Natural Farming

[LilMan72003]

A well maintained soil, rich with decomposed organic material and proper mulch will require less watering. Leaching depends on a variety of factors including: shape/height of the beds or rows,method of irrigation, location in relation to water table, nutrient levels, etc

I believe Jaykush is right on. To believe that it is possible to not only sustain yourself but others as well using JUST the land is silly. A more realistic and yet still natural way is to purchase seed, grow the plant, harvest its seeds for future use (if possible), and compost/green manure the remains to return back to the soil. Its all about returning organic matter to feed those beneficial bacteria and fungi. Buy your livestock (inputs) and compost their doo doo for years for fertilizer (which is unnecessary if you have good soil).

I believe that natural farming or ecological agriculture, should place a heavy emphasis on land use efficiency. I have been working with the apprentices of the Alan Chadwick Organic Garden at UC Santa Cruz, and learning the French Biointensive gardening technique practiced by Alan Chadwick. When growing in beds, seedlings are spaced on triangular/hexagonal centers. When plants reach full maturity their leaves are barely touching, creating a carbon heavy mini-climate that is trapped under the leaves in this dense canopy. Not only are yields greater due to not being limited to a traditional row system, but individual plant yield is maximized from optimal growing conditions.

 

[mad librettist]

When plants reach full maturity their leaves are barely touching, creating a carbon heavy mini-climate that is trapped under the leaves in this dense canopy. Not only are yields greater due to not being limited to a traditional row system, but individual plant yield is maximized from optimal growing conditions.
__________________

that is exactly wht happens with a good living mulch.

I started doing it when I observed that bog plants grown in live sphagnum don't need terrariums to do well in dry climates, whereas the same grown in dead sphagnum suffers.

 

[mad librettist]

why don't we take a look at some of the "free" inputs a natural farm attracts-

Taxicabs for bacteria - any animal moving in from off the property
Fixed nitrogen - lightning, n-fixing symbiotes, standalone N-fixing organisms, visiting animals
Phosphorous - rocks in the soil, when acted upon by fungi
Fixed Carbon - if the farmer uses any cover at all, and it is plowed under or left on the surface


let's see some more, so we can show just how much nature wants to give you free stuff if you ask nicely.

 

[GoneRooty]

Let's not forget all the "weeds" that grow on most peoples land that make excellent mulch/green manure.

 

[mad librettist]

keep the examples coming!

 

[jaykush]

I believe Jaykush is right on. To believe that it is possible to not only sustain yourself but others as well using JUST the land is silly. A more realistic and yet still natural way is to purchase seed, grow the plant, harvest its seeds for future use (if possible), and compost/green manure the remains to return back to the soil. Its all about returning organic matter to feed those beneficial bacteria and fungi. Buy your livestock (inputs) and compost their doo doo for years for fertilizer (which is unnecessary if you have good soil).

actually i was getting more to the point that mad explained in post #23.

like you said though, you should only have to buy outside inputs like seeds/animals once. and from then on self propagate seeds/livestock every year so. over time they adapt to your land becoming far more productive.

fukuokas rice went over a dramatic transformation over the years he grew nature farming style. they went from tall plants to short compact plants.

 

[wilbur]

I seem to recall (thru the mists of time) that Fukuoka said: "The best fertiliser is the footsteps of the farmer."

 

[h.h.]

Coyotes love to dig up drip lines Minor compared to the damage from rabbits.
Predators.

 

[h.h.]

Then on the other hand...
Rabbits.
Decomposers and food.
They have preferences in what they eat. Won't eat the garden if there's something better. Diversity in planting hides the tastier crops.
Living mulch to distract the rabbits while they provide nutrition for the soil and food for us. Coyotes to keep them under control.

 

[jaykush]

yup that's the stuff^^

and drip lines are so not natural farming lol. i think the coyote was trying to tell you something.

 

[h.h.]

yup that's the stuff^^

and drip lines are so not natural farming lol. i think the coyote was trying to tell you something.

Neither is the solar powered well.

 

[mad librettist]

err... solar powered well is definitely in on a natural farm,


just not drip lines.

 

[jaykush]

Neither is the solar powered well.

fine with me

 

[GoneRooty]

Rabbits.
Decomposers and food.

Rabbits are NOT decomposers, they are consumers. There are producers, consumers, and decomposers.
Producers - An organism capable of producing it's own food.
Consumers - An organism that gets it's food from eating other living organisms.
Decomposers - An organism that breaks down dead organic matter to get their food.

 

[mad librettist]

oh boy, now someone will bring up trophic levels, you just watch

 

[h.h.]

I didn't intend to represent drips as a natural means, the focus was on the predators/ Personally, I have a hard time viewing any pumped water as "natural".
Rabbits may be "consumers" in the books. They break down live material and are a step in decomposing. I see no reason to over think it.

 

[GoneRooty]

They break down live material and are a step in decomposing.

So with that logic, isn't everything except producers a decomposer?

 

[mad librettist]

i dunno hh, it's great not to overthink things, but it's also great not to use scientific terms when you mean something different altogether

 

[h.h.]

i dunno hh, it's great not to overthink things, but it's also great not to use scientific terms when you mean something different altogether

Science is not nature. Nature is not science. Words do not belong to science. While I attempt to change my words to fit your perimeters, they are still used in the correct sense.
These traits are common in all living things though rabbits do it more directly than some, shitting where they eat.

I would not want to limit my thinking by labeling them as consumers. It is over simplified. They are only that if they eat your valuable crops.

de·com·pose (d

k

m-p

z

)v. de·com·posed, de·com·pos·ing, de·com·pos·es
v.tr.1. To separate into components or basic elements.

ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Verb1.decompose - separate (substances) into constituent elements or partsbreak down, break up
chemical science, chemistry - the science of matter; the branch of the natural sciences dealing with the composition of substances and their properties and reactions
digest - soften or disintegrate by means of chemical action, heat, or moisture
dissociate - to undergo a reversible or temporary breakdown of a molecule into simpler molecules or atoms; "acids dissociate to give hydrogen ions"
crack - reduce (petroleum) to a simpler compound by cracking
separate - divide into components or constituents; "Separate the wheat from the chaff"

 

[mad librettist]

Science is not nature. Nature is not science. Words do not belong to science. While I attempt to change my words to fit your perimeters, they are still used in the correct sense.
These traits are common in all living things though rabbits do it more directly than some, shitting where they eat.

I would not want to limit my thinking by labeling them as consumers. It is over simplified. They are only that if they eat your valuable crops.



ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Verb1.decompose - separate (substances) into constituent elements or partsbreak down, break up
chemical science, chemistry - the science of matter; the branch of the natural sciences dealing with the composition of substances and their properties and reactions
digest - soften or disintegrate by means of chemical action, heat, or moisture
dissociate - to undergo a reversible or temporary breakdown of a molecule into simpler molecules or atoms; "acids dissociate to give hydrogen ions"
crack - reduce (petroleum) to a simpler compound by cracking
separate - divide into components or constituents; "Separate the wheat from the chaff"

(face hitting palm)

hh, while I can appreciate your sophistry, I will point out yet again that if your goal is communication, it works better when people all speak the same language. Of course, you are free to create an alternate world where words morph to mean whatever you want them to mean, and everyone magically knows how to follow your train of thought straight through a semantic brick wall.

my advice though is to speak english like everyone else, and agree to accepted definitions for words. or, if you want to change a word, be persuasuive enough to convince someone. Presently, you want us to start calling things decomposers when they clearly do nothing of the sort.

Producers - need an energy source and material to make food. Usually it is the sun but there are exceptions in the deep sea
consumers - need to eat producers, or consumers that eat producers
decomposers - they are the cleanup crew, with a very, very special role. So special it deserves a name.

consumers - overall consumers bring increased complexity to a system. They take simple C compounds from producers and make more complex compounds. Yes they poop, but they also grow and burn fuel and fight and fuck.
decomposers - decomposers actively reduce complexity. Like consumers, they are indeed making bodies of complex carbon chains and such, but overall their effect is to reduce.




it's worth noting that the concept "decomposers" is powerful, because how fast things return to the poop loop determines how much and what kind of production and consumption is possible. Without decomposers, the earth would eventually run out of material and space for living organisms. Our breathable atmosphere that supports plant based carbon fixation would also vanish very quickly.

You see, decomposers came second after the very first producers, and the carbon they farted is the food you eat everyday. Before decomposers, the atmosphere on planet earth was a toxic soup. In fact, before decomposers came on the scene, the plant kingdom would have never developed.