From: oleg@netcom.com (Oleg Kiselev)
Subject: Re: Organic Farming: As good as they say?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 08:36:05 GMT

In article <BxBCFJ.Fpn@cda.mrs.umn.edu> kilennj@cda.mrs.umn.edu (Nicholas J. Kilen 1621537) writes:
>1. A lot of the chemicals used in farming are just as organic as the
>so-called natural organic materials.  In 1827 Friedrich Wohler proved

Organic fertilizers slowly release nutrients, providing a steady, even
supply of nutrients.  Most artificial fertilizers flood the plants with 
high levels of basic nutrients, easily washed out of the soil and the 
supply maintained by frequent re-application of massive amounts of the
fertilizer.  

Artificial fertilizers end up in the rivers and lakes, causing elevated
concentrations of nitrates and phosphates, which lead to die offs and 
reduced fertility of fish and to algae blooms which choke down the water
ways.  To get the levels of these chemiclas down to human-safe levels,
urban water supplieers spend millions of $$ treating water polluted by agro
run-off.  Untreated water ends up in the ocean, killing off the oyster and
kelp beds and destroying fisheries.

>2. An organic farm can never become a net exporter of masss produce
>without running down soil fertility.  The only way I know of that
>organic farms can keep there farms fertile is to get phosphate and
>potash by importing feeds produced by fertilisers.

Potassium and phosphorus can be (and are) obtained from mineral and 
organic sources.  Reduced soil erosion helps delay the need for additives.

>3. Organically grown food do not protect against pests and diseases.

Reasonable levels of genetic diversity and judicious use of organic forms of
disease and pest control do not fully insure the absence of problems, but
go a long way to reduce them.  

>Look at history folks.  The Irish were growing potatoes organically
>until the great potato famine.  Additionally, I have a hard time
>believing insects like grasshoppers and locusts will leave an
>organically grown farm untouched.

Look at the more recent history.  Despite of the arsenal of pesticides,
mediterranian fruit fly, gypsy moths and the white fly had caused enormous
devastation to the agriculture.  Natural predators and parasites of these
pests are always better solutions than broad-spectrun poisons.

>4. Agrochemicals are not inheirently dangerous to humans.  Chemicals in
>food have been used since the 1940's, yet life expectency has only gone
>up since then, even though the vast majority of Americans have been
>eating chemically grown food.

Are we talking about the same planet and the same humans?  The *average* 
life expectency has gone up primarily due to the decreases ion childhood
mortality.  Mean while the incidents of cancers had multiplied and the
incidents of cancers and various degenerative diseases plague the most
advanced nations.   The causes can be debated, but the large numbers of
cancer cases in agro communities is directly attributable to pesticides.

>5. Organic farming is not better for wildlife.  A farmer would get
>smaller yields. This would mean that more acres would have to go into
>production leaving less land for wildlife.

Organic farming produces the same yields per invested $$$.  Working
more land is more work and there is a finite amount of land a farmer
can work.  The assumption that a farmer who works X acres now will work
more acres if the farm goes organic is absurd.  It's not like the amount of
food produced in US is insufficient to feed the country.

People buy organic produce and are willing to pay more for it for all sorts
of intangible "feel good" reasons.  However, one of the most compelling 
reasons is quite tangible -- it *tastes better*.  This is why the organic
farms are becoming more numerous and the farmers' markets where most of the
vendors are organic farmers are more and more popular.  
-- 
Oleg Kiselev at home			...use the header to find the path
Newsgroups: alt.sustainable.agriculture