogramma wasps, etc., or use weeder geese — a
quaint but effective biological
weed control.
Increasingly, growers are designing and maintaining
both permanent and temporary habitats specifically
for beneficial insects, spiders, and other helpful species.
This is known as farmscaping.
Sanitation
Sanitation can take on many forms:
- removal, burning, or
deep plowing of crop residues that could carry plant disease
or insect pest agents
- destruction of nearby weedy habitats
that shelter pests
- cleaning accumulated weed seeds from
farm equipment before entering a new, "clean" field
- sterilizing
pruning tools
As in human and animal health, sanitation practices
can go a long way in preventing crop pest problems. However,
many practices — such as clean cultivation, deep plowing,
and burning crop residues — can increase erosion and
reduce biodiversity.
Thus, they may conflict with sustainability.
Good organic growers recognize this and treat those practices
as transitional or rescue options, rather than relying on them
on an annual basis.
Tillage and Cultivation
Tillage and cultivation
are tools that can accomplish
a variety of objectives in farming systems: weed control, crop
residue management, soil aeration,
conservation of manures and other fertilizers, hardpan reduction,
sanitation to destroy pest and disease habitat, etc.
While conventional
farmers rely on chemicals to accomplish many of these objectives,
organic growers focus more on improving tillage and maximizing
its benefits. Guidelines for primary tillage, for example, are
intent on conserving crop residues and added manures in the upper,
biologically
active zones of the soil, rather than burying them deeply where
decomposition is anaerobic (oxygen-starved). Leaving soils completely
bare and vulnerable to erosion is discouraged; fall moldboard
plowing is certainly frowned upon.
Cultivation in organic systems
often rises to the level of art. Row-crop farmers frequently
use blind cultivation —shallow tillage, which largely ignores
the crop rows—beginning shortly after seeding until the
plants are but a few inches high. Rotary hoes, wire-tooth harrows,
and similar equipment can be used for blind cultivation, delaying
the first flush of weeds and giving the crop a head start.
Conservation Tillage and Organic
Farming
Organic agriculture is often characterized as addicted
to maximum tillage — with growers using every opportunity
to lay the land bare with shovel, plow, or rototiller.
This image has been magnified through the popularity of
small-scale organic systems like the French Intensive and
Biointensive Mini Farming models that espouse double- and
triple-digging to create deep rooting beds. While appropriate
to such intensive systems, this degree of cultivation is
not characteristic of organic agriculture in general. It
may surprise some to learn that a large number of organic
producers are not only interested in conservation tillage,
they have adopted it. This will be a surprise because many
believe that conservation tillage always requires herbicides.
The interest in conservation tillage among organic producers
in the Cornbelt was well documented in the mid-1970s by
Washington University researchers. They noted that the
vast majority of organic farmers participating in their
studies had abandoned the moldboard plow for chisel plows.
Plowing with a chisel implement is a form of mulch
tillage,
in which residues are mixed in the upper layers of the
soil, and a significant percentage remains on the soil
surface to reduce erosion.
Furthermore, a notable number of organic farmers had gone
further to adopt ridge-tillage, a system with even greater
potential to reduce erosion.(3) It was especially interesting
to note that the use of these conservation technologies was
almost nil among neighboring conventional farms at the time.
Organic growers were actually pioneers of conservation tillage
in their communities.
Among the more well-known of these pioneers
were Dick and Sharon Thompson of Boone, Iowa. Their experiences
with ridge-tillage and sustainable agriculture became the
focus of a series of publications titled Nature's Ag
School. These were published by the Regenerative Agriculture
Association — the forerunner to the Rodale Institute.
They are now, unfortunately,
out of print.
Research continues to open up new possibilities
in conservation tillage for organic farms. New strategies
for mechanically killing winter cover crops and planting
or transplanting into the residue without tillage are being
explored by a number of USDA, land-grant, and farmer researchers.
Notable among these is the work being done by Abdul-Baki
and Teasdale at the USDA in Beltsville, Maryland — transplanting
tomato and broccoli crops into mechanically killed hairy
vetch and forage soybeans.(27, 28) There are also the well-publicized
efforts of Pennsylvania farmer Steve Groff, whose no-till
system centers
on the use of a rolling stalk chopper to kill cover crops
prior to planting.(29) Systems like Groff's and Abdul-Baki's
are of particular interest because close to 100% of crop
residue remains on the soil surface – providing all
the soil conservation and cultural benefits of a thick organic
mulch. |
After
blind cultivation, subsequent weed control operations in larger-scale
systems can make use of advances in tillage equipment such as
rolling cultivators,
finger weeders, and torsion weeders that allow tilling close
to the plant row. Smaller-scale operations often use wheel hoes,
stirrup hoes, and other less capital-intensive hardware.
Determining
the amount, the timing, and the kind of tillage to be done can
be a balancing act for the organic grower, but experience and
observation over time lead to proficiency.
There are downsides
to tillage, however, and most organic growers are well aware
of them. The most obvious of these is the dollar cost; organic
farmers are as concerned as their conventional counterparts about
costs of production and strive to minimize expensive field operations.
There is also a cost to the soil and environment. Every tillage
operation aerates the soil and speeds the decomposition of the
organic fraction. While this may provide a boost to the current
crop, it can be overdone and "burn
up" the humus reserves in the soil. Excessive
tillage can also be directly destructive to earthworms
and their tunneling, reducing their benefits to the land. There
is also the danger of compaction,
even when field operations are well timed.
Mulching
Mulching is a practice often used by organic growers.
Traditionally, it entails the spreading of large amounts of organic
materials — straw, old hay, wood chips, etc. — over
otherwise bare soil between
and among crop plants. Organic mulches regulate soil moisture
and temperature, suppress weeds, and provide organic matter to
the soil. Mulching is most appropriate to small, intensive operations
with high-value annual or fruit crops.
A few systems of no-till
organic gardening have evolved from the concept of deep, permanent mulching. Among these are the well-known Ruth Stout method and
Synergistic Agriculture — a raised bed system developed
by Emilia Hazelip, who adapted concepts from Permaculture and
the ideas of Masanobu Fukuoka.(30, 31, 32) Mark Cain and Michael
Crane, co-owners of Dripping Springs Gardens — an intensive
market gardening operation
in Arkansas — have adapted Emilia's system to their
farm with considerable success.(33)
Plastic mulch, as long as
it is removed at end of growing or harvest season, is also
permitted in certified organic production. Its use allows larger
acreage to be brought more easily under herbicide-free management,
though there are serious issues to be addressed (see discussion
on High-Input Organic Agriculture).
High-Input Organic Agriculture
At
the beginning of this publication, organic farming was
described as a system that uses a minimum of off-farm inputs.
While that describes most of organic agriculture as it
is currently practiced in the U.S., certified organic farming
can also entail much greater reliance on off-farm inputs.
Intensive annual strawberry and vegetable systems under plasticulture
are good examples. In these systems, traditional rotations
and soil building practices are usually employed, followed
by clean cultivation and the laying of plastic mulch and
drip irrigation tape on shaped beds. During the season,
large amounts of soluble organic fertilizers — typically
fish-based — are fed to the crop through the drip
system (i.e., organic fertigation). At the end of the season,
all plastics must be removed from the field, and it is
returned to more standard organic management. Ideally,
an off-season cover crop will be planted. Such systems
are often exceptionally productive and economically attractive,
when organic premiums are good. The high cost of soluble
organic fertilizer (typically hundreds of dollars/acre),
however, plus the marginally higher cost of pest controls,
make such systems largely non-competitive in the conventional
marketplace.
The labeling of such high-input systems as
organic presents a paradox for many proponents of organic
agriculture. It is unclear whether these technological
advancements reflect the kind of farming most practitioners
and supporters of organics
think of as truly "organic." To begin with,
the research citing environmental and economic benefits
has largely been done on low-input organic systems; it
is questionable whether similar findings would be made
about high-input systems, especially regarding environmental
matters. Of particular note, while low-input organic systems
are documented as being more resistant to erosion, fields
under plastic mulch are reported to be fifteen times more
erodible.(34) Traditional organic farms leach minimal amounts
of nitrogen into tile or groundwater; the losses from fields
loaded with high levels of soluble organic fertilizers
is certain to be greater, but how much greater is unknown.
The fossil fuel energy involved in plastic manufacture,
transportation, and application may or may not be compensated
by reductions in tractor fuel use.
Finally, the lowered
capital investment required to produce a crop by traditional
organic methods makes this form of farming
more accessible to resource-poor farmers and entails
less risk in years of crop failure or lack of premiums.
These factors are less certain in a high-input system.
A further consideration is the issue of plastic disposal
following removal. At this time, there are few to no
options for recycling, and landfills are the fate of
plastic mulches at the end of each season.
While it is
unwise to rush to judgement regarding high-input organic
farming, it is clear that some adaptations will need
to be made, if the traditional character and sustainability
benefits of organic farming are to be preserved. |
Fire
While fire can be used in a number of ways in organic agriculture,
the area of greatest interest is flame or thermal
weeding. In
its most common application,
torches mounted on a tractor toolbar throw a hot flame at the
base of mature (i.e., heat-resistant)
plants, over the inter-row area, or both. Tractor
speed is adjusted so that weeds are not burned so much as seared.
Searing is sufficient to kill most seedling weeds and uses less
fuel. Liquid propane (LP) gas is the fuel most commonly used,
though alternatives such as alcohol and methane offer the possibility
of on-farm sources.
Supplemental Fertilization
In many organic
systems, crop rotation, manuring, green manuring, along with
enhanced biological activity in the soil, provide an abundant
supply of plant-essential minerals annually. This is especially
true on naturally deep and rich prairie soils. It is less true
on poorer soils and on those that have been heavily exploited
through non-sustainable farming practices. To correct mineral
deficiencies in organically managed soils, organic growers often
apply ground or powdered rock minerals.
The most commonly used
rock mineral is high-calcium aglime. Dolomitic limestone, various
rock phosphates, gypsum, sulfate of potash-magnesia, and mined
potassium sulfate are also common. These are all significant
sources of primary (P, K) and/or secondary (Ca, Mg, S) plant
nutrients. The savvy organic grower applies significant amounts
of these materials only with the guidance of regular
soil testing.
Less common are other rock powders and fines that
are limited sources for the major nutrients but are rich in micronutrients
or have some other soil-improving characteristic. Among these
are glauconite
(greensand), glacial gravel dust, lava sand, Azomite®,
granite meal, and others.
Supplementary nutrients that include
nitrogen are often provided in the form of animal or plant
products and by-products such as fish emulsion, blood meal, feather
meal, bone meal, alfalfa meal, and soybean meal. Most of these
products also supply some organic matter, though that is not
the primary reason they are used.
Evaluating Tools and Practices
One
basis on which to evaluate the tools or practices one chooses
for an organic operation is whether or not they contribute
to biodiversity — biodiversity being one of the principal
characteristics of a sustainable organic agriculture.
Crop
rotation, cover cropping, farmscaping, companion planting,
and intercropping are outstanding examples of practices
that contribute to biodiversity. They therefore contribute
to the long-term stability and sustainability of the
farm agroecosystem. Composting and manuring likewise contribute
to biodiversity, but since the diversity they promote is
mostly in soil biota, it is rather less obvious to the
casual observer.
On the other end of the spectrum are practices
such as tillage, cultivation, thermal weeding, solarization,
and plastic mulching.
Such tools significantly reduce diversity in the field
and tend to move the system in a less sustainable direction.
This, however, does not necessarily make these practices
bad choices.
Organic farming has often been called natural farming, as it tries to mimic the processes of nature in
producing crops and livestock. However, the analogy goes
only so far, since most agricultural systems are characterized
by a struggle between human and nature, each with a clear
notion of what plants and animals the land ought to support
and in what proportions. The farmer is typically in the position
of "holding back" the natural succession of plant
and animal species through the use of diversity-reducing
tools and practices. The ideal is to bring about an agricultural
system in which the long-term direction emphasizes diversity
and sustainability. Among the best visualizations of this
ideal are those emerging from the Permaculture
movement. |
Balanced Nutrition
Whether or
not it has been customary in the past, organic growers
are encouraged to have periodic soil testing done on their
fields. How the results of a soil test are used, however,
can vary considerably among farmers, depending on their
personal philosophy and management skill.
While there is
certainly a segment of the organic farming community that
has no faith in soil audits, most growers use them as a
means to monitor progress in building their soils, to identify
nutrient deficits, and to guide supplementary fertilization.
While there are many ideas about fertilization guidelines,
there are two schools of thought that dominate.
The first
is commonly known as the sufficiency approach or model. Though
somewhat oversimplified, the following are among its significant
characteristics:
- annual fertilizer additions of P and
K are based in good part on how much the crop is expected
to remove from the soil at harvest
- additional amounts
of P and K are recommended based on keeping the soil nutrient
reserves at a particular level
- lime is added to the
soil based on pH
- little to no attention is paid to
nutrient balance or to the levels of secondary nutrients
Ca and Mg
The second approach is referred to variously
as cation nutrient balancing, the Albrecht
system,
the CEC, or the base saturation approach. It differs
from the sufficiency approach in that fertilizer and
lime recommendations are made based on an idealized ratio
of nutrients in the soil and its capacity to hold those
nutrients against leaching.
Cation nutrient balancing
is more popular among practitioners of organic farming
and sustainable agriculture in general than it is
among conventional growers. However, there is no universal
agreement on which approach is most appropriate for
organic management. |
A wide range of other products —humates, humic
acids, enzymes, catalyst waters, bioactivators, surfactants,
to name a few — are also acceptable in organic crop production.
However, the tradeoff between out-of-pocket cost and efficacy
of such materials is often challenged by conventional and organic
growers alike. Organic growers are encouraged to experiment,
but to do so in a manner that allows the actual results to
be measured.
Biorational Pesticides
While, in principle,
any pesticide use is discouraged
in organic systems, a rather wide range of biorational pesticides
is permitted. The frequency of pesticide use varies considerably
with crop and location. For example, there is virtually no use
of pesticides on organic row crops in the Cornbelt. By contrast,
organic tree fruits in the Midsouth routinely receive heavy applications
of several fungicides and insecticides allowable in organic production.
The
pesticides permitted in organic farming fall predominantly
into several classes.
Minerals: These include sulfur, copper, diatomaceous
earth, and clay-based materials like Surround®.
Botanicals: Botanicals
include common commercial
materials such as rotenone, neem, and pyrethrum.
Less common botanicals include quassia, equisetum, and ryania.
Tobacco products like Black-Leaf 40® and strichnine are
also botanicals but are prohibited in organic production due
to their high toxicity.
Soaps: A number of commercial soap-based
products
are effective as insecticides, herbicides, fungicides,
and algicides. Detergent-based products are not allowed for
crop use in organic production.
Pheromones: Pheromones can be used as a means to confuse and
disrupt pests during their mating cycles, or to draw them into
traps.
Biologicals: One of the fastest-growing areas in pesticide
development, biopesticides present some of the greatest hope
for organic control of highly destructive pests. Among the
most well-known biopesticides are the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) formulations for control of lepidopterous pests and Colorado
potato beetle.
What Can I Use in Organic Crop
Production?
One of the greater difficulties that organic
producers face on a regular basis is determining whether
or not a particular product or material can be used in
organic production. Sad to say, the problems are real,
but some basic clarifications will help. First of all,
all natural or nonsynthetic materials can be assumed to
be acceprable in organic production. There are a few exceptions,
however, which will be explained shortly.
Most organic
producers and prospective producers have heard about the
National List. §§205.600–205.619 of the
National Organic Program Regulations comprise the National
List; §205.601 and §205.602 are those directly
pertinent to crop production. §205.601 includes synthetic
materials that are allowed in organic crop production — for
example, sulfur, insecticidal soap, etc.; §205.602
contains natural, or nonsynthetic, materials that are prohibited — for
example, ash from manure burning, nicotine sulfate, etc.
When considering commercial products, the grower must be
aware of all ingredients
to determine that none are prohibited. If a full disclosure
of ingredients is not found on the label, details should
be obtained from the distributor or manufacturer and kept
in the grower's files. Note that such details must
extend to inert ingredients. When in doubt about the acceptability
of any material or product for certified organic production,
contact your certifier.The NOP National List of Allowed and
Prohibited Substances is available at www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards/ListReg.html.
An important organization to know about
is the Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI). OMRI
is a non-profit organization
that evaluates products for suitability in organic production
and processing. OMRI does not have status as a regulatory
body. However, its decisions with regard to the acceptability
of commercial products are highly respected and accepted
by most certifiers. OMRI Listed products can be purchased
and used with a high degree of confidence. Producers should
be aware, however, that there are many acceptable products
in the marketplace that have not been evaluated by OMRI
and do not carry the OMRI Listed seal. Again, it is important
to contact your certifier to verify whether a particular
product or material can be used. |
Of Seeds, Seedlings, and GMOs
One
of the challenges faced by organic growers is getting suitable
planting stock. Certified production requires that seed
not be treated with pesticides and be organically grown.
Transplants must be purchased from a certified organic
source or otherwise be grown using organic methods. This
presents
some difficulty, as most commercial potting mixes contain
prohibited fertilizers and wetting agents, requiring special
ordering or the added effort of making a homemade mix.
Generally,
planting stock for perennial crops like tree fruits and berries
is available from conventional sources, even if treated with
pesticides. However, no production can be sold as organic
for a minimum of 12 months following transplanting
to an organic field.
In all instances, organic growers are
not permitted to use varieties of crops that have been developed
through genetic engineering
(GE). At first glance, this might seem perplexing. GE crops
promise further means of non-chemical pest control and the
possibility of nutritionally enhanced foods. However, the
organic community is concerned about environmental, economic,
and social impacts from this new technology which, they feel,
have not been adequately studied. This same concern applies
to GE foods. Natural foods consumers — a large segment
of the organic market — do not want them. This was
made abundantly clear to the USDA when its first draft of
the proposed rule, which suggested permitting genetically
modified organisms (GMOs), was released in 1997. The backlash
was so strong that not only GE crop varieties, but all inputs,
such as GMO-derived biopesticides, are prohibited from organic
production.
Unfortunately the GE issue does not resolve itself
so simply for organic farmers. The proliferation of GMOs
in the marketplace
and across the landscape has created a host of new challenges
that have particular implications for organic agriculture:
- Genetic drift onto crops. Pollen drifting from adjacent
fields can contaminate organic crops. Some clients in the
lucrative
European Union market accept 0% GMO contamination; others
accept only very low levels. Pollen from cross-pollinating
crops like corn easily travels hundreds of yards and may
be carried for miles under the right conditions. No reasonable
amount of non-crop buffer can prevent contamination except
in highly isolated locations.
- Genetic drift onto
soils. Concerns have been expressed over the persistence
of GE pollen in soils. Should contaminated
soils be decertified?
- Non-labeled products. Should
soybean, cottonseed, and corn gluten meals be prohibited
as fertilizers, since these may come from GE varieties? Should
pesticidal use of vegetable oils be prohibited?
- Pest
control problems. The rapid proliferation of corn, cotton,
and other crops featuring the Bt gene from Bacillus
thuringiensis is likely to accelerate the development of resistance to
this natural pesticide. Organic growers may lose one of their
most useful pest management tools.
- Domination of
the food system. In the late 1990s, the public was made
aware of two specific developments of agricultural
biotechnology dubbed the terminator and traitor technologies.
Terminator technology is the genetic altering of seed so
that the subsequent generation will not germinate. This
prevents farmers from saving a portion of the harvested
crop to replant the next year — a traditional practice
among farmers worldwide. Traitor or suicide technology
is the genetic altering of seed so that it will fail to
germinate or mature unless a proprietary chemical is applied.(36)
Such technologies are authoritarian and advance the centralization
and industrialization of the food system. Organic farmers
perceive additional challenges from genetic drift impacts
and difficulty in finding non-GE seed in the marketplace.(37)
|
Foliar Fertilization
Foliar fertilization or feeding entails
the application — via spraying — of nutrients to
plant leaves and stems and their absorption at those sites. It
is not specifically an organic practice, though it is commonly
used by many organic growers. The fertilizer materials used are
typically soluble fish- and seaweed-based products, naturally
chelated nutrients, humic acid extracts, and teas made from plants,
dried blood, manure, guano, or compost.
At first glance, the use of foliar
feeding appears contradictory to the organic notion that one
feeds the soil to feed the plant. Organic growers rationalize
the use of this approach on two points.
- Foliar feeding is strictly
supplemental fertilization;
it is not used as a substitute for traditional soil building
practices.
- Foliar fertilization is understood to increase
the production of root exudates, which stimulates biological
activity in the rhizosphere (soil area adjacent to plant roots).
The soil bio-life gets considerable benefit in this indirect
way from foliar feeding.
Esoteric Practices
There are a number
of farming and gardening practices based on belief in a non-physical
world closely aligned with our physical reality. Those who
use these practices believe that conditions in this unseen
realm influence, or even dictate, what happens on a material
level. They take pains to understand these influences and adjust
their farm activities. In some instances, they act to influence
events. Obviously, these practices are rooted more deeply in
metaphysics than in the conventional sciences.
The most well-known
of these esoteric practices is the scheduling of planting or
other field operations
according to lunar or other astrological signs. Dowsing and
other forms of divining may also be used to guide scheduling,
fertilizer selection, and other facets of farming. The use
of potentized preparations, as done in Biodynamic™ farming,
is also a metaphysical practice.(35) Radionics, energy
balancing towers, "medicine" wheels, prayer — these
are further examples of practices used by some farmers to bring
a tangible spiritual element into their farm operation.
Esoteric
practices like these (there are many others) are not inherently
part of organic agriculture. In all likelihood, only a small-to-modest
minority practice
them or believe in their efficacy. Still, esoteric practices
are sometimes associated with organic agriculture, and it is
almost a given that practitioners
of "energetic agriculture" are either certified
organic or actively pursue a sustainable form of agriculture.
The rationale for this association of organic with the esoteric
is not difficult to understand. Most metaphysical practices
are founded on a world-view similar to that of ecology, in
which everything is related to everything else. The difference
is that ecology considers this interrelationship only on a
hard physical level; metaphysics perceives it also on a non-physical
level. This belief tends to cast humankind as part of nature,
not merely as an inhabitant. This perspective would tend to
make one more concerned about the environment and, therefore,
more readily drawn to organics as a philosophy and pragmatic
farming approach. To put it in a nutshell, it is natural for
the metaphysically-inclined to choose organics; it is far less
likely, however, that the average organic farmer is drawn to
metaphysical practices.
A further factor plays into the association between esoteric
farming practices and organics. It relates to the fact that
organic agriculture has, for many years, been marginalized
and treated as pseudoscience
by the mainstream — an experience shared by practitioners
of metaphysical arts. It is not surprising
for underdogs to seek common ground.
Buffers and Barriers
Field buffers are strips of sod or other permanent vegetation
at the edge of or surrounding crop fields. There is considerable
interest in both conventional
and alternative agriculture in these buffers,
since they assist in reducing soil erosion and improving water
quality. If managed properly, some buffers also serve as
beneficial insect habitat.
In certified organic production, however, field buffers have
an added purpose in reducing crop contamination from chemicals
used on adjacent land. Most agencies require a minimum 25-foot
buffer along "uncontrolled" borders
where there is a hazard of chemical use. Wider borders may be
required where hazards are great — for instance,
where adjacent farms have synthetic pesticides
applied by aircraft.
Organic Farming: Niche Market
or Viable Alternative?
The pioneers of organic farming considered
organics the preferred direction for the whole of agriculture
to take. It is likely that most contemporary proponents
still hold that view. While recent growth in the organic
industry is definitely encouraging, much of the impetus
is tied to its growth as a niche market, not as a serious
shift in the direction of mainstream
agriculture. Unfortunately, a likely reason for the newfound "tolerance" of
organic agriculture in many land grant universities and other
formerly hostile environs is its perception as a niche market
opportunity only. As such, it is not a serious threat to
the status quo.
Is it practical and responsible to promote
organic agriculture as the dominant approach to farming in
the future? While some are quick to answer, "Yes!",
most are buffaloed by the nagging question, "Can organic
agriculture feed the world?" Questions about the productivity
and the prospects of widespread starvation have long been
an effective tactic for stonewalling
serious discussion of organics. While it is not the purpose
of this publication to settle such a compelling issue, there
are a few points that can and should be made regarding the "starving
billions" scenario.
- Critics warn that, were organic
farming to be adopted on a wider scale, per-acre agricultural
productivity would decline
sharply; that meeting food needs would necessitate the
plowing of even more erodible hillsides and the draining
of more wetlands. Such scenarios are often based on pre-chemical
era yield data that ignore the advancements of modern organic
farming. Contemporary research on organic systems — as
limited as it is — indicates that the per-acre productivity
of organic and conventional systems is not vastly different.(39)
Other scenarios are sometimes based on the perceived need
for vast quantities of grain — particularly corn.(40)
Since overproduction of grain has led to prices below costs
of production for several years, this is a questionable basis
for argument. It also ignores the fact that most of the grain
produced is fed to livestock and that many livestock species
can eat forage instead. Ruminant livestock — cattle
and sheep especially — are designed by nature to thrive
on forage and can even be finished for market on pasture.
- The
paucity of good research on the productivity of organic systems
also spotlights the lack of practical research for organic
producers. That organic farms are as productive as they appear
to be is remarkable in light of minimal research and extension
support for many decades. It has often been argued that,
had comparable resources been put into organic research,
its widespread feasibility would be unquestionable. This
assertion is well-supported by the development, in recent
years, of a number of alternative, organically acceptable
pesticides, that are certain to expand organic production
of many crops in regions where it had previously been near
impossible on a commercial basis.
- Increasing agricultural
production alone does not alleviate hunger. The amount
of grain produced in the world in 1999 could, by itself,
sustain 8 billion people – 2 billion more than
our current population.(39) Total food
production is estimated to provide each human being with
at least 3500 calories per day.(41)
The issue of hunger, it appears, is not so much a lack
of food, but lack of entitlement to food. People
are shocked to learn that while many Bangladeshees starved
during the 1974 floods, roughly 4 million tons of rice
produced in that country were stacked in warehouses for
want of buyers. The people were simply too poor to buy
it.(42) They are surprised to learn that
Ireland exported grain during the Irish potato famine while
1 million of its citizens died and even more emigrated;
that India regularly exports food and animal feed despite
an estimated 200 million in starvation.(39)
Those lacking the ready cash to buy food or the resources
to produce it themselves seem destined for hunger no matter
what miracles agricultural technology provides. The world's
nations will need to deal with issues of equity and democracy
first, if hunger is ever to be effectively addressed.
- No agriculture
can continue to feed a growing population if it depletes
or fouls its resource base. The path undertaken
by conventional agriculture is ultimately a dead end in
this regard, though there is an almost mystical faith that
genetic engineering and other complex technologies will
always triumph. Agriculture needs to be sustainable. Therefore,
those who promote organic agriculture as a true alternative
are well advised to do their part in ensuring that certification
and regulation does not create a "compliance agriculture" in
which sustainability becomes little more than an afterthought.
|
Record Keeping
Few would consider record keeping
as a tool for organic crop production. However, the documentation
of how and where a crop was raised, what products were applied
and when, which bin or cooler it was stored in, is of critical
importance to establishing the integrity of the product. If
the farmer cannot provide reasonable documentation that his
or her crop was organically grown, that it has not been contaminated
with chemicals, and that it has not commingled with a similar
conventional
product, then certification may well be denied.
Other Tools
and Practices
As stated at the outset, the tools and practices
described in detail here are by no means an exhaustive
listing of organic options. Among those not discussed but
requiring mention are timing of planting and field operations
to avoid pests or disrupt
their life cycles, various forms of pest traps, physical barriers
to pests, and increasing plant populations to enhance crop-weed
competition.
Back to top
Summing Up
While there have been varying notions of organic farming
over the years, the growth of the industry and the introduction
of standards and certification
have led to a clearer definition in recent years. That definition
describes organics as a viable agriculture,
based on sound farming practices, that does not include synthetic
chemicals.
Certified organic agriculture can be further characterized
by a set of principles that include biodiversity,
integration, sustainability, natural plant nutrition, natural
pest management, and integrity. These principles are expressed
through the implementation
of both traditional and cutting-edge farm practices.
As the organic
industry continues to grow and evolve, it faces many challenges,
including the consequences of its own success. Economic opportunities
invite new players into the marketplace who may have little interest
in sustainability or the positive social benefits many have come
to associate
with organics. This matter was touched on by rural socialogist
Dr. William Heffernan. Dr. Heffernan
has gained considerable attention in recent years for his insightful
analyses of the causes and social consequences of the increased
concentration and corporate control of the U.S. food system.
In an interview published in Acres USA (38), he expressed
the following regarding organic farming.
We are beginning to realize
that up to this point we believed that organic was synonymous
with family farms and we are finding out that is changing.
In fact, the organic is going to continue to grow. That doesn't
mean that it is going to support family farms the way it
has in the past. With the whole organic movement, we assumed
that the social would go along with the environmental movement,
and what we are finding out is no, that is not necessarily
true, and even what they do environmentally is questionable.
Whether
certified organic farming will survive its own success and
continue as a socially and environmentally
responsible alternative, or merely become a parallel production
system based on minimal compliance to standards, remains to
be seen.
Back to top
An Attra Guide To Selected Resources
A Supplement to Organic Crop Production
Oveview
History & Philosophy of Organic Agriculture
Many of the foundational books on organic farming are out of
print, but should not be too difficult to locate through interlibrary
loan or a good used bookstore. A few resources currently available
are:
- The Soil and Health Library at http://soilandhealth.org
features many old titles online. Among them are Albert Howard's
An Agricultural Testament and Soil and Health,
Eve Balfour's Toward a Sustainable Agriculture – The
Living Soil, and Newman Turner's Fertility Farming.
- Copies of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring,
Louis Bromfield's Pleasant Valley, and William
Albrecht's bound papers are available from the Acres USA
Bookshelf, P.O. Box 91299, Austin, TX 78709 (800) 355-5315, (512)
892–4400, FAX: (512) 892–4448, www.acresusa.com.
Several
contemporary books on organic agriculture and organic soil
management that deserve mention include the following:
- Organic
Farming by Nicholas Lampkin.
701 p. A highly comprehensive book on organics published
in England.
- Successful Small-Scale Farming by
Karl Schwenke. 134 p. A low-capital approach to organic
farming.
- The New Organic Grower by Eliot Coleman.
One of the best books available on intensive organic
market gardening.
- How To Grow More Vegetables by
John Jeavons. 201 p. The classic book on biointensive
mini-farming.
- Edaphos by Paul
Sachs. 197 p. Does an excellent job of creating
a unified whole out of the various theories and
methods of ecological growing.
The above books are all available
from Acres USA Bookshelf, P.O. Box 91299, Austin, TX 78709 (800)
355-5315 ,
(512) 892–4400, FAX: (512) 892–4448, www.acresusa.com.
Catalog available.
- The Soul of Soil by Grace Gershuny & Joseph
Smillie. 174 p. A very good basic book on understanding
soils and fertility from an organic perspective. Available
for $16.95 plus $6.00 s&h from : Chelsea Green publishing,
c/o Resolution, Inc., PO Box 2284, South Burlington, VT 05407,
(800) 639–4099, www.chelseagreen.com.
- Building Soils for Better Crops by Fred Magdof
and Harold van Es. 240 p. Practical information on soil management
to boost fertility and yields while reducing environmental impacts
and pest pressures. Available for $19.95 plus $3.95 s&h from:
Sustainable Agriculture Publications, 210 Hills Bldg., U. of
Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405-0082, (802) 656–0484, www.sare.org/publications/.
National Organic Program
The National Organic Program (NOP) was created to implement
the Organic Foods production Act of 1990, which is the over-arching
legislation behind the federal standards. The NOP Website is
the place to view the Regulations, to view all Accredited Certifying
Agents, and to monitor the progress and recommendations of the
National Organic Standards Board. The NOP website is http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/indexNet.htm.
ATTRA publications and Materials of Particular Value
to Organic Producers
- Organic Farm Certification and the National Organic
Program. Our basic guide to the organic certification
process. Provides a brief history of organic certification,
steps in the certification process, how to evaluate a certifier,
and examples of how feeds are assessed.
- Documentation
Forms. These forms are tools
for documenting practices, inputs, and activities that demonstrate
compliance with the National Organic Standard. They are intended
to make recording easy and should be shown to the inspector during
annual inspections. There are four separate packages: "Field
Crops," "Livestock," "Orchard,
Vineyard, & Berry
Crop," and "Organic Market Farming Forms."
- National
Organic Program Compliance Checklist for Producers. A tool
to assist farmers, ranchers, inspectors, and certifiers in assessing
compliance with the National Organic Standard. The document is
reformulations of the Regulations into "yes" and "no" questions
and is organized to reflect the content requirements of the Organic
System Plan.
- Opportunities in Agriculture —Transitioning
to Organic Production . ATTRA has a special relationship
with the Sustainable Agriculture Network (SAN) and distributes
many of their publications. We are especially pleased to
provide this publication on transitioning to organic production.
- Organic
Crops and Livestock Workbooks. NCAT's "Organic
Crops Workbook" and "Organic
Livestock Workbook" are
the products of two years of collaborative effort with many leaders
from the organic community. Both publications are written from
the perspective of organic inspectors and give the user a clear
picture of all the details that must be considered in developing
a system that is compliant with the National Organic Standard.
The reader will get an excellent picture of the range of practices
and inputs allowed and prohibited. Guidelines for selecting the
most sustainable options are provided. Unresolved issues are
highlighted and discussed. The Workbooks are excellent tools
for anyone making the transition from a convention operation.
- Creating
and Organic Production and Handling System Plan. Contains
template forms that are in common use by U.S. certifiers. Provides
prospective organic producers with an insight into the kinds
of information they will need to provide when making application
for certification.
- Biodynamic Farming & Compost
Preparation.
Provides details on a unique approach to organic production.
- Manures
for Organic Crop Production. Addresses
the problems and challenges of raw and composted manure. Also
deals with guano.
- Holistic Management. Outlines
a decision making framework that creates a link between sound
economics and the environment. Such a framework is invaluable
to farmers evaluating organic agriculture as an option, and
to organic farmers trying to select the best tools, practices,
and marketing strategies for their operation.
- Overview
of Cover Crops & Green Manures.
A guide to selecting and using cover crops and green manures,
which are among the most useful tools for bringing an operation
into organic production.
- Suppliers of Seed for
Certified Organic Production.
Organic growers must use organic seed if commercially available.
ATTRA has more than 240 publications on organic and sustainable
agriculture topics, including rotational grazing, multispecies
grazing, intercropping, composting, sustainable soil management,
weed control, and agroforestry—topics that typically interest
organic producers and which they find very useful. Descriptions
of these materials can be found in the ATTRA
Publications Catalogue, also available free of charge
by calling 1-800-346-9140
References
- If current growth rates continue, organic production will
constitute 10% of American agriculture by 2010. Ref: Cummins,
Ronnie. 2000. Victory for organic consumers and farmers: USDA
surrenders. Acres USA . May. p. 7.
- This definition was
passed by the NOSB at its April 1995 meeting in Orlando, Florida. Ref: Organic
Trade Association Web site. No date. www.northcoast.com/~startrak/ota/legislat.htm.
- Lockeretz,
William, Georgia Shearer, and Daniel Kohl. 1981. Organic farming
in the Corn Belt. Science. Vol. 211, No. 6. February.
p. 540—547.
- Drinkwater, L.E., P. Wagoner, and M. Sarrantonio.
1998. Legume-based cropping systems have reduced carbon and nitrogen
losses. Nature. Vol. 396, No. 19. November. p. 262—264.
- Anon.
1998. If you care about organic food…act now!
Organic Gardening. March. p. 22—25.
- Howard, Albert.
1943. An Agricultural Testament. Oxford University Press, London.
253 p.
- Howard, Albert. 1947. The Soil and Health. Schocken
Books, New York . 307 p.
- Rodale, J.I. 1945. Paydirt: Farming & Gardening
with Composts. Devin-Adair Co., New York. 242 p.
- Carson,
Rachel. 1962. Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin
Co., Boston , MA . 400 p.
- The low quality and productivity
of organic agriculture
was widely accepted as fact, even by many who had no particular "bone
to pick." To illustrate, an otherwise well-written educational
guide developed by Pennsylvania State University contained the
following language in its section on tree fruits: "Markets
for tree fruits are flexible, so an operator may sell the
produce on a less demanding market, if adequate care was not
given to an orchard. If the operator neglected to spray or fertilize
the orchard, the fruit may be marketed as organic fruit."Ref: Lesson
#7. In: Brockett, John. c. 1978. Farm Management for
Part-Time Farmers and Small Farmers. Pennsylvania State University
, University Park , PA.
- USDA Study Team on Organic Farming.
1980. Report and Recommendations on Organic Farming. US Gov't
Printing Office 1980-0-310-944/96.
USDA, Beltsville , MD. July. 94 p.
- The term "eco-agriculture" first
appeared as part of the subtitle for Acres USA's October
1971 issue. (It had just begun publication the previous
June.) The editor wrote that "eco" could stand for
economic as well as ecological; that "a farm practice cannot
be economical in the long run unless it is also ecological." Ref: Walters,
Charles Jr. 1971. Acres, USA growing up. Acres USA . October.
p. 3.
- Klepper, R. et al. 1977. Economic performance
and energy intensiveness on organic and conventional farms in
the Corn Belt: a preliminary comparison. American Journal of
Agricultural Economics. Vol. 59, No. 1. February. p. 1 — 12.
- American
Society of Agronomy (ASA), Crop Science Society of America (CSSA),
and Soil Science Society of America (SSSA). 1984. Organic Farming:
Current Technology and Its Role in
a Sustainable Agriculture. ASA Special Publication No. 46.
ASA, CSSA, & SSSA, Madison , WI . 192 p.
- Pimental, D.,
and L. Levitan. 1986. Pesticides: Amounts
applied and amounts reaching pests. BioScience. Vol. 36. p.
86 — 91.
- Hainsworth, P.H. 1976. Agriculture: The Only
Right Approach. Bargyla & Gylver Rateaver, Pauma Valley ,
CA . p. 27.
- Engelken, Ralph, and Rita Engelken. 1981. The
Art of Natural Farming & Gardening. Barrington Hall Press,
Greeley , IA. 208 p.
- Richards, Keith. 1997. Improving Soils,
Increasing Profits
Makes Farming Fun. A Planting Your Farm's Future publication.
National Center for Appropriate Technology, Fayetteville
, AR. September. 2 p.
- Coleman, Eliot. 1989. The New Organic
Grower. Chelsea Green, Chelsea , VT. p. 67 — 68.
- Kogelschatz, Ginger. 2000. Personal communication.
July 17.
- Ogden, Shepherd. 1992. Step By Step Organic
Vegetable Gardening. HarperCollins Publishers, New York , NY
. p. 110 — 111.
- Stossel, John. 2000. How good
is organic food? ABC News 20/20. February 4. http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_000204_stossel_organic_feature.html
(inactive).
- The
estimate of manure generated is from Silverstein, Ken. 1999.
Meat factories. Sierra. January — February. 10
p. The estimate of organic crop acreage is from Anon.
1999. Certified organic farmland expands in United States.
Organic Trends. Early Winter. p. 1.
- Kirschenmann, Fred.
2000. The Hijacking of Organic Agriculture. . . and how USDA
is facilitating the theft. US Farm Crisis. April 6.Vegetable-based
composts are addressed in considerable detail in Biointensive
Mini-Farming as promoted by John Jeavons and others. See Jeavons,
J., and B. Bruneau. 1989. Grow Your Manure For Free. Ecology
Action, Willits , CA . 32 p. and Griffin,
J.M., L. Gaudreau, and J. Jeavons. 1984. Growing and Gathering
Your Own Fertilizers. Ecology Action, Willits , CA . 140
p.
Contact: Bountiful Gardens , 18001
Shafer Ranch Rd. , Willits , CA for
current price and availability.
- Watkins, Gordon. 2000. Personal
communication. May
22.
- Abdul-Baki, Aref A., and John R. Teasdale. 1997. Sustainable
Production of Fresh-Market Tomatoes and Other Summer Vegetables
With Organic Mulches. Farmers' Bulletin No. 2279 (Rev.).
U.S. Department of Agriculture — Agricultural Research
Service, Beltsville , MD. 23 p.
- Heacox, Lisa. 1998. Broccoli
into beans. American Vegetable Grower. February.
p. 24, 26, 27.
- Weiss, Christine Louise. 1999. Making no-till
work. Acres USA . February. p. 1, 8 — 11.
- Creve,
Patrick. c. 1999. The synergistic garden, part
1. Permaculture Magazine. No. 19. p. 13 — 14.
- Hazelip,
Emilia. c. 2000. The synergistic garden, part 2. Permaculture
Magazine. No. 20. p. 12 — 14.
- Hazelip, Emilia. c.
2000. The synergistic garden, part 3. Permaculture Magazine.
No. 22. p. 8 — 10.
- Cain, Mark. 1999. No-till system
works for this farm. Growing for Market. November. p. 12 — 13.
- Raloff,
Janet. 1999. Plastic mulch's dirty secrets.
Science News. September 25. p. 207.
- Biodynamics™ is
an organic farming and garden system that evolved from the philosophy
of Anthroposophy.
Anthroposophy is similar in many respects to Theosophy and
takes a very metaphysical view of nature. The literature on Biodynamics™ is extremely well grounded in the practical aspects of organic
farming as detailed in this document. However, it is also replete
with discussions on lunar and astrological scheduling, communication
with nature intelligences (devas, nature spirits, etc.),
and the use of special potencies or preparations, that are derived
by what might be called alchemical means.
- Anon.
1999. Sterile seeds: new technologies threaten
to end seed saving as we know it. Carolina Farm Stewardship Association
Newsletter. March — April. p. 5.
- In late 1999 Monsanto
announced plans to abandon its attempt to commercialize terminator
technology. There is, however, considerable skepticism that such
technologies will be readily set aside. Ref: Williams,
Greg and Pat Williams. 1999. A partial shutdown of terminator
technology, but… HortIdeas. December. p. 135.
- Anon.
2000. Big money agriculture (an interview with
William D. Heffernan). Acres USA . August. p. 28 — 31.
- Meadows, Donella. 2000. Our food, our
future. Organic Gardening.
September — October. p. 53 — 59. An example
of this is found in the publication Organic
and Conventional Farming Compared, published in 1980,
by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. There
is sound reasoning behind the notion that total grain production
would drop under a predominantly organic agriculture. While
organic growers may produce competitive per-acre yields,
the proportion of acreage in corn is lower on organic farms,
to allow for nitrogen-fixing forage legumes in rotation.
- Anon.
2000. Facts on hunger and poverty. The Wooden Bell . (Catholic
Relief Services) March — April. p. 7.
- Lappe, Frances
Moore, and Joseph Collins. 1977. Food First: Beyond the Myth
of Scarcity. Houghton Mifflin, Co.
Boston, MA. p. 19.
- Anon. 2000. Facts on hunger and poverty. The Wooden
Bell. (Catholic Relief Services) March−April. p. 7.
- Lappe, Frances
Moore, and Joseph Collins. 1977. Food First: Beyond the Myth
of Scarcity. Houghton Mifflin, Co. Boston, MA. p. 19.
By George Kuepper and Lance Gegner
NCAT Agriculture Specialists
August 2004
© NCAT 2004
Edited by Paul Williams
Formatted by John Webb
IP170/ Slot 44
Version #081104
Back to top |