A Farm for the Future BBC2

Prono 007 · Post by **Prono 007** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:01

OK here's a few questions that concern me about the soil.

1. If 95% of the UK's arable land is degraded where are we going to get the compost to refertilise all that soil from?

2. And given taking into account possible limits from the above question how long would it take to do?

3. When will this project get underway? Does anyone have any faith that the government are going to plan such a transition before a food crisis hits?

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:09

Prono 007 wrote:OK here's a few questions that concern me about the soil.

1. If 95% of the UK's arable land is degraded where are we going to get the compost to refertilise all that soil from?

That's an easy one. Shit and piss.

Prono 007 wrote:2. And given taking into account possible limits from the above question how long would it take to do?

Longer than it need do, largely through cultural inhibition.

Prono 007 wrote:3. When will this project get underway?

Possibly never.

Prono 007 wrote:Does anyone have any faith that the government are going to plan such a transition before a food crisis hits?

No.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:13

dominicj wrote:Surely to find a good grass mix for your land, you should throw a variety of grass seeds on it and see whats still there in a few years?

Unfortunately, that approach just leads to thistles.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:13

We wont use Compost.
Soil is "degraded" when certain, I'm trying to think of the right word, elements or elemental compounds are taken from the soil by plants, and the plants are then taken away and not brought back.
Iron leeched fromthe soil by a spinach plant isnt destroyed, its just been moved.
We just have to go and find it. We already know where it is, its been dumped in the sea and eaten up by the kelp, so, we could harvest the kelp, compost that, and then stop dumping poo in the sea.

No idea how long it'll take, or if the government would even allow it.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:16

deleted

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:16

I've never heard of a soil that is short of iron.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 25 Feb 2009, 13:20

I've never heard of a soil that is short of iron.

It was the only thing I could think of.
Spinach is high in iron, I think.
No idea what lettuce is high in

contadino · Post by **contadino** » 25 Feb 2009, 14:15

DominicJ wrote:We wont use Compost.
Soil is "degraded" when certain, I'm trying to think of the right word, elements or elemental compounds are taken from the soil by plants, and the plants are then taken away and not brought back.
Iron leeched fromthe soil by a spinach plant isnt destroyed, its just been moved.
We just have to go and find it. We already know where it is, its been dumped in the sea and eaten up by the kelp, so, we could harvest the kelp, compost that, and then stop dumping poo in the sea.

No idea how long it'll take, or if the government would even allow it.

No. You're wrong on so many levels it's scary.

The major reason soil dies is because all the microorganisms/worms/etc living in it are killed - usually by chemicals. Dead soil can be rich in say, calcium due to underlying rock, but it'll still erode easily, won't hold water, and will lack the other necessary minerals on which plants depend.

goslow · Post by **goslow** » 25 Feb 2009, 14:21

DominicJ wrote:
I've never heard of a soil that is short of iron.
It was the only thing I could think of.
Spinach is high in iron, I think.
No idea what lettuce is high in

Try googling/wikipeding "nutrient cycling" mate, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium are most important as plant macronutrients as well as micronutrients like iron. How we work with nature to improve soil nutrients rather than relying on finite chemical fertilisers is the main issue.

contadino · Post by **contadino** » 25 Feb 2009, 14:22

Prono 007 wrote:OK here's a few questions that concern me about the soil.

1. If 95% of the UK's arable land is degraded where are we going to get the compost to refertilise all that soil from?

2. And given taking into account possible limits from the above question how long would it take to do?

3. When will this project get underway? Does anyone have any faith that the government are going to plan such a transition before a food crisis hits?

The poo produced by livestock and people is fundamental for maintaining soil. This is where the whole "save agriculture by becoming a vegan" falls down - I keep animals as much for their poo product as for their other products. With no animals it would take many, many years to improve the terrible soil I had when I bought my place.

My introducing manure to the soil, the results can be seen within the first year.

Why should governments be telling farmers how to farm? It's got nothing to do with them.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 25 Feb 2009, 14:27

No. You're wrong on so many levels it's scary.

Thats quite a strong opening line when we're using terms as specific as "degraded"

The major reason soil dies is because all the microorganisms/worms/etc living in it are killed

See I could just as easily point out that soil is not alive, and therefore you're so wrong its scary.

usually by chemicals.

So you dont believe in mineral depletion?
If you have a portion of soil grow onions, remove the onions, add NPK, grow some more onions, remove the onions, add NPK again ect
The plants grown in the soil wont degrade nutritionaly?

and will lack the other necessary minerals on which plants depend.

"Soil is "degraded" when certain, I'm trying to think of the right word, elements or elemental compounds are taken from the soil by plants, and the plants are then taken away and not brought back."

NPK and round up dont destroy magnesium, they allow farmers to remove it and still grow what appear to be healthy, but nutritionaly limited, crops.

Or so the organic farming website I read told me, it seemed to make sense, at least in its diagnosis of the problem.

contadino · Post by **contadino** » 25 Feb 2009, 15:11

DominicJ wrote:NPK and round up dont destroy magnesium, they allow farmers to remove it and still grow what appear to be healthy, but nutritionaly limited, crops.

Well, it seems you don't know your fertiliser from your herbicide.

And so long as you've found a website that says you're right, you must be right.

As usual, you're not letting your ignorance and lack of experience get in the way of a good argument, but I can't be bothered this time. It's freezing cold, I have broken ribs, and I'm off to sit in front of the stove with a glass of wine.

Bandidoz · Post by **Bandidoz** » 25 Feb 2009, 15:20

DominicJ wrote:If you have a portion of soil grow onions, remove the onions, add NPK, grow some more onions, remove the onions, add NPK again ect
The plants grown in the soil wont degrade nutritionaly?

That's essentially how industrial agriculture works. However, soil needs more than just NPK, there are numerous trace elements that become gradually depleted if a sensible crop rotation isn't performed. So the yield gradually diminishes.

Try this book for more details.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 25 Feb 2009, 15:25

Contadino
A question was asked
"1. If 95% of the UK's arable land is degraded where are we going to get the compost to refertilise all that soil from?"

I answered it.
What does herbicide have to do with anything?

Privide proof Im ignorant, everyone else seems to have understood my comment and broadly agreed with it.

re · Post by re » 25 Feb 2009, 15:39

DominicJ wrote: Privide proof Im ignorant

two typos says it all.