Another interesting Roundup study...

[Glutton4...]

Educate. Educate. Educate...

[Darwin.]

I used roundup in the past on my driveway, at the base of my beech hedge and at the base of trees, though not the fruit trees. When I was rotovating an area for spuds and veg last year the lad in the garden centre told me to spray the area with roundup a few weeks beforehand. I didn't take his advice. I have no intention of using it around my trees, hedge or anywhere else this year or ever again.

[zazen999]

If there were no pesticides, and we weren't killing off natural predators, would there be a need for pesticides?

[Leif]

If there were no pesticides, and we weren't killing off natural predators, would there be a need for pesticides?

Yes. We grow plants in very artificial conditions, as monocultures which encourages pests, with artificial fertilisers, in large fields with few hedges and few wildflowers. We do this because we want fruit and veg at 'affordable' prices. A lot of people cannot afford to buy organic crops. And in any case, which is worse, a non organic crop grown in a Lincolnshire field, or an organic crop grown in Argentina and shipped to the UK? The Islington intellectual may prefer the 'naturally grown' crop, but it might be no more greener, or it might even be worse.

The home grower can mix crops and keep areas for 'weeds' to encourage natural predators. And they can make lots of compost, or buy compost, to avoid having to use artificial fertilisers. I've discovered a free source of used hops, I get cuttings from a hedge, grass cuttings, and urine as a compost accelerator. And I have a reasonable sized garden, unlike most people, with space for fruit and veg.

[Two_Sheds]

A lot of people cannot afford to buy organic crops.

Like me.
That's why I grow them.

[VirginVegGrower]

Yes. We grow plants in very artificial conditions, as monocultures which encourages pests, with artificial fertilisers, in large fields with few hedges and few wildflowers. We do this because we want fruit and veg at 'affordable' prices. A lot of people cannot afford to buy organic crops. And in any case, which is worse, a non organic crop grown in a Lincolnshire field, or an organic crop grown in Argentina and shipped to the UK? The Islington intellectual may prefer the 'naturally grown' crop, but it might be no more greener, or it might even be worse.

The home grower can mix crops and keep areas for 'weeds' to encourage natural predators. And they can make lots of compost, or buy compost, to avoid having to use artificial fertilisers. I've discovered a free source of used hops, I get cuttings from a hedge, grass cuttings, and urine as a compost accelerator. And I have a reasonable sized garden, unlike most people, with space for fruit and veg.

Crikey talk about sweeping generalisations abound.
I buy organic if I don't have it on the plot.
I am not living in Islington but my ancestors did.
I am not rolling in money but they may have been. I will flog myself later for their transgressions.
My organic veg comes from the local farm shop, three villages away because the supermarkets have killed off anything closer. This also supports my buy British buy seasonal ethos.
I do not mind tatty imperfect veg, which organic veg tends to be.
I care about a much bigger picture THE PLANET.

[Leif]

Crikey talk about sweeping generalisations abound.
I buy organic if I don't have it on the plot.
I am not living in Islington but my ancestors did.
I am not rolling in money but they may have been. I will flog myself later for their transgressions.
My organic veg comes from the local farm shop, three villages away because the supermarkets have killed off anything closer. This also supports my buy British buy seasonal ethos.
I do not mind tatty imperfect veg, which organic veg tends to be.
I care about a much bigger picture THE PLANET.

Care to explain what you thought were sweeping generalisations, given your aggressive tone?

[Alison]

Good points VVG, especially re farm shops, if you have a good one near you then they're fab. As you say the veggies may not look as pretty but should taste good. I personally think a lot of people are put off by what they think is a lack of choice due to seasonal availability although us growers are more in tune with this than some.

[Leif]

Like me.
That's why I grow them.

Very sensible. But not everyone has the time, or access to land. Apparently 5% of UK fruit and veg is homegrown.

[Two_Sheds]

not everyone has the time, or access to land. .

So we need more allotments, not more Monsanto ?


I'm not interested in baiting you, Leif : I'm genuinely interested in the debate, but I am in favour of organic methods, having used them now for 16 years in growing my own food.

A few titbits from: Can Britain Feed Itself? | The Land Magazine

"In 1975, the Scottish ecologist Kenneth Mellanby wrote a short book called Can Britain Feed Itself? His answer was yes, if we eat less meat"


"the Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania has grown cash crops continuously for 20 years on the same land, fertilised only by winter cover crops and soya beans" (ie, no synthetic fertilisers)


Then 2 of my favourite gardeners, Masanobu Fukuoka, who "did not plow his fields, used no agricultural chemicals or prepared fertilizers, ... and yet his yields equaled or surpassed the most productive farms in Japan."


and Sepp Holzer

[VirginVegGrower]

Care to explain what you thought were sweeping generalisations, given your aggressive tone?

Aggressive tone? Mmmmmm.

[Leif]

Aggressive tone? Mmmmmm.

It would help if you said what you meant rather than being cryptic. That comment applies to your last two posts in this thread.

[bearded bloke]

So we need more allotments, not more Monsanto ?



A few titbits from: Can Britain Feed Itself? | The Land Magazine

"In 1975, the Scottish ecologist Kenneth Mellanby wrote a short book called Can Britain Feed Itself? His answer was yes, if we eat less meat"

Another titbit from the same article ...............

Mellanby’s calculations are for so-called “conventional” agriculture using nitrogen fertilizers and other chemicals, which makes his task much easier; but he does mention the potential of organic agriculture and concludes that, although less productive than conventional agriculture, it could still probably feed the country using an extra 33 per cent of the land.

[Leif]

So we need more allotments, not more Monsanto ?


I'm not interested in baiting you, Leif : I'm genuinely interested in the debate, but I am in favour of organic methods, having used them now for 16 years in growing my own food.

A few titbits from: Can Britain Feed Itself? | The Land Magazine

"In 1975, the Scottish ecologist Kenneth Mellanby wrote a short book called Can Britain Feed Itself? His answer was yes, if we eat less meat"


"the Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania has grown cash crops continuously for 20 years on the same land, fertilised only by winter cover crops and soya beans" (ie, no synthetic fertilisers)


Then 2 of my favourite gardeners, Masanobu Fukuoka, who "did not plow his fields, used no agricultural chemicals or prepared fertilizers, ... and yet his yields equaled or surpassed the most productive farms in Japan."


and Sepp Holzer

That first sentence is a bit too Daily Mail for me i.e. making a rather black and white statement that few people would disagree with.

It is an interesting point as to whether or not we need more allotments. I suppose few people would argue with that suggestion, although for many city dwellers it would mean quite a long drive to get to one, so it would not be feasible. When I said many people do not have the time to look after an allotment, I was thinking of my late mother when she was struggling to bring up a child on her own, on a nurse's salary, with a big mortgage. We were so poor that in Winter you could see your breath indoors. These days the young struggle to buy their own home, and many rent a small flat. Where would we get accessible allotments from? Farm land is now very expensive, and I would not condone using unfarmed land, which is usually very good for wildlife. But, growing ones own food must surely mean good exercise, and a better diet. My suspicion is that people in rural and semi-rural areas do grow a lot, as I am hoping to.

Another issue is food education. I am amazed when people buy a tin of tomato sauce for pasta. What? It takes minutes to whizz up a tin of tomatoes, add oil, pepper, salt, chilli, and simmer for 10 minutes. And scone mixes too! Eh? I think people need to learn that some foods are thickened with cornflour to make up for poor ingredients and so on.

Regarding eating less meat, I eat no meat, but I do eat fish and crustaceans so I am no veggie. That said, a lot of the calculations about how bad meat is were done poorly. It turns out that animals do have a use, they can be fed on waste feed, and they can live on land that is too poor to farm, such as a rocky hillside. Yes, eating less meat is probably good. But that goes back to food education. And sorting out the laws, whereby UK farmers have to farm humanely, whereas we import cheap chicken from the Far East which is not farmed humanely.

Regarding organic food, if it is so easy to grow as you imply, why then is it so expensive? Maybe you should 'preach' to UK farmers, not to me, the consumer.

That's enough I think.

[Leif]

Another titbit from the same article ...............

What does 'using an extra 33 per cent of the land' mean? Relative to what? Farmland? Urban areas? It makes a big difference. In the South, and parts of the North, there is very little natural land. Most is either built up, or industrial farmland, with very low wildlife value. If we convert so called 'waste' land to farming, albeit cuddly lovable fluffy organic farming, we will reduce the wildlife reserves. I record fungi, and waste land has by far the greatest diversity, the poorer the land the better, up to a point. Farm land has very little fungal diversity, Volvariella gloiocephala being one exception which occurs in stubble.

And in Yorkshire and Scotland there are moors which are important for birds, hares and other animals.