Conservation agriculture

[Christophe]

But I know conservation farming forms without glyphosate and synthetic pesticides !!! It is much more difficult ...

Oh? Which one or rather which one?

Otherwise, a long time ago, we were already talking about it forum: farming / agriculture-semi-sub-covered semi-live-and-tcs-t5923.html

https://www.econologie.com/telechargeme ... abour-tcs/
https://www.econologie.com/telechargeme ... tion-sols/

[Did67]

Manfred Wenz, whom I quoted in my book, has been doing "biodynamics" (therefore "more than organic") without any tillage for over 30 years ... It is he from whom I was inspired to "inventing" the "Lazy man's vegetable garden" [even if I don't believe - I mean believe - not for a second in certain aspects of biodynamics; besides, it does not make orthodox biodynamics and was almost excluded from the Demeter label]

"Ideal" agriculture is very difficult to achieve. So there are 36 shades of gray. Conservation agriculture remains "conventional" in that it uses pesticides. Even is it considerably reduces its fuel consumption and benefits from "living" soils, it fishes with pesticide residues and the damage at this level on biodiversity (which due to living cover is infinitely greater than in conventional conventional) . But she is very careful with the life of the soil. The "classic bio" refrains from synthetic pesticides but uses natural pesticides, some of which are very harmful to the system (even if the residues pose no or very few problems for the consumer). And continues the massacre at the level of tillage, with its effects on the life of the soil (earthworms), destructuring, mudslides, etc ...

None of this is "perfect". There are advances here. Or there ...


See from the 38th minute:

Friedrich Wenz is the son of Manfred, who took over the operation:

Here, sowing wheat in a live canopy of cruciferous WITHOUT PRIOR TREATMENT HERBICIDE!

[izentrop]

But I know conservation farming forms without glyphosate and synthetic pesticides !!! It is much more difficult ...

Oh? Which one or rather which one?

There is also Felix Noblia, who must have a favorable climate and soil, because a climatic accident can quickly lead to disaster.

[Did67]

There is also Felix Noblia, who must have a favorable climate and soil, because a climatic accident can quickly lead to disaster.

I discover. It is indeed the same approach of culture under living cover without the use of herbicides, thanks to c called FACA rollers (which bend and "break" the stems of the plant used as cover, which, suddenly, dies on the spot in any case dries up).

We see it: we have to think a lot. These are systems with "few active ingredients, a lot of gray matter!"

Any small factual error of Félix in his presentation: humanity has not always "worked" the earth as we do today, thanks to fossil fuels. She has "scratched" the earth for a very long time, using the plow.

Deep, brutal plowing is a fairly recent "invention": around 200 years, with an acceleration after the war (so a little over 50 years) with the generalization of deep plowing, with turning ...

The system is more susceptible to accidents than during the very critical phase of the emergence of the sown plant. There, indeed, it can go into a spin. Otherwise, cultivate under cover is rather more resilient! In bare soil, we can quite easily succeed in installing a culture to tears, in rainy conditions: the herbicides save him a competition, perf perfume will retype it ... In a living system, it is something else: the cover takes over ...

Note: the argument that we have favorable conditions is the last one left for those who do not want to question themselves; I hear it regularly at home: "ah, but you're lucky, you have favorable soil". My soil is a rather thin soil, with a high slope, of a POOR natural meadow! I bet you that his neighbors find that their soil is "normal" ...

[bobbysolo67]

There is also Felix Noblia, who must have a favorable climate and soil, because a climatic accident can quickly lead to disaster.

In the Bas-Rhin, there is Michel ROESCH http://www.sol-vivant.fr

[Did67]

Yes. He, I know.

The BASE movement is quoted in my book.

And in the reissue, I add the site A2C ...

There, what is interesting, among these farmers, is to cross "conservation agriculture" (therefore without a lot of tillage) and "organic" therefore by refraining from glyphosate.

This "hybridization" is interesting. Because "conventional" conservation agriculture, as I said, sins on that side - sometimes increased dependence on pesticides. The "conventional organic", sins with an excess of tillage - where considers tillage as "normal" And turns a blind eye to its dependence on oil and its energy balance ... Both are too timid for my taste and therefore in a relative impasse (less than those who do not think at all, but still!) ...

And if progress came from hybridization (ideas!)?

[Moindreffor]

Yes. He, I know.

The BASE movement is quoted in my book.

And in the reissue, I add the site A2C ...

There, what is interesting, among these farmers, is to cross "conservation agriculture" (therefore without a lot of tillage) and "organic" therefore by refraining from glyphosate.

This "hybridization" is interesting. Because "conventional" conservation agriculture, as I said, sins on that side - sometimes increased dependence on pesticides. The "conventional organic", sins with an excess of tillage - where considers tillage as "normal" And turns a blind eye to its dependence on oil and its energy balance ... Both are too timid for my taste and therefore in a relative impasse (less than those who do not think at all, but still!) ...

And if progress came from hybridization (ideas!)?

I think the most positive point is to get out of the single "organic" solution, because it really locks agriculture into an endless circle, sterile debates and stagnation
that people open their minds is refreshing

[to be chafoin]

I dug a little ...

First of all, the side of the pile, a little report on the subject of last year:

Then conservation agriculture was analyzed by the State in 2013. https://agriculture.gouv.fr/lagriculture-de-conservation-analyse-ndeg61
First of all, an inventory: in 2006 one-third of cultivated land is exempt from the systematic ritual of annual plowing, and 10% of French agricultural land does not undergo aggressive soil work.

Agri Cons 3.JPG (31.61 KIO) Accessed 3399 times

I go over the positive aspects to evoke the side face and some additional problems (other than the major one of herbicides) that could interest also the gardener on living ground:

Possible pollution with nitrous oxide.

Agri Cons 1.JPG (39.25 KIO) Accessed 3399 times

Advantage / disadvantage of water management because of the evapotranspiration of cutlery / intercropped green manure.

Agri Cons 2.JPG (18.57 KIO) Accessed 3399 times

Possible leaching of phosphorus, especially on drained soil. (I found that on another analysis a little older)

Agri Cons P.JPG (54.87 KIO) Accessed 3399 times

But I do not see why the gradient would be disturbed by plowing? So I do not know if this problem exists, especially since it does not appear in the analysis of 2013.

[izentrop]

Conservation agriculture around the world, an FAO record http://www.fao.org/conservation-agriculture/fr/
For that to change, it would be necessary to penalize plowing and soil left bare.

[VetusLignum]

In 2 hours, the live RIAV: https://www.verdeterreprod.fr/2019/02/1 ... du-vivant/

The program here: https://riav.fr/evenement/conferences