Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

montanafreepress.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 297 posts

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#91

Post by Scoundreller »

lwb wrote: post #88
zachware wrote: post #80

Organic and regenerative ag are built on the assumption that crops must be grown in open air soil. The reality is that crops can be grown in open air soil and, if they are, regenerative ag in particular is significantly better for soil longevity. That said it is not necessarily better to produce all crops in low density, high volatility, season dependent environments. Some material % of crops can move to more intelli…

Interested in links or books on this if you know any good ones. Don't you still have to use soil?

Probably hydroponics? Soil is adds more variables and can be a home to pests/microbes.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#92

Post by ohsonice »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #57

What is the best criticism of regenerative ag? Everything I see about it is so positive that it seems crazy everyone hasn't switched. Are there really no downsides and it's just institutional inertia/caution holding everyone back?

Look into Chris Newman at Sylvanaqua farms. Scale and social-economic accessibility are some of the big ones. He critiques a pattern of "circle citation" within the community.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#93

Post by amanaplanacanal »

saalweachter wrote: post #68
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #57

What is the best criticism of regenerative ag? Everything I see about it is so positive that it seems crazy everyone hasn't switched. Are there really no downsides and it's just institutional inertia/caution holding everyone back?

Honestly? My biggest concern about it is that half its advocates say crazy things. For instance, down-thread we got the line: "[Paul Wheaton] believes that in a decade the soil will be so rich in organic matter with healthy microbial activity (with no chemical history) could produce food that cures cancer. I believe that in an environment where human body is not weakened by the constant bombardment of chemical compou…

A person could totally be an expert on soil and sustainable agriculture and know nothing useful about medicine. In fact, that is what I would expect. Listen to the experts on their subject of expertise, and take the rest with a huge grain of salt.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#94

Post by samatman »

saalweachter wrote: post #68
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #57

What is the best criticism of regenerative ag? Everything I see about it is so positive that it seems crazy everyone hasn't switched. Are there really no downsides and it's just institutional inertia/caution holding everyone back?

Honestly? My biggest concern about it is that half its advocates say crazy things. For instance, down-thread we got the line: "[Paul Wheaton] believes that in a decade the soil will be so rich in organic matter with healthy microbial activity (with no chemical history) could produce food that cures cancer. I believe that in an environment where human body is not weakened by the constant bombardment of chemical compou…

That's a reasonable response, but it's actually totally normal to have expertise in one domain and totally wacky ideas in another one.

It's even possible to combine these things, although that's a dangerous game to play. Biodynamic agriculture is a great example of this, Rudolph Steiner's model of how agriculture (and scientific matters in general) is... heterodox... but biodynamic farms regularly produce good crops of quality food, and the practices cultivate healthy soil by any objective measure you would care for.

I wouldn't go casually trying this with medicine, where practitioners are more likely to do the wrong thing for the wrong reasons, rather than the right thing for the wrong reasons.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#95

Post by tastyfreeze »

kaycebasques wrote: post #2

Has anyone here undergone a soil restoration project (big or small)? Did you happen to blog about the progress? There's so much I don't know, like how you even determine that your soil is degraded, or how you measure progress.

Get a shovel and dig a hole where there are some plants growing. You will see a darker layer (soil) on top of a lighter layer. The lighter layer is dirt (sand, silt, clay) without carbon in the form of life and carbohydrates. Progress is measured by the depth of the darker layer. The native prairie had a dark layer filled with roots 30 feet deep. To determine exactly how healthy your soil layer is you will need a microscope to survey the microbiota. If you dont have a microscope you can get an idea of how you are doing by observing how well the soil aggregates and is bound to roots. In healthy soil plants will have soil aggregates stuck to their roots that have to be manually removed. The aggregates are formed by glomalin produced by fungus and bacteria.

The more life you see in the soil the healthier it is. Predatory arthropods are a really good indicator. If they are around that means there is food for them.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#96

Post by Scoundreller »

mathgladiator wrote: post #77
saalweachter wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly? My biggest concern about it is that half its advocates say crazy things. For instance, down-thread we got the line: "[Paul Wheaton] believes that in a decade the soil will be so rich in organic matter with healthy microbial activity (with no chemical history) could produce food that cures cancer. I believe that in an environment where human body is not weakened by the constant bombardment of chemical compou…

I've experienced this, and I've learned to search for the grains of truth. At core, the people doing this are highly disagreeable, and so they form their own opinions and go deep. I think going deep into crazy is natural, and the hard question is trying to balance that out with a deeper truth. At core, I think there is a deeper value in being the control group outside of the modern world. So, can food cure cancer? I…

While cancer is lower, their life expectancy is around the US average. US average lifespan isn’t something to write home about.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#97

Post by kaiju0 »

mathgladiator wrote: post #64
songzme wrote: post #33

There's a guy in Montana called Paul Wheaton who spent the last 6 years building soil rich in organic matter using no chemicals (pesticides & biocides) in his 200 acre plot of land. There were giant hugelkultur beds 15 ft high it was a crazy sight. He believes that in a decade the soil will be so rich in organic matter with healthy microbial activity (with no chemical history) could produce food that cures cancer. I…

There feels like a deep truth to the constant assault of man-hand compounds in relation to our health. I recently started fasting every other day, and I've noticed odd issues just clearing up on their own. I'd wager the down-votes related to the claims around curing cancer, but there is reason to pursue this. I'm self experimenting on myself and wife since the wife has an auto-immune issue (MS). She was on the anti-g…

I think bodies are not meant to always be processing food. We are designed for downtime to process the backlog. The body would get to nagging issues if given opportunity to do so.

I also think this has a lot to do with our cancer rates.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#98

Post by amanaplanacanal »

driverdan wrote: post #59
coldcode wrote: post #5

Like everything there are costs and benefits; sometimes people only focus on the benefits of "modern" practices and forget the costs associated with them, like stripping the soil, and the expense and side effects of chemicals. Finding a better approach means taking risks and trying new ideas. This applies to programming as well as growing food.

> the expense and side effects of chemicals What does that mean? Everything is made of chemicals.

From context I’d say they mean fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides.

Edit: you will probably find that many words have multiple meanings, and it is not hard to find words that have one specific technical meaning and a different one in colloquial usage. Organic is another common one.

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#99

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

zachware wrote: post #80

Organic and regenerative ag are built on the assumption that crops must be grown in open air soil. The reality is that crops can be grown in open air soil and, if they are, regenerative ag in particular is significantly better for soil longevity. That said it is not necessarily better to produce all crops in low density, high volatility, season dependent environments. Some material % of crops can move to more intelli…

City boy here with no knowledge of farming.

When you say "indoor" are you describing large greenhouses? Or growing crops using artificial light?

Re: Organic and regenerative agriculture are revitalizing rural Montana economies

#100

Post by pcmaffey »

Scoundreller wrote: post #91
lwb wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interested in links or books on this if you know any good ones. Don't you still have to use soil?

Probably hydroponics? Soil is adds more variables and can be a home to pests/microbes.

Hydro grown plants are often more susceptible to pests and problems because they lack the natural fortifications provided by soil. Large scale living soil can still be done indoors though.
Post reply on HN