Does the organic movement exist in some other world? Perhaps you could tell me where these people exist?
E.U Interference!!!*****!!!
Moderators: KG Steve, Chantal, Tigger, peter, Chief Spud
-
Mr Potato Head
I don't think that anyone is arguing that pesticides help produce bigger yields, just that large yield is not the only effect of using pesticide.
Does the organic movement exist in some other world? Perhaps you could tell me where these people exist?
Does the organic movement exist in some other world? Perhaps you could tell me where these people exist?
-
Cider Boys
- KG Regular
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 110 times
Dear Mr Potato Head
At last you admit that conventional (the real world) farming with chemicals produce bigger yields. Unless you consider we do not need to feed everyone and I am sure you do not, we have to practise agriculture to produce enough food to prevent starvation.
My point is we are privileged in that we can make the choice to eat and grow organic food.
I for one choose to buy organic milk and grow food for myself as organically as practical, but if I was to insist in taking more and more land into organic farming with its higher costs and lower yields it is of little help to the majority who are poor in this real world.
So until organic methods become cost effective, they are only playing at solving a serious problem to the many of this world. Most hungry people would opt for small chemical residues than to starve.
Barney
At last you admit that conventional (the real world) farming with chemicals produce bigger yields. Unless you consider we do not need to feed everyone and I am sure you do not, we have to practise agriculture to produce enough food to prevent starvation.
My point is we are privileged in that we can make the choice to eat and grow organic food.
I for one choose to buy organic milk and grow food for myself as organically as practical, but if I was to insist in taking more and more land into organic farming with its higher costs and lower yields it is of little help to the majority who are poor in this real world.
So until organic methods become cost effective, they are only playing at solving a serious problem to the many of this world. Most hungry people would opt for small chemical residues than to starve.
Barney
-
Mr Potato Head
Quantity of food is not the issue for the 'real world', distribution is. Whilst I wouldn't necessarily say that there's plenty food to go around, the West certainlyy eats more than it needs.
Also the West take up precious potential food growing areas in developing countries and use them to grow unneccesary cash crops like tobacco, coffee, cut flowers, tea, cocaine, heroin, sugar etc etc.
There's even some that would argue that we could feed a lot more of these starving people if we discouraged large-scale cattle production, which graze land to produce meat to feed people, which would be more efficiently used to grow crops to feed people and cut out the middleman. (And cut out a sizeable methane contribution to global warming to boot...)
So to counter; 'most' hungry people would rather see their effective growing land used to feed their people rather than supply profits to the rich west and their own corrupt governments...
But you're right too; I'm sure, like the rest of us, they'd be willing to take the risk of a few chemicals in their food. Sadly, food is not what they're allowed to grow.
Also the West take up precious potential food growing areas in developing countries and use them to grow unneccesary cash crops like tobacco, coffee, cut flowers, tea, cocaine, heroin, sugar etc etc.
There's even some that would argue that we could feed a lot more of these starving people if we discouraged large-scale cattle production, which graze land to produce meat to feed people, which would be more efficiently used to grow crops to feed people and cut out the middleman. (And cut out a sizeable methane contribution to global warming to boot...)
So to counter; 'most' hungry people would rather see their effective growing land used to feed their people rather than supply profits to the rich west and their own corrupt governments...
But you're right too; I'm sure, like the rest of us, they'd be willing to take the risk of a few chemicals in their food. Sadly, food is not what they're allowed to grow.
Unfortunately the Western world faces problems with falling birthrate while the third world where food is scarce faces problems of uncontrolled population explosion. Merely shifting food around will not solve the problem.
-
Jenny Green
- KG Regular
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 4:47 pm
- Location: East Midlands
Dear Barney
Apologies for the brevity of my reply. I'm setting up my own business atm and am extremely busy.
This debate originally started on pesticide use. As you have now brought in artificial fertiliser etc. I'm more inclined to agree with you that post world war two such things have boosted production. However, let's not forget that use of artificial fertiliser produces sappy growth which is more prone to attack by pests and diseases. So really the use of artificial fertiliser and pesticides go hand in hand.
Your example of the Irish Potato Famine is a good one because it shows how relying on vast monocultures of one non-disease resistant variety (Lumpers), which is a conventional farming practice, leaves us vulnerable. Breeding and using disease resistant varieties, an organic practice, gives us more protection.
Talking of disease resistance, let me give you another example. Use of pesticides has caused strains of greenhouse whitefly to evolve which are resistant to all pesticides. Use of biological control, another organic practice, has proved more effective.
I can assure you that the multi-national agrochemical companies have their claws firmly in the third world already and are able to commit many ethical abuses that are prohibited over here. I have yet to hear a news report that said people are starving in Ethiopia due to their lack of access to pesticide. I think you'll find that most famines are caused by poor land management, drought and war, and that third world farmers have good access to chemicals to poison themselves and their land with.
I am not disagreeing that we need to feed ourselves but organic farming should not be dismissed as a luxury for the rich to indulge themselves in. It probably holds the key to feeding ourselves sustainably in the long term future.
IMO if we ate less, had to pay more for our food and had less money to buy MP3 players and mobile phones, the world would be a better place.
(Not such a short reply after all!)
Apologies for the brevity of my reply. I'm setting up my own business atm and am extremely busy.
This debate originally started on pesticide use. As you have now brought in artificial fertiliser etc. I'm more inclined to agree with you that post world war two such things have boosted production. However, let's not forget that use of artificial fertiliser produces sappy growth which is more prone to attack by pests and diseases. So really the use of artificial fertiliser and pesticides go hand in hand.
Your example of the Irish Potato Famine is a good one because it shows how relying on vast monocultures of one non-disease resistant variety (Lumpers), which is a conventional farming practice, leaves us vulnerable. Breeding and using disease resistant varieties, an organic practice, gives us more protection.
Talking of disease resistance, let me give you another example. Use of pesticides has caused strains of greenhouse whitefly to evolve which are resistant to all pesticides. Use of biological control, another organic practice, has proved more effective.
I can assure you that the multi-national agrochemical companies have their claws firmly in the third world already and are able to commit many ethical abuses that are prohibited over here. I have yet to hear a news report that said people are starving in Ethiopia due to their lack of access to pesticide. I think you'll find that most famines are caused by poor land management, drought and war, and that third world farmers have good access to chemicals to poison themselves and their land with.
I am not disagreeing that we need to feed ourselves but organic farming should not be dismissed as a luxury for the rich to indulge themselves in. It probably holds the key to feeding ourselves sustainably in the long term future.
IMO if we ate less, had to pay more for our food and had less money to buy MP3 players and mobile phones, the world would be a better place.
(Not such a short reply after all!)
(Formerly known as 'Organic Freak')
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed.
-
oldherbaceous
- KG Regular
- Posts: 14432
- Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 1:52 pm
- Location: Beautiful Bedfordshire
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 709 times
Dear Jenny, just to lighten things a little, i love it when your angry. 
Kind regards Old Herbaceous.
Theres no fool like an old fool.
Kind regards Old Herbaceous.
Theres no fool like an old fool.
-
Cider Boys
- KG Regular
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:03 pm
- Location: Somerset
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 110 times
Dear Jenny
Well, I can not argue with much of your sentiments and I believe most people would prefer to grow food in the safest way possible. However, perhaps it should be accepted by the ‘organic/green’ lobby that when there are famines {due to the weather etc.) the sacks of food that are flown in to help prevent starvation are grown using methods that would not have Soil Association approval. Also there is tremendous pressures in the poorer parts of the world to clear large areas of forest in able for them to produce food.
This, with reason, seems to be strongly argued against by the ‘organic/green’ lobby that at the same time campaign for the world to convert more land to their methods that result in lower production. Surely there is a possible contradiction here or am I being unfair?
Anyway, I wish you all the best of luck with your new business venture.
Barney
Well, I can not argue with much of your sentiments and I believe most people would prefer to grow food in the safest way possible. However, perhaps it should be accepted by the ‘organic/green’ lobby that when there are famines {due to the weather etc.) the sacks of food that are flown in to help prevent starvation are grown using methods that would not have Soil Association approval. Also there is tremendous pressures in the poorer parts of the world to clear large areas of forest in able for them to produce food.
This, with reason, seems to be strongly argued against by the ‘organic/green’ lobby that at the same time campaign for the world to convert more land to their methods that result in lower production. Surely there is a possible contradiction here or am I being unfair?
Anyway, I wish you all the best of luck with your new business venture.
Barney
Hi Mr PH,
You know very well that I was not lumping you with the ALF. Limp as much as you like but don't play the 'Old Soldier Routine' on an old serviceman!
Seriously though, it was not in my mind that you would take that as a personal remark and, miserable old sod as I am, I simply would not make a remark like that. I know I can be quite caustic but I hope never insulting.
JB.
You know very well that I was not lumping you with the ALF. Limp as much as you like but don't play the 'Old Soldier Routine' on an old serviceman!
Seriously though, it was not in my mind that you would take that as a personal remark and, miserable old sod as I am, I simply would not make a remark like that. I know I can be quite caustic but I hope never insulting.
JB.
-
oldherbaceous
- KG Regular
- Posts: 14432
- Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 1:52 pm
- Location: Beautiful Bedfordshire
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 709 times
Dear Lizzie, you are so wise for such a young person.
Kind Regards, Old Herbaceous.
There's no fool like an old fool.
There's no fool like an old fool.
. Oldherbaceous this just proves that lizzie is not just a pretty face 
.
With reference to Barney and Jenny's discussion regarding food production, well the easiest way to get more food on the table is not to increase production necessarily but to educate the Eu and consumers that distorted or odd shaped fruit and veg are ok to eat.
Despite F1 seed et al 40% of food produced is rejected by supermarkets because it doesnt look "perfect", its too small, too big , too bent, too red, too green. The main reason that organic food is so expensive is because nearly 60% of that is rejected because of insect damage etc.
No extra work, 40% more food, a no brainer really.
Johnboy, I treat the word organic in a pragmatic way, I dont spray insecticide but do use glysophate, I dont use chemical fertilizer but do use non organic cow manure. Other than meat, tropical fruit and things I cant grow such as sugar this year I have produced 85% of our food from two allotments and with a bit more organisation and space management could have inreased this a bit more, so without spraying chemicals to fertilize or eradicate insects I havent starved.
As a bonus how does this grab you. If you change 3 light bulbs for energy saving ones you save 150Kwh of energy, turn all of your standby appliances off and you save 200kwh but if you grow your own food, by saving all of the packaging, transport, processing costs, chemicals etc you can save 30,000Kwh of energy, and that makes a big difference in your carbon footprint.
With regard to organic food, a large proportion of the people that insist on organic food quite happily spray 20 different cans of air spray and chemical cleaners into their home and are quite happy to do that.
Bizzare, or is it just me
Despite F1 seed et al 40% of food produced is rejected by supermarkets because it doesnt look "perfect", its too small, too big , too bent, too red, too green. The main reason that organic food is so expensive is because nearly 60% of that is rejected because of insect damage etc.
No extra work, 40% more food, a no brainer really.
Johnboy, I treat the word organic in a pragmatic way, I dont spray insecticide but do use glysophate, I dont use chemical fertilizer but do use non organic cow manure. Other than meat, tropical fruit and things I cant grow such as sugar this year I have produced 85% of our food from two allotments and with a bit more organisation and space management could have inreased this a bit more, so without spraying chemicals to fertilize or eradicate insects I havent starved.
As a bonus how does this grab you. If you change 3 light bulbs for energy saving ones you save 150Kwh of energy, turn all of your standby appliances off and you save 200kwh but if you grow your own food, by saving all of the packaging, transport, processing costs, chemicals etc you can save 30,000Kwh of energy, and that makes a big difference in your carbon footprint.
With regard to organic food, a large proportion of the people that insist on organic food quite happily spray 20 different cans of air spray and chemical cleaners into their home and are quite happy to do that.
Bizzare, or is it just me
Hi Piglet,
I do not use anything specifically organic and certainly not FYM. Quite frankly it is the way you grow your plant and not how you come by the seed or how they were produced. To me Organic Seed is simply a waste of money. I use Peat and have spent a fortune trying to find a suitable alternative. When I say a fortune I mean several thousands of pounds to get products that are nothing like the samples I had seen. I do use MMF if the need arises. I will use a Pesticide if all else will fail.I do use slug pellets when necessary. I really do not see why I should lose a crop for somebody else's set of ideals. Because there are those who will put up with inferior produce and before you jump down my throat 90% of the Organic produce I see grown locally by gardeners is quite frankly appalling.
You say that the Super Markets will not buy certain items and reject too much. It is the Great British
Public that will not buy them so the onus is with the public not the Super Markets.
How I wish you were my age and you would then understand the changes that have occurred over my lifetime. I didn't see a Television until I was past twenty. Super Markets unheard of and half the vegetables available today were totally unheard of.
Since WW2 so many changes have come about and the winter used to be a time of hardship for many but the war changed all that. When men returned they would not put up with any nonsense and conditions slowly improved. Now with the Organic movements they want to return to the good old days. I lived through those good old days and quite frankly there was sod all good about them. If you were rich you were OK but if you weren't you could bloody well starve and then people had to draw on the parish to be sneered at by a load of toffee nosed gits.
I going to close now because I am getting a rage on me. Now the clever sod's want to go back to those days!!!!!!!
JB.
I do not use anything specifically organic and certainly not FYM. Quite frankly it is the way you grow your plant and not how you come by the seed or how they were produced. To me Organic Seed is simply a waste of money. I use Peat and have spent a fortune trying to find a suitable alternative. When I say a fortune I mean several thousands of pounds to get products that are nothing like the samples I had seen. I do use MMF if the need arises. I will use a Pesticide if all else will fail.I do use slug pellets when necessary. I really do not see why I should lose a crop for somebody else's set of ideals. Because there are those who will put up with inferior produce and before you jump down my throat 90% of the Organic produce I see grown locally by gardeners is quite frankly appalling.
You say that the Super Markets will not buy certain items and reject too much. It is the Great British
Public that will not buy them so the onus is with the public not the Super Markets.
How I wish you were my age and you would then understand the changes that have occurred over my lifetime. I didn't see a Television until I was past twenty. Super Markets unheard of and half the vegetables available today were totally unheard of.
Since WW2 so many changes have come about and the winter used to be a time of hardship for many but the war changed all that. When men returned they would not put up with any nonsense and conditions slowly improved. Now with the Organic movements they want to return to the good old days. I lived through those good old days and quite frankly there was sod all good about them. If you were rich you were OK but if you weren't you could bloody well starve and then people had to draw on the parish to be sneered at by a load of toffee nosed gits.
I going to close now because I am getting a rage on me. Now the clever sod's want to go back to those days!!!!!!!
JB.