How to find a land

[lilian07]

Brinbrin. For my it is obvious if you wonder ... compare yourself to the economy. Take the option 1. Build your business that will allow you to be realistic with the market I do not budge 2. Choose a scope of your profile or your ambition ... big ... half big ..... 3. Innove brings added value to your product and does not take you too far for a low price. The market will correct you and your dream will remain philosophy if you do not apply the rules. Our rules are constrained, of course, but they are not there for nothing, and they contain global truths much more philosophical. It is necessary to phillopher certainly but to remain in this world to be able to optimize, correct and innovate ... which is currently lacking.

[Ahmed]

Lilian07, you write:

Our rules are constrained, of course, but they are not there for nothing and they contain global truths much more they (?) of philosophy.

The economy is one thing, it has constraints, as you say, but no "truth", except that of adaptation to its constraints and mechanisms. Another thing, indeed, is to have a critical position and an analysis about what constrains us so strongly.
We must be aware of the fact that the further we are from the control centers * of the economic machine, the more the situation remains dependent on uncontrollable factors and the less leeway we have.

* The agents of the system closest to these command centers, however, exert their influence that on the express condition of obeying it...

[brinbrin62]

Hmmm ... Okay, I'm going to go back and think in my cave. Starting a business when you are at RSA and you have zero capital, I nevertheless think that it remains difficult.

[lilian07]

So you need a brilliant, innovative and simple idea.

[Did67]

And I forgot in my post above, you have to choose a method:

1) Organic with tillage, with or without plastic sheeting -> Yield on arrival, but unstructured soil
2) Permaculture -> New-age aspects, and you have to like Gaia and stuff like that
3) Fenoculture -> Very interesting method, but not very suitable for a large area (it seems to me).
4) Conservation agriculture / Living soil market gardening -> Must manage plant cover
5) Aquaponics and cultivation under LED ramps -> Big investment in gear, and you have to like this type of agriculture ...
5) Other methods ...

It must be possible to mix, but this increases the complexity of soil management.

In my opinion, a combination of 3) and 4) ... Occasionally, for early vegetables, one year in 3 or 4, why not a dose of 1) (you must not be Khmer Vert; you can occasionally "damage" when, on the other hand, we re-patch with efficiency - conventional agriculture has been damaging for 50 years and continues to produce!)

I don't think it increases the complexity. Last year I missed an underground clover seedling; it became a "bare plot" for the 2017 season, which gradually became grassy, ​​after having produced well. It is therefore one of the first that I covered with a very thick layer of hay, with the idea of ​​putting the pdt in phenoculture. On the contrary, I find that it fits together very well!

I have another plot that I left bare during 2017 because the lamb's lettuce came there spontaneously. There, it is a beautiful carpet of Véronique of Persia. That I leave. I think I'll pass the rotofil and plant some "beefy" and erect vegetable plants: cabbage, fennel, ...

I'm not saying it's going to work, but I think so, otherwise I won't try.

And there again, it "fits" quite naturally.

On the other hand, it is necessary to observe / reflect / adapt and .... sit on all the methods, the guides, the beautiful speakers of Internet, the consielleres of all kinds. Anyway, you have to try ..

The 2) You forget: too low labor productivity ... I think that a certain form of permaculture is already "stillborn". And the fashion effect should definitely make you suspicious!

The 5) It is conventional agriculture to the power of 10 !!! I do not understand how we can associate this with an idea of ​​"progress" !!! This is the example of the perfect misunderstanding into which our wanderings can lead us when we lack a reference frame of reference!

[olivier75]

I outbid the response from Didier, (and the last video), as much it is praiseworthy to define the words well in order to understand each other, as much on the application as in fact it is not necessary to go there hold strictly. Especially when words become suitcases.
Once a guideline defined, a red line drawn, it is essential in my opinion, to do what we can, and at each establishment to manage as best as possible according to the objectives, the means, the availability of materials, the time , weather. Without getting too psychologically blocked.
As an example the new land that I have just recovered, while I also "boast" of placing my seeds more than sowing them, for lack of material (no more hay), of material (no seeder under cover) , I started with a blow of the rotavator, hoping not to come back to it. On this dead soil, a classic vegetable garden “cleaned” with weedkiller again last fall, hoping that I would manage to keep it and breathe enough life into it.
This plot will be my undercover gardening trials, probably mixed with phenoculture just below the plants.
Olivier.

[Did67]

In my opinion, a combination of 3) and 4) ... Occasionally, for early vegetables, one year in 3 or 4, why not a dose of 1) (you must not be Khmer Vert; you can occasionally "damage" when, on the other hand, we re-patch with efficiency - conventional agriculture has been damaging for 50 years and continues to produce!)

I quote myself, to clarify:

- I invent by advancing!
- I realize that we cannot compare different phases:

a) The "conquest" of an area which was not a market garden: natural meadow, or wasteland (not too wooded - otherwise, it's a little harder). There, the "slightest effort" leads "naturally" to a phenoculture under "thick mantle" ... With one constraint: finding this mass of hay (or possibly a mixture of organic matter that can replace it).

If you are not in a hurry, or if you want to "expand" your business always at the slightest effort, you can go on a long cycle of about 3 years; this is what I would do, for example, for an already wooded wasteland (willows, acacias, birches and other soft hardwoods already installed): grind as much wood as possible on site; spread it in a thick layer; to install legumes there ... From the second year, the "nitrogen hunger" is compensated by the symbiotic fixation (free); the legume (eg fodder legume) produces biomass, partly transferable to already cultivated areas ...

b) The maintenance of an area already "phenocultivated" for 2 or 3 years: I do not know if it is the same for you, but I note that the invasive "weeds" have largely taken their toll; mostly replaced by upholstered ...

We can then mix, a little bit at will, parts "covered with hay" (in lighter quantities), parts that have remained bare which will leave in "ground covered by weeds".

Depending on the weeds, we can then "catch up" the following year, or try a cultivation under living cover of "bulky" and erect vegetables (cabbages, leeks, beans, etc ...), if the cover consists of ground cover plants (Véronique, chickweed ...) ...

In this area, green manure may have a place (it depends on the succession).

3) We will have understood: it is easier if we find a sufficient surface, even if these are partly or totally brown fallow which nobody wants!

To come back to a question asked above: to live on it, I think that an order of magnitude is the hectare! Even if everything is not in intensive market gardening (zone a; production of biomass on site in a "false pasture producing hay to feed the worms"!)

[brinbrin62]

Well agree that only experience is worth. Permaculture (with the aromatic spiral and the Buddha near the pond) is a fashion, biodynamics continues. So does electroculture.

One question: Smother the quackgrass by covering the surface with carbon (wood, straw) and wait a few months to create a nitrogen hunger, then, when the surface is sanitized, plant nitrogen fixing plants ("green manures" ) seems a good technique to you?

[Antoche]

1/

In no case will you be able to achieve by cultivating in hay the productivity per unit area that it reaches. It is just impossible, because it is extremely intensive and uses tools (seeders in particular, ..) which ensure a certain cover of the ground by the plants themselves, tools unusable in a cover.

we can always adapt by imagining a system where instead of plowing we prepare the land in hay or BRF / hay.
Either :
a) - Releasing the large thickness of mulch at the time of sowing (the soil will thus be ready during the several months of preparation which preceded)
b) - By putting less mulch but still enough to feed the soil and covering over it with a tarpaulin, shade nets, or BRF more resistant to degradation, these 3 solutions will limit unwanted perennials.

During the cultures we will keep a thin layer of mulch (this thin surface layer can be in BRF during the cultivation times, I think it can be ideal because more durable over time) and thus allow a much tighter production. Because if I understand correctly the disturbing element will be the too thick mulch thickness.

2nd point: Among the tools that Fortier uses, some do not go against the funct. natural, and can be used. (example harvester at meslun which I find great)

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------

2/
Regarding the price of hay which can be a brake, a hay / BRF mixture is interesting in order to reduce this cost if there is not enough cheap hay, and all the more if subsequently we chain with a thin layer of BRF. In addition it seems to me that the BRF is particularly effective for mycorrhizae. Less than hay? As much as hay? More than hay? Thank you for your info on this.

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------

3/
Several words escape me in the vocabulary: tonnages; carry water bodies; unit of mass transported / gross mass;

a lot of reasoning in agronomy or values ​​is based on dry matter

Is the following image correct? In a fruit / vegetable, the nutrients are found in the juice part, while the fiber with very low nutrients is the structuring part. When you cook a whole food, it is not the same raw and cooked. Raw it has all its nutrients, but cooked, it loses a lot of nutrients which evaporate due to the heat.
So if I draw a parallel with cooking:

straw = fiber remaining from a carrot go to the juice extractor
compost = cooked carrot

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------

4/

... What people want ... Even AMAP customers have cravings and will not live on rutabagas and rhubarb.

I remember that we must try to adapt to the desires of the customers (to a certain extent obviously), but I also believe I am not obliged to offer a very very wide variety of vegetables, especially according to the seasons. Without going into an extreme case of offering only 2 products (rhubarb and rutabagas) let's not forget that there are cheese makers who only sell cheese, other than chicken and eggs, and there are even producers only salad (in Amap I don't know). But customers can buy from me on several products and supplement from others. When they go to Amap buy cheese they come not only for the cheese but also the other producers on the recovery site.

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------

5/

- it is possible to make "lazily" (without any work of the soil, without fertilization, without making / undoing the covers) seasonal vegetables or more exactly conservation vegetables: typically, onions / garlic / shallots, celery, leeks, a large part of cabbages, turnips, cucurbits, etc ... Also fit in there some "salads" (lamb's lettuce, curly, endives, dandelion, winter lettuce ...) ...

- for those who are going to eat in autumn or during winter, it does not matter to be a little late! And it's already a significant part of the production! Any effort gained on this is won!

It's already a lot to win. Without counting my future rustic vegetables requiring little maintenance. I can therefore offer a range of choices to customers from the list of rustic vegetables and berries.

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------

One of the goals is to find a balance by offering customer satisfaction, while avoiding the complicated vegetables requiring the most investment, time spent. I am necessarily a winner if I manage to meet both of these conditions. I have no problem looking for the possible limits of "laziness / profit / profitability" in market gardening. This is the goal of any business leader, to generate the most profitability by investing the least possible effort. It therefore requires research work above all for a good business plan, somehow discerning the limits of the possible, through discussions among other things. I think it is legitimate when you see the economic misery of farmers. (the famous 2 € per month). If market gardeners did not have a minimum of passion, market gardening would be over. I believe I have this common passion but I also intend to make a good living from my future profession.

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ---------

And I forgot in my post above, you have to choose a method:

1) Organic with tillage, with or without plastic sheeting -> Yield on arrival, but unstructured soil
2) Permaculture -> New-age aspects, and you have to like Gaia and stuff like that
3) Fenoculture -> Very interesting method, but not very suitable for a large area (it seems to me).
4) Conservation agriculture / Living soil market gardening -> Must manage plant cover
5) Aquaponics and cultivation under LED ramps -> Big investment in gear, and you have to like this type of agriculture ...
5) Other methods ...

In the subject I opened the day before yesterday, I tried to develop this point at the beginning where I believe that we have to get out of the mentality of choosing between different approaches, it is putting too many barriers between the different forms of crops. We don't have to stay 100% in one. We are there only to seek the most possible efficiency, we can pick in any denomination of things efficient and durable, I do not see how it is necessarily complicated. If a method is effective and useful, it is applied regardless of its denotational source. Do 20% of that, 40% of this, 40% of that.

Me too, I don't like the new-age at all etc but let's completely disregard that and keep the useful (and I also wonder if this aspect is not a drift and that at the base the permaculture of Mollison doesn't really talk about that) (it's like the "human permaculture" dimension, personally I don't want to know anything about the subject, I'm already full of prejudices on the thing, even if I admit that it can there are some interesting things said, nothing forces me to study this facet, I focus on all the points of plant culture that can be effective (and respectful of natural functions)
Regarding the subject of growing plants, I opened a subject the day before yesterday, if you haven't seen it, here is the link:

agriculture / foundations-of-a-good-of-crop-plant-t15583.html

I have several questions following the video shared in it and a few notes of an internship copy at the end where I highlighted in yellow. If you have the answers or references of books to get that could answer that I would be interested, concerning the questions addressed.

The 2) You forget: too low labor productivity ... I think that a certain form of permaculture is already "stillborn". And the fashion effect should definitely make you suspicious!

In the video series on the other subject that I shared, we are still talking about investing 1 calorie to produce 5,10, 20 calorie food. If there are no lies it is still a form of productivity! invest 1 win 5 minimum. I still think that in permaculture there must be a lot to draw, and I will say especially in the long term. Eric Escoffier had confided to me that in France there is almost nothing in the example of perma, that the Anglo-Saxons are more lively and tilte better than the Latin who are slower to relax (it was not that word for word but I retransmit the idea with my words) and that most of the good examples of permaculture are found abroad. On this point I confess to trust him since he is from the middle and that he was trained with big names. But all that to say that surely our image of permaculture is wrong by a lot of things that can be done on the internet and that there surely exists a gap between what was originally transmitted by the founders and the teaching of 'today.

[Did67]

One question: Smother the quackgrass by covering the surface with carbon (wood, straw) and wait a few months to create a nitrogen hunger, then, when the surface is sanitized, plant nitrogen fixing plants ("green manures" ) seems a good technique to you?

Quackgrass is less powerful than bindweed, but I saw bindweed "crossing" and invading a bunch of BRF that must have been 1 meter high! As he is the only winner in such an affair, he takes advantage of it and spreads himself out. Unless as soon as we emerge, you pull out. So it has "invested" a lot (on its reserves in the rhizome), with no return (you destroy its solar collectors. Put "boxes" or buckets on the places where it emerges; it will "go round in circles" in it, in search of light and therefore continue to further deplete its resources ...

Quackgrass can be eradicated quite easily. Under cover, it sets up its rhizomes between soil and hay (or BRF), so enough on the surface. With a pitchfork, you can tear it out at 80 or 90% as soon as it points its nose ... The rhizomes come like strings, in "aggradated" soil ... Two or three years of such treatment and he's worn out...