# Say NO to GMO in your feed grain.



## ladytoysdream (Dec 13, 2008)

I got this magazine the other day and was reading about GMO in the feed. 

Today I made a call to the phone number on the bag of chick starter I just bought. This is the place that makes the grain for TSC stores. 

I was told the only way to know for sure if GMO is NOT in your animal feed is to either raise your own, or feed organic, which is about double the cost of the regular grain. 

I just did a search on the nutrition magazine website and came up with this article. I have the article in the magazine that I have here. 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

so please read this article about GMO's in food products. 


http://www.betternutrition.com/hidden-gmos/features/featurearticles/1034

From this article ....
"In the area of reproduction, male rats fed GM soy had changes in the structures and function of their testicles that influenced sperm development. When *female rats were fed GM soy before they conceived and through pregnancy and lactation, more than 50 percent of their offspring died within three weeks of birth *compared with only 10 percent of those whose mothers ate non-GM soy. "
______________________

Only way you can beat the GMO grains, is to raise your own and or buy certified organic feed which is about double the cost of regular grain. 

I have a few older hens, that look like they are in permanent molt and today I go out there and find a 2 yr old hen dead. Rest of the flock is fine. 
So I am really starting to look at the GRAIN more seriously. I can't afford to feed organic.

I started this research because I have a lady willing to buy eggs from me, if I can tell her there is no GMO in the grain I buy for my chickens. From what I have learned so far....there is NO 100% way to know unless you go organic.


----------



## suelandress (May 10, 2002)

If you're not buying organic, anything soy, corn and most wheat is likely GMO. And alfalafa is soon to follow.


----------



## Wisconsin Ann (Feb 27, 2007)

You do understand that in the study cited they ONLY fed soybean meal? It wasn't part of a balanced diet. Since the site you're reading it from is anti-GMO or anything other than a "natural" raised product, you're starting from a slanted view. 

just sayin'.


----------



## christie (May 10, 2008)

Sue is right... Everything is GMO Corn, soy wheat and now Alfalfa!!! And thats everything we eat as well not just animal feed.
The only way to beat them is to buy organic food. You have to take the plunge and do it. At 1st its hard, but I pretend that there is no other options and that s just what it costs.
Some stores are trying to come up with a non GMO label to help people shop.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

If you only want to eat non-GMO foods, that is your choice. But don't do it only because the propaganda has you convinced it is a boogeyman. That link was full of exaggerations and half-truths. Allergies in the UK went up by 50% and the mainstream media just flat missed it???? I don't think so.

The genie of GMO crops has been out of the bottle for almost 20 years now. If it were harming us in any tangible way, I think it could be definitively proven by now, and there would be class action lawsuits out the wazoo against these companies. They have plenty o' money and lawyers and plaintiffs would be lined up around to block to get some if it were possible to prove damages. 

Eat or don't eat whatever you want, but do it for the right reasons. Not because some activist scared you into it.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

suelandress said:


> If you're not buying organic, anything soy, corn and most wheat is likely GMO. And alfalafa is soon to follow.


Wheat is not GM.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Wisconsin Ann said:


> You do understand that in the study cited they ONLY fed soybean meal? It wasn't part of a balanced diet. Since the site you're reading it from is anti-GMO or anything other than a "natural" raised product, you're starting from a slanted view.
> 
> just sayin'.


Bang on, Ann!!!


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> If you only want to eat non-GMO foods, that is your choice. But don't do it only because the propaganda has you convinced it is a boogeyman. That link was full of exaggerations and half-truths. Allergies in the UK went up by 50% and the mainstream media just flat missed it???? I don't think so.
> 
> The genie of GMO crops has been out of the bottle for almost 20 years now. If it were harming us in any tangible way, I think it could be definitively proven by now, and there would be class action lawsuits out the wazoo against these companies. They have plenty o' money and lawyers and plaintiffs would be lined up around to block to get some if it were possible to prove damages.
> 
> Eat or don't eat whatever you want, but do it for the right reasons. Not because some activist scared you into it.


Good point...:clap:


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Just so the "organic" types know, there is lots of food sold as "organic", that is not actually organic. What many fail to realize, is the amount of food grown which is organic in name only. Grains sold as "organic" often are not. Organic food/feed buyers are feeding a big juicy marketing ploy unfortunately.

Don't get me wrong, but it is a system of marketing, being badly abused by farmers to get higher prices being paid by those who are falsely being told it is better, more sustainable, and healthier. As consumers have jumped on this bandwagon, so too have less than honest farmers followed, and supplied them with much food that is anything BUT organic.

Canada has some of the strictest food quality controls om the planet, but I know for a fact that guys are selling non-organic product at premium organic prices. How? Well, many organic growers "contract out" production to non-organic producers. 

So don't kid yourselves, it is a marketing ploy, and nothing but a marketing ploy.

In a perfect world, I would love to be "organic". But I want to save my soil and build it, not mine it, till it, and watch it run away when it rains, or the wind blows. Most of all, I want to be EFFICIENT at growing food, to feed the most mouths I can. If we were all "organic", you would think back to 2011, and wish you had those feed prices, and food prices back..

I believe in the theory of organic production, but seeing how it actually works firsthand, I want no part of it. And I do not believe in the supposedly "green" and environmentally friendly practice it is espoused to be. One that depends on mass tillage, mass fossil fuel use, and the general thumbing of the nose at we who choose a different route to produce clean, healthy, and abundant food for the masses.


----------



## suelandress (May 10, 2002)

> If you only want to eat non-GMO foods, *that is your choice*.


No, it's not. They aren't required to label it.


----------



## suelandress (May 10, 2002)

MO_cows said:


> If you only want to eat non-GMO foods, that is your choice. But don't do it only because the propaganda has you convinced it is a boogeyman. That link was full of exaggerations and half-truths. Allergies in the UK went up by 50% and the mainstream media just flat missed it???? I don't think so.
> 
> The genie of GMO crops has been out of the bottle for almost 20 years now. If it were harming us in any tangible way, I think it could be definitively proven by now, and there would be class action lawsuits out the wazoo against these companies. They have plenty o' money and lawyers and plaintiffs would be lined up around to block to get some if it were possible to prove damages.
> 
> Eat or don't eat whatever you want, but do it for the right reasons. Not because some activist scared you into it.


 
Maybe. Maybe not. Don't see many lawsuits against shortening/trans fats. Now we know better, but hey, our government told us to eat it instead of butter. now you'd think there'd be lawsuit after lawsuit.....


----------



## christie (May 10, 2008)

There are so many things that our bad for us that the gov hides. And if you think the only detector of that is lawsuits you are blinded by your own ignorance. Smoking, trans-fats, aspartame, thirmesol, MSG, food colourings, are all proven to be toxic and some are illegal to use in parts of Europe. Are you going to wait till you get cancer to take care of yourself?

Monsanto is the leading producer of GM seeds. Do some research on them. They have the FDA in they're hands. Ex. Monsanto's x- employees are working in the FDA , and approve everything for them. There future goal is to put small farming out of business.

NOw, Organic farming is suppose to be strictly monitored and highly regulated, With inspections done often. An honest organic farmer works to hard and has to much invested to fail an inspection and lose they're organic license. Which takes about 5 years on average to attain.
Now are they're people who cut corners? Yep. Are there all out scam artist or farms that have inspectors in there pockets? Sure! But I don't believe thats the majority. Just like in every industry there are people who don't follow thru, and they are the minority. But they're the ones that make the headlines and sadly give everyone else the bad wrap.
Organic standards are so strict that even with some corner cutting it still makes a better product.
So if you don't want to eat organic that is fine. But don't suggest that those that do are just scared from propaganda media. Someone to make that case sounds to me a person that is either ignorant or trying to live through rose coloured glasses. In either case its a problem that the whole country is facing. People who are indifferent to the truth and just don't care at all what is happening around them. Whether its food, medicine, or politics.
Sorry for the rant... just a peeve of mine.


----------



## wildcat6 (Apr 5, 2011)

Forgive me for asking but what exactly is GMO?eep:


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

MO_cows said:


> If you only want to eat non-GMO foods, that is your choice. But don't do it only because the propaganda has you convinced it is a boogeyman. That link was full of exaggerations and half-truths. Allergies in the UK went up by 50% and the mainstream media just flat missed it???? I don't think so.
> 
> The genie of GMO crops has been out of the bottle for almost 20 years now. If it were harming us in any tangible way, I think it could be definitively proven by now, and there would be class action lawsuits out the wazoo against these companies. They have plenty o' money and lawyers and plaintiffs would be lined up around to block to get some if it were possible to prove damages.
> 
> Eat or don't eat whatever you want, but do it for the right reasons. Not because some activist scared you into it.


The right reason to avoid them is because they are harmful.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

farmerDale said:


> But I want to save my soil and build it, not mine it, till it, and watch it run away when it rains, or the wind blows.


Funny... That's the situation most common by conventional standards, while organic farming focuses more on building soil.


----------



## springvalley (Jun 23, 2009)

suelandress said:


> If you're not buying organic, anything soy, corn and most wheat is likely GMO. And alfalafa is soon to follow.


Not all farmers plant GMO corn, and not all seed companies sell GMO seed. The small companies that have not been bought out by the big M, still sell some form of non GMO seed. I buy seed from a small Mennonite seed company that grows non GMO seed, and they are just as good a company as some bigger ones I know. You need to find a farmer that plants, grows and harvests non GMO crops, he may even sell you some, and maybe even grind some for your chickens also. > Thanks Marc


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The right reason to avoid them is because they are harmful.


There's not a lot of evidence to back that up


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

I'm thinking not a shred, bearfoot.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Heritagefarm said:


> Funny... That's the situation most common by conventional standards, while organic farming focuses more on building soil.


So tell me. How do "organic" grain farms build their soil. Tell me about their tillage and fuel usage. And how about their yields? Weed issues? Disease issues? And finally, please tell us how an "organic" grain farm is possibly sustainable. What would I possibly know? I'm just a grain farmer.

Thank you kindly.

Dale


----------



## springvalley (Jun 23, 2009)

I still say that the GMO crops are what is killing our bee`s . Had a neighbor tell me that Monsanto has come out with a new GMO corn that you only have to plant the corn around your field, and it will act as a barrier to keep the bugs out of your corn fields. It is nasty stuff, and I want no part of it, And Dale sorry that some of us organic farmers may burn a bit more fuel doing cultivation, but I will trade that for a healthy crop I can feed to my animals and family. I do alot of soil testing and put on my farm only what is needed, alot of conventional farmers put on what they are told by people that have no idea what there farm may or may not need. And some conventional farmers use the moron system, if a little is good more on is better. We could debate this all day, and no one would win. So you farm the way you want to and I will farm the way I want to. > Thanks Marc


----------



## springvalley (Jun 23, 2009)

farmerDale said:


> So tell me. How do "organic" grain farms build their soil. Tell me about their tillage and fuel usage. And how about their yields? Weed issues? Disease issues? And finally, please tell us how an "organic" grain farm is possibly sustainable. What would I possibly know? I'm just a grain farmer.
> 
> Thank you kindly.
> 
> Dale


How do we build our soil ? you have got to be kidding. Most organic farmers have better soil than the standard farmer, we use cover crops, manure, natural fertilizers, rotation of crops and the list goes on. We have twice as much humus in our soil than most farmers, and we don`t use salt based frtilizers. And anhydrous ammonia as a nitrogen, don`t even get me started on it, why would you put something on your soil that kills everything it comes in contact with. During wars, it is used to build runways for aircrafts, makes the soil hard as cement. I could go on but I need to go, I know there will be more later on this one. > Thanks Marc


----------



## ladytoysdream (Dec 13, 2008)

I am still learning about this subject. 
So any links to check out would be a good thing.

We only have the 2 acres here. In order for us to feed organic, we would have to purchase it by the bagful. Just not feasible nor does it fit our budget. 
We do have a garden for our own use. I want to grow a lot of sunflowers this growing season. I like the color, and have been able to feed them, to the hens. 

Am still learning how to feed the chickens more natural. I would like something to sub in for the layer crumbles that would do the same job for us. And not be costly. 
________________________

To answer the question.......
GMO means genetically modified organism .


----------



## wildcat6 (Apr 5, 2011)

________________________

To answer the question.......
GMO means genetically modified organism .[/QUOTE]


Thank you.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Most organic farmers have better soil than the standard farmer,


They always SAY that, yet they tend to have lower yeilds



> we use *cover crops, manure*, natural fertilizers,* rotation of crops*


Lots of non organic farmers do those things too.

Your plants can't tell where the Nitrogen they use comes from, so it's no big advantage to use a few TONS of manure vs a few hundred pounds of a chemical fertilizer.


----------



## greenSearcher (Mar 23, 2007)

I have been troubled by feeding GMO feed to my chickens since I first got them almost 2 years ago. I had read about fertility issues from GMO feed in hogs and that haunted my mind. I finally was able to find reasonably priced organic feed, 30% more costly and made the switch. I have made the transition this month, and the increase in laying is not statistically significant as the longer days could be enough to cause the increase. I can say that the new feed is preferred to the DuMor/Puriena feed, I have much less billing and waste even though both feed is pelleted. I also see there is less being eaten, and spring has not really arrived, we are already 5" behind in rainfall so everything is still dry and brown. I am not looking forward to the awakening of the bugs as they will be voraciously attacking the gardens.

I choose to avoid GMOs in our personal diet because what scientific research that has been done shows that they are not as harmless as Monsanto/et al claim. Already most folks have forgotten the Starlink GMO (for animal feed only) that contaminated the human food supply. I am appalled that agribusiness researchers want to change the very basic nature of foods so that they can be sold when they are no longer good. Why else would they want to have apples with the browning gene "turned off". The apple industry was not receptive of this recent offering out of Canada. 

There is a growing population that wants to know what they are eating and wish to eat wholesome and nourishing foods. Unfortunately, unless one raises their own, they can not feel secure that they are eating what they need. It is not paranoia stirred up by eco freaks that drives most of us to make this choice, but hours of in depth research that left us with out trust in our food supply.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

I have a feeling this has been debated here more than a few times. And everybody is passionate about it and not likely to change their views. But, for the new folks like Wildcat who didn't even know the term GMO, let me say this. When the GMO's were first introduced, I was alarmed. I initially bought into the whole "franken-food" fear thing. But that was years and years ago. And the sky didn't fall. What I have seen with my own eyes is the farmers whose land surrounds ours, are in their fields a lot less. They no longer have to make all those cultivation passes thru their corn, sending up dust clouds of valuable topsoil and burning fossil fuel. My horses ate literally tons of GMO grain in their feed over the years, and they lived to be nearly 30 years old. 

One of my potential egg customers wanted me to avoid any GMO grain in the poultry feed. Sorry, darlin', it's not labeled so I can't tell you if it's in there or not. But she still went ahead and bought my eggs because my hens get to free range, and she fed a lot of those eggs to her kids. So apparently, she wasn't THAT scared.


----------



## ladytoysdream (Dec 13, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> One of my potential egg customers wanted me to avoid any GMO grain in the poultry feed. Sorry, darlin', it's not labeled so I can't tell you if it's in there or not. But she still went ahead and bought my eggs because my hens get to free range, and she fed a lot of those eggs to her kids. So apparently, she wasn't THAT scared.


Let me expand on my opening post.......

My potential egg customer wants to buy 30 dz eggs per WEEK. That is what she is currently buying from another person who she is NOT sure if the feed they use is NON gmo. It could mean a nice local selling niche for me. So hence my research. 
And I have to admit, I have been living under some stone. When she first said GMO....I had no clue what she was talking about .
I grew up on a dairy farm but it has been quite a few years now, since I paid attention to growing any field crops.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

springvalley said:


> How do we build our soil ? you have got to be kidding. Most organic farmers have better soil than the standard farmer, we use cover crops, manure, natural fertilizers, rotation of crops and the list goes on. We have twice as much humus in our soil than most farmers, and we don`t use salt based frtilizers. And anhydrous ammonia as a nitrogen, don`t even get me started on it, why would you put something on your soil that kills everything it comes in contact with. During wars, it is used to build runways for aircrafts, makes the soil hard as cement. I could go on but I need to go, I know there will be more later on this one. > Thanks Marc


Tillage does not build soil. Tillage breaks down the soil.

Every conventional farmer I know uses crop rotation, forages, and many use manure. I have been using anhydrous on our land for nearly 20 years, and it is more alive now than it ever has been before! You should come grab some of my alive soil and see for yourself. NH3 does not kill everything in the soil. It is put in the soil in a narrow band that affects a tiny portion of the soil. These kinds of lies and falsehoods are what drives your marketing ploy. you play on the fear of people who have no clue. (the consumers) You mention NH3 used to make airstrips. It was put on at thousands of pounds an acre, and it basically froze the soil. A conventional farmer uses maybe 80 or 100 pounds an acre every year, and my soil is as alive, mellow, and gaining organic matter, microbes, and earthworms quickly, funny how that can happen if anhydrous kills the soil, hey?

Once in the soil, any nitrogen source is not differentiated by the plants.

The "organic" guys I know, and I know alot of them, have erosion, are mining the soil, but worst, contracting out production, yet still calling it "organic".

Their yields are suffering, because they can not replace nutrients removed with forages. May i ask where you get your manganese, copper, iron, boron, potassium, phosphate, etc. from?

I soil test. I apply nutrients my crop needs in a very precise way. Much more precise than manure application. 

It bugs me. Organic types imply I am raising crap for food, and that is what this is all about to me. It gets my goat that NH3 is raised as evil, your "salt' based fertilizers are evil, and that it is hard on my soil. Maybe i'll mail you a handful of my soil, you mail me some of yours. We can then compare.

:bowtie:


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

springvalley said:


> How do we build our soil ? you have got to be kidding. Most organic farmers have better soil than the standard farmer, we use cover crops, manure, natural fertilizers, rotation of crops and the list goes on. We have twice as much humus in our soil than most farmers, and we don`t use salt based frtilizers. And anhydrous ammonia as a nitrogen, don`t even get me started on it, why would you put something on your soil that kills everything it comes in contact with. During wars, it is used to build runways for aircrafts, makes the soil hard as cement. I could go on but I need to go, I know there will be more later on this one. > Thanks Marc


Tillage does not build soil. Tillage breaks down the soil.

Every conventional farmer I know uses crop rotation, forages, and many use manure. I have been using anhydrous on our land for nearly 20 years, and it is more alive now than it ever has been before! You should come grab some of my alive soil and see for yourself. NH3 does not kill everything in the soil. It is put in the soil in a narrow band that affects a tiny portion of the soil. These kinds of lies and falsehoods are what drives your marketing ploy. you play on the fear of people who have no clue. (the consumers) You mention NH3 used to make airstrips. It was put on at thousands of pounds an acre, and it basically froze the soil. A conventional farmer uses maybe 80 or 100 pounds an acre every year, and my soil is as alive, mellow, and gaining organic matter, microbes, and earthworms quickly, funny how that can happen if anhydrous kills the soil, hey?

Once in the soil, any nitrogen source is not differentiated by the plants.

The "organic" guys I know, and I know alot of them, have erosion, are mining the soil, but worst, contracting out production, yet still calling it "organic".

Their yields are suffering, because they can not replace nutrients removed with forages. May i ask where you get your manganese, copper, iron, boron, potassium, phosphate, etc. from?

I soil test. I apply nutrients my crop needs in a very precise way. Much more precise than manure application. 

It bugs me. Organic types imply I am raising crap for food, and that is what this is all about to me. It gets my goat that NH3 is raised as evil, your "salt' based fertilizers are evil, and that it is hard on my soil. Maybe i'll mail you a handful of my soil, you mail me some of yours. We can then compare.

:bowtie:


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

springvalley said:


> I still say that the GMO crops are what is killing our bee`s . Had a neighbor tell me that Monsanto has come out with a new GMO corn that you only have to plant the corn around your field, and it will act as a barrier to keep the bugs out of your corn fields. It is nasty stuff, and I want no part of it, And Dale sorry that some of us organic farmers may burn a bit more fuel doing cultivation, but I will trade that for a healthy crop I can feed to my animals and family. I do alot of soil testing and put on my farm only what is needed, alot of conventional farmers put on what they are told by people that have no idea what there farm may or may not need. And some conventional farmers use the moron system, if a little is good more on is better. We could debate this all day, and no one would win. So you farm the way you want to and I will farm the way I want to. > Thanks Marc



Ahh the bees!!! We have lots of bees. They pollinate millions of acres of gm canola up here. No bee problem at all. But lets just blame gm or monsanto, cuz well, we can...Are you implying my grain i raise is not healthy? Interesting. Perhaps we should along with compare our soil, send our seed to independent labs as well. 

I sure will continue to farm the way I do, as I will pass this land on to my kids with fewer weeds, better soil, and a healthier environment for us all. This I can guarantee. You can sure continue to farm as you wish, but please abstain from stating your grain is healthier than mine, your soil is healthier than mine, etc.. Because you can't really know that, can you?


----------



## CollieFlowerWV (Jun 28, 2010)

We don't use organic, but we do use non-gmo feed. There are some feed sources out there that you can find. They are few and far between. If you google you might find them. Here is a good website, but there are many:
http://www.saynotogmos.org/


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

farmerDale said:


> So tell me. How do "organic" grain farms build their soil. Tell me about their tillage and fuel usage. And how about their yields? Weed issues? Disease issues? And finally, please tell us how an "organic" grain farm is possibly sustainable. What would I possibly know? I'm just a grain farmer.
> 
> Thank you kindly.
> 
> Dale


Interesting: I think this is the closest to actually being polite you've ever been. That's why I'm responding. But anyways...
Conventional farming and organic farming are both capable of building soil. However, organic is more capable of doing it. In organics, you necessarily use composts and manures as fertilizers. If you apply enough, and do it right, you can rise the SOM of the soil and ultimately build the soil. Organics also pays more attention to trace elements, which is something conventional usually does not. That is not to say conventional _cannot_ pay attention, or that organics _will_. On the flipside, using chemical fertilizers is largely incapable of building soil since no organic matter (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen) is added as fertilizer on a regular basis. Furthermore, if conventional agriculture continue to grow crops without adding micronutrients back to the soil, soils will become, or stay, micronutrient deficient. 
Organic yields are typically lower yielding, however, this is an exchange for a higher quality produce. They can, however, match and even compete with conventional yields.
Weed issues are a problem since we have no chemicals, but it is a small concern since there are plenty of methods of dealing with them.
Organics will, in general, have less problems with diseases on account of better health. Monitoring of trace elements will ensure optimum health, as well as better care of soil microbes. Ensuring that soil microbes are taken care of will help ensure productivity and disease resistance of plants. Conventional agriculture is notorious for abusing soil microbes; it is almost as if they do not exist. Microbes are responsible for a large portion of a plants health: toxic chemicals used by conventional methods severely abuse mycorrhizae. This invites diseases in. Once this happens, chemicals ensure a constant vicious cycle of chemicals are diseases that could easily be quelled simply by taking better care of plants.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Thanks for the vote of confidence in my politeness. I am not sure where you get your information from regarding conventional farming, but it sure seems to me most of it comes from anti conventional farming websites. My soil is dynamic and healthy and I use chemicals and fertilizers. Why is this? as well, every single con. farmer I know is very interested in micronutrients. Every single organic farmer I know relies on tillage to oxidate the OM in the soil to provide the nurients. They use legumes to "build the soil", but legumes only fix nitrogen. I am not sure where the organic farmers get the micro's from. Is copper organic?

And to the point of mychorhizae fungi. I can tell you tillage is very hard on this fungus type. When I switched to no tillage, I noticed a dramatic increase in soil life, while using chemicals. I also know that it prefers certain crop residues.

I have awesome soil, and it is getting better while using supposedly "toxic" chemicals. My neighbors who are mining their soil, have a pulverised, structurless, erodible soil scince going "organic". They rely exlusively on tillage for weed control. I have one neighbor who after 5 years of organic farming, has such a vibrant seed bank of wild mustard, he had to go conventional to get it under control. You can not organically control many weeds. With this mustard, it emerges late, and seeds out before harvest. It is viable in the soil for 60 years. Now he can not be organic, as he has a yellow flower fest every year!

I am not against organic, it is a marketing idea that is very effective, and we all need to fill a niche. I am against people spreading false accusations about conventional farming like our soils are dying, we have no mychorizae fungi, and our food is unhealthy. Or that we don't pay attention to micro nutrients, etc.. I am a real life grain farmer, simply trying to bring some balance to a debate that I have a distinct interest in. I love soil, I love agronomy. It was my major in university after all. When I go to these anti gmo websites that are so full of false information, downright lies about conventional farming, and fear mongering for those who have no possibility of knowing better, I get very frustrated.

BTW, politeness doesn't translate to text very well. I do not mean to be impolite, and my appologies to any I offend with real life farming experiences.

Later,
Dale.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Organic yields are typically lower yielding, however, this is an exchange for a *higher quality produce*.


That is simply NOT true.

There is NO difference in the quality or nutrition of "organic".
There are many studies that I know you've seen to back that up, so I don't understand why you continue to repeat it

[ame]http://www.google.com/search?complete=1&hl=en&source=hp&q=organic+produce+not+more+nutritious&aq=0&aqi=m1&aql=&oq=orgnanic+produce+not+more+nutritious[/ame]





> Conventional agriculture is notorious for abusing soil microbes





> Organics also pays more attention to trace elements, which is something conventional usually does not.


Those statements are pretty much false too.

ALL farmers pay attention to their soils, since their livelyhoods depend on it. and adding micronutrients are done as needed by every farmer I know, through custom fertilizer blends and soil testing.

Organic farmers tend to ASSUME theirs is better, but reality is it's basic CHEMISTRY, and the source makes NO difference at all


----------



## suelandress (May 10, 2002)

Well, we've gone from GMO poultry feed to organic vs conventional farming. Gotta love HT.

If it were up to me, everyone would farm organic. Why? Because months, years, decades, centuries down the road, we discover that it's not nice to fool with mother nature.

But that's me. What really BUGS me, is that 1) labeling of GMO food is not required, so I can't decide for myself
2) GMO crops are tainted nearby organic fields.....again, lessens my choices, doesn't it?


OK, off my soap box. back to where you were


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

farmerDale said:


> Thanks for the vote of confidence in my politeness. I am not sure where you get your information from regarding conventional farming, but it sure seems to me most of it comes from anti conventional farming websites. My soil is dynamic and healthy and I use chemicals and fertilizers. Why is this? as well, every single con. farmer I know is very interested in micronutrients. Every single organic farmer I know relies on tillage to oxidate the OM in the soil to provide the nurients. They use legumes to "build the soil", but legumes only fix nitrogen. I am not sure where the organic farmers get the micro's from. Is copper organic?
> 
> And to the point of mychorhizae fungi. I can tell you tillage is very hard on this fungus type. When I switched to no tillage, I noticed a dramatic increase in soil life, while using chemicals. I also know that it prefers certain crop residues.
> 
> ...


I am pleased to hear that your soil is improving with your methods. If it suits your needs, continue that way. I'm glad you pay attention to your micronutrients. Around here, we have the opposite situation you describe: The conventional farms rarely soil test, apply rather random amounts of fertilizer, if they fertilize at all, and I know several who go on soil tests 10 years old. Their soils are awful, and continue to get worse. 
However, there are other reasons not to use GMOs other then that they are inherently unstable. It simply makes me mad that they would patent life. That, in and of itself, should be illegal, and was for quite some time. It also makes my blood boil when I hear of all the farmers sued simply for having wind scatter pollen into their field and contaminating their plants. There is simply no reason for that, and I believe it is done to make farmers afraid not to use GMOs. I believe that if they are novel enough to be patented, they should be labeled, at the very least.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

See, i think a thing that may surprise you, is up here we don't grow corn, and then soy, and then corn, and call it a rotation. We grow MANY crops, and I can see where soil issues from monoculture can exist.

I also think not tilling is the key to building soil in conventional farming. It was built without a plow! I peruse a couple of american websites that are like this one, but farmer talk mostly, and many pictures are posted of farmers plowing, mulching, and disking their soil. The soil looks like crap! There is no structure, it just looks so beat up. I do not believe in this type of agriculture. Bare soil is not natural. Tilled soil is not natural either.

I believe in a healthy agriculture. An honest agriculture. I get the feeling on here at times that people think conventional agriculture automatically means BAD. Or that a half litre of glyphosate every 4 years on an acre of land is toxic. Or that commercial fertilizer is a sin. I love this site, I just think many have a skewed idea of what really goes on in farming. A highly romanticized ideal of organic farming. That they have been so mislead by the many websites espousing lies is a disgrace. It would be like me being told lies about something I know little about, and having no way of knowing the truth. I want to share some of the truth.

So many posters have a few acres, and expect farmers to hand pull weeds, or spread manure. That is all fine and dandy, but I don't think many of them can fathom a farm of 5 000 acres or even 1 000. See, I have a different view, because my view is based from a GRAIN producers perspective. What i believe about farming grainland, does not necessarily translate to veggie or fruit farming, which of course is generally done on a much smaller scale.

Just a bit of info on where I am coming from. I do not want or need GM wheat for example. Or strawberries, or flaxseed, or oats, or barley, or peas, or most other crops. But with canola, there was a definite need to use less chemical, and gm canola has delivered this. 

Just because i am a conventional farmer on a large scale, does not mean I am raping the soil, that i am chemical dependent only, that I overuse fertilizers, that I love chemicals, or that I am environmentally inept. I have over 500 acre of forests I could clear to farm if I were that type of person. I could drain every marsh that my land includes but I do not. Conventional farming can work hand in hand with nature. 

Dale


----------



## springvalley (Jun 23, 2009)

Farmer Dale I have no idea why your farming methods are better than mine just because you say so. I tell no lies as far as using chemicals on farm ground, I have farmed 31 years and started out farming the way eveyone else was, My father was almost killed by anhydrous ammonia 30 years ago due to a faulty valve on a applicator, changed our farming methods from that day on. We replace the nutrients in our soil just like most people do, we apply it. We can put anything on our soil that has come from the earth or is in the earth. As far as nitrogen added to our soil, as I stated we use cover crops such as rye or clover and shallow plow in under. we can add manure, like pelleted organic chicken manure, compost, and fresh manure. Most of the time if the nutrients in the soil are balanced we have very little problem with weeds in our crops, weeds grow because something is missing in our soil, one nutrient that is basicly used up from our soil is calcium, and calcium is what helps sugars develope in the plants. And if plants are healthy they don`t have problems, and if plants are healthy bugs don`t bother them as much either. I am glad you have great soil, and that is very healthy, but farmers down this way plant corn or soybeans, that is their rotation. Very few livestock farms around, so no manure or compost, no one is going to grow hay if you don`t have cattle. I also find it hard to believe that organic farmers can get away with the things you say they do. That does not happen down here as the organic certifiers are very good at what they do, everything you use needs to be approved before you use it on your crop. When I was a kid, there was an old man that owned 80 acres not far from us, he was organic and ahead of his time, he had a fantastic farm for back then. He had no heirs when he died so the farm was sold and has never been the same after that. I wish I had some money back then to buy it as it would have been such a nice place to have. I also have no idea weather your crop are deadly or not, I`m just saying that they don`t know enough about some of these GMO seeds, we have no idea what they will do fifty yaers from now. I KNOW fifty years from now organic is still organic, and as far as yield goes I can get 150-60 bu. of corn an acre without doing much more than tillage and planting. Once again we could debate this till we are blue in the face, I`m right, your right. By the way how many years has your farm been a farm ? Most down this way are going on 200 years under cultivation. and the hardest has been in the last fifty years. > Marc


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Hey Marc,

I certainly do not mean to come across as being a better farmer. I do what I can for my situation. Organic is an iffy prospect here for the reasons mentioned. I have no doubt there are well run and excellent organic farms. There are just none here. As far as guys getting away with contracting out, as long as they keep it quiet, how will anyone know? How could the inspector know he is topping up with the neighbors barley? You know what I mean? 

I think I made it clear in my previous post that I am an open minded individual who happens to conventionally farm. I am very glad you are doing well, and are a proactive organic farmer. My posts, while perhaps seeming a little hard on the organic way, are supposed to be DEFENDING my way, and dispelling fallacies. If a fallacy regarding conventional farming is brought forth, like that gm canola is a superweed, or that it is not environmentally friendly, or that anhydrous kills the soil, I will defend actual facts.

Neither of us are right, because no one is perfect, but we just need to present FACTS, not fallacies, IMO.

Our farm has been a farm for about 90 years. It was broken in the 1920's, and has not been tilled for the last 15. It is better now than it was when I started farming it. I plan to pass it down better. 

Yeah anhydrous CAN be dangerous, but so can a faulty hydraulic line or too much water in the human stomach. 

I am sorry your dad had that dreadful accident. Sounds scary! I am extremely careful around the stuff, I always know the wind direction, and wear protection. Me and NH3 have a good respectful relationship!!!

Good night

Dale


----------



## ladytoysdream (Dec 13, 2008)

suelandress said:


> Well, we've gone from GMO poultry feed to organic vs conventional farming.


When I posted for information, I was not expecting any clear cut answers. 
I hope, we all can learn something from this thread. 

The farmer controls this issue of GMO. It is up to each individual what they buy to keep their soil producing to get crops to sell. 

I grew up on a farm, and my husband worked for a big dairy farmer for 17 years. So I have seen first hand how different things affect farmers. My husband has a regular full time job, but when the weather warms up, they go to 4 ten hours days, so, it makes 3 day weekends for him, He is sometimes able to do sub work for a BIG dairy farm driving a truck to bring the crop in from the fields. I cannot comprehend how farmers today, can afford to pay for the new bigger equipment.


----------



## Lazy J (Jan 2, 2008)

Heritagefarm said:


> Furthermore, if conventional agriculture continue to grow crops without adding micronutrients back to the soil, soils will become, or stay, micronutrient deficient.


An once again you have made assertions that are blatantly false. Conventional famers most certainly DO pay attention to micronutrients. We add S, Zn, B, and Fe regularly to our fertilizer mixes to meet nutrient demands of the plant. Plus we use foliar applications of Micro Nutrients to feed them to the plant.

One issue that vexes all famers is increasing OM in the soil, whether you are an Organic or a Convetional farmer building OM is a long process. Obviously using high OM products like compost and manure will help but the increase doesn't happen over nights.


----------



## buffalocreek (Oct 19, 2007)

Strange that Monsanto apologists now inhabit this site. Sure has changed over the years.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Who are the monsanto apologists? I'm curious.


----------



## Lazy J (Jan 2, 2008)

buffalocreek said:


> Strange that Monsanto apologists now inhabit this site. Sure has changed over the years.


Please do tell who the Monsanto apologists are.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Please do tell who the Monsanto apologists are.


I take it to mean anyone who doesn't fall for all the organic/anti-GMO hype


----------



## christie (May 10, 2008)

> Me and NH3 have a good respectful relationship!!!


Doesn't that alone make you wary of using chemicals? You speak of leaving your farm to your kids.... But arn't you worried about what they're eatting? They are eating that stuff!! Will they have a dad die from cancer? How about those MArsh lands your saving???? All those chemicals spilling ino our water ways. Killing fish, then birds. Phosphate run off makes algae grow and flouris,h smothering out other life in the water ways.
I live on a lake that down hill from farms. Are lake is tested every year, and the chemical and bacterial runoff makes it unsafe to go swimming in. 
Everything we do effects the environment that we rent here from God. 
Everything has a pro and con. To deny that is plain ignorance, and your living in denial. 
I want as many pros on my list!!!
I want to look my kids in the eyes and say I did my best with what I had and what I knew. And I f my kids can't touch{ for they're healths sake} what I am going to spray on there food.... even in minute quantities... I personally couldn't do it.
And IF I was a farmer... I would hope that weeds, or big yields, wouldn't stop me from doing the better the thing for all mankind., I want to be a bigger person then that. 
Your soil might be great, the seed may be fine.....But like I said everything has its cost.. Whats it worth to you.
You probably feel you don't effect anyone. But there are thousands of "you"! All believing there not effecting anyone living with they're eyes closed to the harsh realities.

Monsanto apologists would be the ones that agree that monsanto has the right to patent life. And sue anyone that may have some cross pollination.
Like the other poster said if he, monsanto wants to be so special He should get a label!!! Why is he hiding it?
sorry for the rant!


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

christie said:


> Doesn't that alone make you wary of using chemicals?
> 
> Not at all. The nh3 - once in the soil is exactly the same nitrogen as is supplied by manure, or legumes. You have to be safe with anhydrous because it can be dangerous in its raw form. So a person keep his equipment in good shape. But accidents happen more frequently with balers, grain bins, and on the highway.
> 
> ...


Monsanto has no patent on life, they have a patent on a gene, which in the case of canola, is a soil bacteria based gene, which they fused into the genome of SOME canola varieties, that helps the plants better break down glyphosate. They patented a gene. Again, before they did this, i used litres of harsh herbicides, which were volatile, dangerous, and disgusting, on every acre. I then tilled the land twice to incorporate it so it bonded to the soil. After the tillage, my soil would wash and blow away taking chemicals and fertilizers with it. This chemical leached into groudwater, eroded into lakes, and because of the tillage required, caused massive erosion. 

Today, I seed into untilled land covered in a crop residue mulch, that does not erode, spray the crop a few weeks after emergence with a small amount of herbicide, and build the soil in the process. Which do you prefer?

Thank you,

Dale[/FONT]


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Finally, for someone from connecticut who doesn't farm, and who has probably never seen a field bigger than 4 acres for all I know, it is fairly rich of you to belittle a farmer who is actually working the land. Your lack of knowlege is obvious, I am sorry to say. At 3 540 000 acres, your state has only about 5 times as much land base as my small to medium sized municipality! Your population density there is about 1400 times what ours is. Of course you would have a different view, and I respect that view. But it is skewed badly, and falsely, I am sorry to say. I do hope you can see through the clutter, and take to heart some of what I have told you of how farming works. Because you are very mistaken, and frankly, out of touch. I post here, because of this general removal of todays society from farm life, and the way things are. This needs to be separated from the romantic, and often lying notion of organic agriculture, foisted on those who have no opportunity in real life to actually know better, but get information from organic websites, green peace websites. But who would think to ask a farmer? Why on earth would one ask how things work on a conventional farm, to find out how thing work on a conventional farm? 

Unfortunately, too many of you urban types rely on food Inc. , and other enviroweenie shows to feed you what you seem to want to hear. 

If you want to know about conventional farming, why would one rely on an organic website? A skewed movie like food inc. ? Because sadly, these source know as well as i do, that the masses have no clue. Through no fault of their own, urban types get fed lies, and false accusations by people who feed on this type of nonsense, and from the organic lobby, which has nothing but big gains to be made by promoting lies about conventional farmers.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

buffalocreek said:


> Strange that Monsanto apologists now inhabit this site. Sure has changed over the years.


This site is made up of many people. Some of them even live and work in the real world. If you came here looking for a bunch of people joined at the hip and singing Kumbya you certainly are barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

buffalocreek said:


> Strange that Monsanto apologists now inhabit this site. Sure has changed over the years.


It's not that. I grew up with our homestead farm being the oat seed supplier for 25-30 local farms and one field was always planted just for seed oats. (We also had the only winnowing machine in the valley.) Neighboring farm was an uncle and he had all the gear for sizing corn and supplied those same farmers with Golden Glow. My last year on the homestead farm was day after day of picking 2 buckboards of corn by hand and only ailment was from bending over to pick up the ears from the short stalks. Pick 2 loads per day and figure an acre with 2 huskers. (Uncle was a pegger while I was a hooker and I could out-husk him with cleaner ears!) Maybe 25 bushels per acre in a good year. Left that hillside clay for prairie silt and 100 bushel per acre DeKalb and Pioneer the next year. 12" ears versus 6"! Quite a shock just to go to mechanical picking, to say nothing about the production. Years later, what wowed me then would be expected from the poorest acreage on a farm now. Don't care who is responsible for the genetic seed manipulation which has gotten farmers to where they are now but the alternative is not where some may want us to be. Been there, done that, don't want to go back! 

Martin


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

buffalocreek said:


> Strange that Monsanto apologists now inhabit this site. Sure has changed over the years.


In light of the fact that everyone has a join date next to their name don't you think that is a silly statement?


----------



## Cindy in PA (May 13, 2002)

farmerDale said:


> Ahh the bees!!! We have lots of bees. They pollinate millions of acres of gm canola up here. No bee problem at all. But lets just blame gm or monsanto, cuz well, we can...Are you implying my grain i raise is not healthy? Interesting. Perhaps we should along with compare our soil, send our seed to independent labs as well.
> 
> I sure will continue to farm the way I do, as I will pass this land on to my kids with fewer weeds, better soil, and a healthier environment for us all. This I can guarantee. You can sure continue to farm as you wish, but please abstain from stating your grain is healthier than mine, your soil is healthier than mine, etc.. Because you can't really know that, can you?


Funny, the farmer that rents FIL's land rotate crops....corn/soy-corn/soy. The land we took over for our own use was terrible. He uses round-up ready & often over sprays on our land. By the end of the season the weeds in his field are big & spreading seeds. Hardly think RR stuff makes for less weeds. This year he spread human crap. I get to smell the rotting carcass smell everyday. FIL was stupid & didn't ask questions. It happens to be Class A, so government says it's safe. It will NOT happen again. When fertilizer went up the other year, he spread chicken manure form crappy broiler houses. I buy organic feed for the chickens, local grass-fed beef & local grass-fed organic milk. If I stay away from processed stuff in the store, I don't get GMO soy over load. We raise as many vegetables as we can. If they would just label GMO crap in the store, we could make our choice & I believe Monsato would lose. Hence the reason it is not required.


----------



## suelandress (May 10, 2002)

the font you used is too hard to read! some of us are old you know??




farmerDale said:


> Monsanto has no patent on life, they have a patent on a gene, which in the case of canola, is a soil bacteria based gene, which they fused into the genome of SOME canola varieties, that helps the plants better break down glyphosate. They patented a gene. Again, before they did this, i used litres of harsh herbicides, which were volatile, dangerous, and disgusting, on every acre. I then tilled the land twice to incorporate it so it bonded to the soil. After the tillage, my soil would wash and blow away taking chemicals and fertilizers with it. This chemical leached into groudwater, eroded into lakes, and because of the tillage required, caused massive erosion.
> 
> Today, I seed into untilled land covered in a crop residue mulch, that does not erode, spray the crop a few weeks after emergence with a small amount of herbicide, and build the soil in the process. Which do you prefer?
> 
> ...


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Yeah, I noticed how it looked AFTER I read it this morning. I thought it was your basic bold print. I do apologize. It is hard to read...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> It is hard to read...


LOL
I thought it was my eyes


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> he spread chicken manure form crappy broiler houses


There's a big sheep farm near here that also raised chickens for a long time. (Commercially)

They "saved money" by using the manure instead of fertilizer on the pastures.
It was great until *the sheep started to die *from the excess copper that had tainted the soil

"Organic" isnt always "better"


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> There's a big sheep farm near here that also raised chickens for a long time. (Commercially)
> 
> They "saved money" by using the manure instead of fertilizer on the pastures.
> It was great until *the sheep started to die *from the excess copper that had tainted the soil
> ...


LOL! You would blame "Organic" for the copper overload?!?! LOL!!!!!!!!


----------



## suelandress (May 10, 2002)

> Probably not. I eat my veggies, home grown meat, wild game, etc...The garden we grow gets less commercial treatments, because its smaller size makes it practical to be kind of organic.




Why? It may be more practicial on a smaller scale, but why do it at all ?


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

suelandress said:


> Why? It may be more practicial on a smaller scale, but why do it at all ?


Why I kind of organically farm my garden, is because I can not fit my farm machinery in the garden area mostly. I also no-till my garden, so I don't need machinery for a half acre of garden plot. We have animals, and I use the manure on our garden because I have to put it somewhere. And finally I must repeat. I am a GRAIN farmer. Conventional grain farmers do not use very much chemical, compared to fruit or veggie conventional farmers. Store bought veggies and fruits get sprayed as the fruit forms, and fungicides are used and such. This I agree is not as healthy as my home grown garden produce. I may be a conventional farmer, but I at the same time, do not agree with the amounts of chemicals used on fruits and veggies. Grain farming vs. veggie farming is very different!


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Heritagefarm said:


> LOL! You would blame "Organic" for the copper overload?!?! LOL!!!!!!!!


 Sigh. :bored:Organic producers as a matter of course use copper sulfate which is unbelievably allowable to use in an "organic system" for disease control. It is often applied foliar style. And manure contains excessive amounts of several nutrients that a crop will not remove fast enough. The big one being P. Again, with the tillage organic producers require to control weeds, the nutrients become easily volatile. Erosion is made possible by this tillage, and the soil leaves the field along with the nutrient overload.

Organic guys are shooting to replenish N, and to get enough N, need to apply a few tons or more an acre of manure. So to get that N, an excess of P is applied. A conventional farmer can exactly control and band INTO THE SOIL, not on top, as in organic production, a very exact amount of nutrients... Eliminating waste, leaching, and over-application. Organic producers; Not so easily or precisely.

Dale


----------



## Curtis B (Aug 15, 2008)

farmerdale, I have a question, even though I rarely get involved in these discussion, but I do read them. Do you think you folks up in Canada have a different idea of crop rotation than farmers in the states? Around here in KS, the farmers I know consider crop rotation as corn, beans, corn, beans/ wheat, corn, wheat, corn/ as rotation. You have stated that your rotation is much more varied. I am not knocking anyone, but it seams you may be a bit more progressive than the farmers around here, have you ever compared yourself and stateside farmers?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> LOL! You would blame "Organic" for the copper overload?!?! LOL!!!!!!!!


Manure is about as organic as it gets.


----------



## blaineiac (Jan 10, 2010)

To me it's simply a matter of Not wanting engineering in my food. If it is fine... Then eat it up. I'm growing my own food to have some control over what I eat. I do not want gmo's in my food if I can help it. Keep building your chemical soil and sell the product for ethanol if that is what keeps the lights on. I'm not eating that stuff. I think most people here are trying to do this same thing. That's why they are "homesteading". I am doing this out of choice and not necessity. I choose non GMO. Ethanol doesn't feed the world.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Curtis B said:


> farmerdale, I have a question, even though I rarely get involved in these discussion, but I do read them. Do you think you folks up in Canada have a different idea of crop rotation than farmers in the states? Around here in KS, the farmers I know consider crop rotation as corn, beans, corn, beans/ wheat, corn, wheat, corn/ as rotation. You have stated that your rotation is much more varied. I am not knocking anyone, but it seams you may be a bit more progressive than the farmers around here, have you ever compared yourself and stateside farmers?


Thanks for the question, Curtis. :baby04:

I think most areas of Canada have a much different take on crop rotation than the corn belt guys. I grow about a dozen crops, which all have different nutrition needs, disease problems, weed issues, etc. So it is easy to keep the pests off balance, WITHOUT using pesticides. A typical rotation might be: Wheat, peas, oats, canola, barley, flaxseed, canaryseed, canola, oats, forage for a few years, etc.

Some practice a shorter rotation than that, but many crops are in the mix. I also as I said, am a member of a few stateside farm forums, and am surprised many call corn-corn-soybean-corn a rotation:bash:. No wonder american farmers have glyphosate resistance issues! I am also appalled at the massive tillage that takes place. 

Up here, zero tillage is done on probably 80 % plus of the land. That means that the soil is always covered in residue, and soil builds due to it being undisturbed. In the corn belt, there are several good farmers who realize the soil improvements with no tillage. But many still disk, mulch, plow, and pulverize their soils. Then it loses structure, bakes hard, erodes, gets compacted, and then they look into cover crops like tillage radishes to alleviate the problems they cause by tillage!!!

The thing is, I use some chemicals, yes. But due to the no tillage factor and the extensive crop rotation factors, my soil gets better and better, pests are a minimal issue, and the environment is pristine. 

I do appreciate the question, and I do appreciate the obvious fact you have read my posts with interest and understanding.:cowboy: Even the quoted ones with the WICKED font!


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

blaineiac said:


> To me it's simply a matter of Not wanting engineering in my food. If it is fine... Then eat it up. I'm growing my own food to have some control over what I eat. I do not want gmo's in my food if I can help it. Keep building your chemical soil and sell the product for ethanol if that is what keeps the lights on. I'm not eating that stuff. I think most people here are trying to do this same thing. That's why they are "homesteading". I am doing this out of choice and not necessity. I choose non GMO. Ethanol doesn't feed the world.


Is this comment directed my way? If it is I'd like to respond. If it is not, I will save my fingers.:huh:


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

farmerDale said:


> Sigh. :bored:Organic producers as a matter of course use copper sulfate which is unbelievably allowable to use in an "organic system" for disease control. It is often applied foliar style. And manure contains excessive amounts of several nutrients that a crop will not remove fast enough. The big one being P. Again, with the tillage organic producers require to control weeds, the nutrients become easily volatile. Erosion is made possible by this tillage, and the soil leaves the field along with the nutrient overload.
> 
> Organic guys are shooting to replenish N, and to get enough N, need to apply a few tons or more an acre of manure. So to get that N, an excess of P is applied. A conventional farmer can exactly control and band INTO THE SOIL, not on top, as in organic production, a very exact amount of nutrients... Eliminating waste, leaching, and over-application. Organic producers; Not so easily or precisely.
> 
> Dale


I am unaware of the Cu sulfate, but I'm just starting. However, chicken little is a better source of N. Also, no one out here bands anything into the soil; the machinery would be broken as soon as you stuck it in the ground! I think anhydrous ammonia is a very poor choice for fertilizer; adding water and sugar or using a different type would be much better.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Heritagefarm said:


> I am unaware of the Cu sulfate, but I'm just starting. However, chicken little is a better source of N. Also, no one out here bands anything into the soil; the machinery would be broken as soon as you stuck it in the ground! I think anhydrous ammonia is a very poor choice for fertilizer; adding water and sugar or using a different type would be much better.


They are being wasteful if they spread fertilizers on the surface, for sure. Anhydrous ammonia is nitrogen once it is converted in the soil by microbes. Same as manure, Urea, legume nodules, breaking down organic matter, etc. Water and sugar for a couple thousand acres is not feasible. Anhydrous sure is. Other than the very odd safety issue with NH3, I fail to see why the source of N matters.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

farmerDale said:


> They are being wasteful if they spread fertilizers on the surface, for sure. Anhydrous ammonia is nitrogen once it is converted in the soil by microbes. Same as manure, Urea, legume nodules, breaking down organic matter, etc. Water and sugar for a couple thousand acres is not feasible. Anhydrous sure is. Other than the very odd safety issue with NH3, I fail to see why the source of N matters.


It does matter. The NH3 that you put in your soil is for the entire year, right? So, while a natural condition would slowly release NH3 into the soil, what you do is say "Have your year's worth of food in several hours". It could be compared to putting nitrogen in a regular motor vehicle. Also, if there is a healthy soil, it can break down residue matter just fine.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The NH3 that you put in your soil is for the entire year, right?


That "NH3" is NO DIFFERENT than the "NH3" in chicken litter.

Do *you* put it out every day by the spoonful, or do you do a years worth at the time?



> It could be compared to putting nitrogen in a regular motor vehicle


No, it couldn't.

Nitrogen is Nitrogen no matter what formulation is used to put it into the soil.



> Also, no one out here bands anything into the soil; the machinery would be broken as soon as you stuck it in the ground!


So you don't use *ANY* ground engaging equipment?


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Heritagefarm said:


> It does matter. The NH3 that you put in your soil is for the entire year, right? So, while a natural condition would slowly release NH3 into the soil, what you do is say "Have your year's worth of food in several hours". It could be compared to putting nitrogen in a regular motor vehicle. Also, if there is a healthy soil, it can break down residue matter just fine.


The NH3 I put in my soil is PART of my soil N needs. The soil supplies some all year long, and the NH3 doesn't all get used up in a short time. The plants use it all year long! :clap:

With no tillage, the organic matter is going UP. And all the residue on the surface, to the tune of a few tons an acre on most crops, is slowly broken down. Once this dynamic new system is in place, my soil tests show I need LESS commercial fertilizer for my N needs, because the soil is supplying more than before, naturally too. And this is supplied all year long, as the plants need it. 

Lets look at this another way. Crops need a certain required nutrient supply for a given amount of yield. For a 50 bushel an acre crop of canola, 150 pounds an acre are needed of nitrogen. My soil will have about 30 pounds available at the beginning of the year, generally, depending on the previous years weather, crop yield, and general conditions. My soil contains between 6 and 9 per cent om. And generally, 1 per cent om can supply ten pounds per acre of nitrogen during the course of the year. So with a om of 6%, it may supply another 60 pounds during the course of the year. So 30 pounds plus 60 is 90 total soil available pounds, right? Now I need to supply 60 more pounds to reach my 50 bushel yield target. 

The residue of crops contains usually 30-70% of the nitrogen that was harvested as seed, depending on crop type. So in following years this residue breaks down and supplies a season long nitrogen source. So now maybe you can see why I am not concerned, and that this system is sustainable. As my om levels continue to go up a 20th of a percent or more a year, the nutrient supplying power of my soil continues to increase, and my fertilizer needs get less over time.:lock1:

Now this is JUST looking at N. Other nutrients have different dynamics in farming. If all farmers depended on manure to supply their nutrients needs, we'd have to raise a bunch more livestock to supply it, and we would all be in serious trouble. Not to mention the lack of consistency of manure, the chance of drugs, pests, and weed seeds in manure, and the total impracticality of ACCURATE nutrient application. And then you have the whole fact that many nutrients are wasted in the quest for the biggie, Nitrogen. Wasted, washed away, and leached. Whereas on my farm, I can put PRECISELY the right amount of nutrients INTO my land, and not waste a dang thing, not overload my soil, and not have excess wash away. KWIM??????


----------



## christie (May 10, 2008)

DAle thanks for the info... I am learning, and getting a different perspective. Thanks for having patience.
And granted I don't live in Kansas, but I have driven thru it! :-} 
I live on 2 acres with about 50 acers of wildlife preserve all around me. 
Ct is a dairy, fruit, poultry and horse farming state. More horses per capita then any other state!
So most pollution in the state via farming is from animal manure run off. My lake in particular is at the bottom of an orchard at one side and a huge horse farm on the other. The orchard is as organic as possible and sprays as litle as possible. but im sure in the past the sprayed big time and that is probably still in the soil.
You talked about phosphates not running off... Thats the biggest concern around here. Its in the soaps and cleaners we use. Which get washed down the drain and into the water supplies. Our lake association doesn't even want us to wash our cars for fear of more phosphates.
And I am glad you are conscientious tto the enviro. But most seem not to care at all. Farmers here are in it for profit. They'll dump manure on there wet lands on their property, spraying the heck out of they're fields with who knows what. 
If your feeling you are doing better then what you have done in the past, well then that s growth. And if you see that farming in general is getting better... well then I can sleep better tonight!;-}

Now read this link and tell me what you think about alfalfa. How its spreads miles with pollination. The organic community is up in arms about this. How Gm Alfalfa will contaminate their fields. And being unregulated they can now be right next door to them.
Alfalfa is already heavily sprayed, for insect control as well as weeds. Now that its roundup ready im sure they'll go to town with spraying it now.
Organic dairy needs to feed organic alfalfa, this will make that cost go thru the roof.
We are a big hay/alfalfa state.... When you consider all those horses to feed! This can't be better for the enviro???? Just getting your hash on this.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> But most *seem not to care *at all. Farmers here are *in it for profit*.


To me that is one of the most common misconceptions.
They DO care, *because* it affects the profits.

They do soil tests and ONLY apply what they HAVE to apply.

When you see them spraying, it looks like a lot, but reality is you're seeing mostly water.

When they fertilize, it's based on soil testing, and most use a custom blend to apply the NEEDED nutrients for that particular crop



> Now read this link and tell me what you think about alfalfa. *How its spreads miles with pollination. *The organic community is up in arms about this. How Gm Alfalfa will contaminate their fields. And being unregulated they can now be right next door to them


Alfalfa depends on insects for pollination.
People growing it for HAY will not let it flower before cutting, so there won't be any pollen to worry about.

The only one's that should be concerned at all is whose who grow for SEED.

Pollen will NOT change the plants in the field already, but only future generations from any seeds produced.

Since alfalfa is a perennial, you could grow one field for YEARS right next to a GMO field, and as long as you cut it at the right time, there will be NO contamination

The "organic community" is always up in arms because they tend to panic, and not because there is good reason


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

christie said:


> DAle thanks for the info... I am learning, and getting a different perspective. Thanks for having patience.
> 
> *Thank you for taking my comments with sincerity, and calmness.*
> And granted I don't live in Kansas, but I have driven thru it! :-}
> ...


* What your farmers are spraying on their alfalfa now is beyond me. Therefore I can not make an informed decision on whether it is neutral, better, or worse for the environment. If RR alfalfa saves a pile of other chemicals being applied in the fields, as it has for me and canola, by allowing me to use MUCH less herbicide than before, it may be positive. If it is not really necessary, it may be negative. But the organic guys growing hay properly surely should have no concerns, due to how alfalfa, should be harvested, IMHO.*


----------



## christie (May 10, 2008)

We are a very wet state... Meaning haying is an iffy crop to raise. You got a one shot deal befor it rains again. Its awful...to lose it to rain. So its not that they are ignorant to growing/cutting hay, its that New England's weather doesn't always permitt to cut it before the heads pop.Us horse people want the heads on for the most nutrition. 
Blister Beetles is what they spray for. Very toxic to horses. So even though most of our alfalfa is bought from other states it is more then likely sprayed.
Here is a link
http://aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/_circulars/circ536.html
There are better ones if you google blister beetles in alfalfa. But most were pdf files and I couldn't tranfer them to here.


----------

