Monsanto attacks Permaculture & Organics

even worse than that, I was told by a farmer I know well, that in fact, sheep really like weeds that have been rounded up. Apparently it causes the sugars to all move to the leaves or somethign.
I find it a little hard to beleive, but I doubt he would say it, unless he has seen sheep prefer the sprayed, to non-sprayed areas. Yes, sounds bad doesn't it. Not sure if that's an intended use of roundup. Scary, how much rounded up weeds a sheep might eat in a couple of days.

 

Weeds love ground that has been sprayed. I used to watch this for a decade with a neighbour who sprayed the gap between their hedge and the footpath. They did this a couple of times a year, and the rest of the year the patch of ground grew the most lush weeds. I don't know if that's because the ground was vacuum to be filled, or if there was something about the herbicide that prompted this, or both.

 

That sounds pretty much on the money... given how glypho works to block the production of certain amino acids...

 

I just re read my last couple of posts and realised how dumb and garbled they were.
Put it down to lack of sleep please.

What I meant to say was ....
I dont think size is The Issue.
So long as the ethics and principles are being applied by people on farms that are run by People and not corporations, then to me that is the original intended recipient of the Permaculture message.

Large is a matter of local comparisons.
For example it is a well known fact that Australian sheep stations are Huge.
They need to be just to get by.
It may well be that they shouldnt be running sheep at all but kangaroos but thats not the point I'm trying to make.

There is growing concern that Monsanto will get their GM seeds into Australia and New Zealand.
The target is the farmers.

I think it is quite unfortuanate that farmers have not got the message that Permaculture has been trying to get across.
The Consumers have got the message to some degree, in that alot of people now grow at least some of their own food/buy organic.

You cannot shoot the farmer for niot getting the message, it obviously has not been put across in a way that gives them a solution.
To throw down a mattress and plant a tree may well get the attention of some people, to a farmer who has to keep 1000's of sheep/cattle alive - that is quite frankly an insult to intelligence and offers no solution to the differculties they face and actually shows a complete lack of understanding of their circumstances and is insulting.
I know/have known alot of farmers and they are generally caring of their livestock and their farms even if they are only the sharemilker on it.
One forestry nursery I have worked in has been using deep water seaweed and some sort of liquid worm compost to fertilise the nursery beds.
I dont think they continued this due to very high costs.
I do know that that manager does know the land would be better off with this sort of thing rather than chemical products.
Unfortunately he has to answer to somebody else and needs to show results Now, not 2-5 years down the track.

Stop belittling the farmers/station holders etc.. just because they are not doing what you think they should.
They are 51 % right just because they have produced the meat/bread/milk etc that you just ate for tea tonight.
We arent.

I originally came across the permaculture designers manual 20 years ago when I was researching for data to "prove" to my then husband that it would be a really good idea to move the family to the country and how this could work, unfortuantely this didnt happen and it could have.
I actually thought up til recently that permaculture Was about farming (til I got Lindas book)

I see this portion of society as the ones who need to get the message.
The fact that they havent shouldnt be a mark against them but those that are trying to get the message across.
It really is time to change the message so they do get it and can see how they and their livelyhood can benefit.
We are running out of time.
Monsanto and co have excellent PR/ marketing strategies which need to be met or bettered.
I find it interesting that they target Permaculture and other Organic movements, they are obviously expecting a counter move and this needs to be done.
Whose up for it?
So rather than putting the farmer down, how do you get the message to them that chemical additives on their farm is destroying it and there is a better way of getting results?

I mentioned last week to one person I work for that I thought mono/farming was insane, they agreed.
They work within the ag community.
A fellow work mate overheard and said 'Oh yeh, back to dad and dave farms'
Yet it is also a well known fact that even running afew old Ewes on a dairy farm will clear out the ragwort from the farm and keep it clear, because the old girls love it, its like candy to Them, doing away with the need for chemical intervention

The last point I was trying to make was ...
Too often we take alittle knowledge and run with it and run our mouths off with it.

Does anybody know actually how many farmers are trying to cut back the chemical imput on their farms,
how many are trying to keep stock away from the waterways,plant trees,take that next slow but sure step to improve their soil/stock management?

How many have bothered to target the farmers in their promotions when pushing permaculture design?

How many have bothered to find out what the farmers want and what the problems are that they see need fixing right now?

Its easy to sling off at someone who is not doing something right when you see that the solution is obvious, but, they are the ones walking the walk and if you havent solved these problems and Dont have hands on understanding of them then you should keep your mouth shut.:angel:

 

A drive in the country would give us a fair idea. Looking at the number of farms with dead paddocks in the middle of the growing season. There are probably as many contract sprayers in the North West of Tasmania as their are farmers - certainly as many boom sprays...

Tests have revealed both MCPA and 2,4-D in the Duck River in N.W. Tasmania AGAIN. Health regulations say a maximum of 2 parts per billion in rivers is acceptable. The tests in the Duck river was more than 9 Parts Per Billion... Permaculture would certainly be an answer to preventing this type of runoff...

https://www.theadvocate.com.au/news/local/news/general/duck-river-poison-fears/1930229.aspx

 

Our problem is the opposite.
The paddocks are green, look lovely the cows give great milk, birth out well so.... hey theres nothing wrong is there,, why change anything?

We have pre emergence spraying contractors here too.
A friends husband is a retired one, who on selling his business refused to sell it to a young man who had not gotten married and/or had kids.
This is the same person who for years defended the practise and said the spray did no lasting damage, yet when it comes time to pass it on to someone else he chose to sell it to a married with children, just in case I had a point.

Its hard to sell people the idea that certain things like chemicals in everything is not a good idea because they Are healthy.

So, if you drive throught he countryside and see all these dead driedout paddocks, why are these farmers not getting the point that something needs to be done differently?
They have evidence before them.
Its only going to get worse if Monsantos deadseeds get thru the doors.
I think the point that everybody misses and I think this will only become apparent in many many years, is that we are living off the health of our grandparents.
By that I mean genetically, we may appear not to be sufferring from ill effects because we have the health of our parent and grandparents health/ier lifestyle, foods, environment to sustain us.
I'm sure that in years to come it will become known that chemical overload has caused genetic damage resulting in unhealthy people.

In the bible somewhere it says something about the sins of the father will be passed unto the 7th generation.(I think I got that right).
I think it works both ways, ie the health of our predecessors, means we dont show the symptoms of the damage being done.

 

You guys are still using 24D?
You gotta be kidding!!

 

Yeah, I rang the ag department once and questioned it... they said it was basically MCPA by another name... Not very intelligent people working there.

Its funny how people don't see the signs of the effects of chemicals around them.

- One in Two people will have cancer at some point in their lives. It may well be the illness that kills them - its taken 50 years for most to understand the dangers of cigarettes.

- Autism has exploded in the past few years - nobody knows why.

- Other birth defects and genetic abnormalities with "just one of those things" answers.

- Obesity is a major problem these days, many people are not aware that the body creates fat to store chemicals it can not immediately get rid of. I wrote an article about this recently... here - https://ezinearticles.com/?Healthy-...hetic-Chemicals-Affect-Weight-Gain&id=4510131

People who can't see these symptoms are taking a trip up the Nile in a boat with one oar... Denial is a funny thing.

 

Impressive post Fernando.
it should provide us all with food for thought

My 5c worth
My stand on persistent non-biodegradable chemicals has been consistent for over 40 years now. What I see/have seen is one gets banned and a new one emerges; then, 10-20 years down the line it gets banned.
I recently read a research paper from Europe where researchers had found 400 foreign chemicals in mother's milk. Something that should be pristine and pure. That is outrageous and horrible enough. But you read on and something more shocking is hidden in the article.
The researchers found 400 chemicals and ONLY 400 chemicals because that is ALL THEY COULD AFFORD TO TEST FOR!

 

https://www.triplepundit.com/2009/0...o-crops-launches-permaculture-design-service/

https://kjpermaculture.blogspot.com/2010/07/monsanto-says-buy-organic-to-avoid-gmos.html
I'll save that one up for next April

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6885XA20100909

 

Good to see some people still have guts as well as principles.

 

I wanted to say, in defence of farmers, that they are price takers, not price setters and that this factor, more than any other, determines how they farm.

When multinational food stores can set the price of produce then the margins per unit to farmers are reduced to an absolute minimum. That means that, in order for farmers to make a profit from the business of farming then they must grow many more units. And the only feasible way they can see to do this is to mechanize the farming operation, to plant a monoculture and to use large scale machinery to farm.

I don't believe that all farmers are opposed to permaculture and alternative food production techniques, but I think that they need to take back control of their product and to be able to get a reasonable return for their produce. The current system severly undervalues all of the resources involved in production; the water use, the soil degradation costs, the human labour, the fossil fuels, the loss of biodiversity.

The evolution of CSA schemes has allowed some farmers to make a reasonable living from their properties and this is encouraging, but as long as farmers are dictated to by the buyers then there will be no incentive for them to change the way they farm. I reckon there needs to be a tiered pricing system which everyone adheres to, with a minimum floor price for produce which covers all the inputs and still makes a return for the farmer.
I'm not, in any way, in defence of chemical and monoculture farming, but I think it's way too simplistic to put the emphasis on farmers to make the change when most of us are complicit in supporting such a system. I produce some of the food my family eats but I still shop and as long as I buy supermarket brand butter, for example, I am supporting a system of farming which is unsustainable and toxic.

 

true phillippa, but have you seen the price of some of that chemical stuff... makes organic production look cheap!

 

I agree with you phillippa,
Farmers not only are given little say in the prices they receive, they also are not allow to sell at a higher price at the gate.
In NZ this includes vinyards which means there is no point in going around on vinyard tours as my parents used to ( for example) cos you have to pay the same price as in the supermarket.

There must still be some way for those who are looking at even just cutting costs, to start in one area and work on that then move on to the next.
It might take alittle time but it would make a difference over time.

 

I don't know. I reckon you ALWAYS have a choice.

This is what I don't get. There is a figure of something like 70% of Australian farms that are unprofitable (i.e. do not make a profit) So why don't they stop what they are doing, grow an acre of food for themselves, run a few cows or something just to get a bit of cash flow. Surely they are already better off than trying to grow mega-acres worth of crops for no benefit and then driving to town to buy their groceries from the Oligopoly? Is there something I'm missing or is there something enjoyable about banging your head against a brick wall?

 

I think maybe the Jones's have something to do with it.
Or maybe its the subsidies they get for each headache.

 

Sometimes its just easier to continue doing what you've always done... but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again while expecting a different result... To many change is an Evil word!

 

And to institute a policy among farmers which sets a minimum price requires all farmers to co-operate and not do some deal privately with a buyer which undermines the whole process.

I do agree with Grahame that we always have a choice but I think that a lot of farmers are not skilled in adapting to change, either in the marketplace or in their farming techniques. I know a farmer who grows tomatoes for a living and many have tried to convince him to grow heirloom varieties and to market them to the right customers but he just won't be in it; it's too hard to think it through and make the change, so he just muddles through and gets the same shitty prices every year, unless farmers elsewhere have a natural disaster and then he has a good year.
I know another farming couple who run an organic vege farm and market directly to their customers via their website. They can't get enough produce.

 

I really try to never quote a large volume of text, but I will make an exception this time. Helen, you have made an excellent response to Fernando's questions.Your remark ..."Nothing can deliver the quality of life the Western World aspires to. Nothing." ... was exactly what I felt!
@ Fernando .. Permaculture is not about competing with industrial agriculture - it is about alternatives - you can NEVER solve the problem with the same mindset that created it! The response to the failure of broadscale cropping, is not broadscale cropping with lipstick on -- it is to find a new way to produce the needs of the world, and that will NOT be found more than 5 klms from where the food is needed, and it most definitely won't be found in a monocrop situation!