----- Original Message ----- From: RH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 5:00 AM Subject: Re: [globalnews] Farmers Fight Global Warming with No-Till Farming
Thanks to Rex for an excellent posting - true - no till is one more sneaky trick to get more farmers more hooked on chemicals than what they already are, that said its probably the best way to farm a large portion of our agricultural lands,IF YOU WANT TO BE A REALLY SWITCHED ON CHEMICAL FARMER. What I would like to add is this truly spectacular bit of stupidity called 'carbon credits' "The concept becomes especially abstract when you consider a global market in which a U.S. corporation could continue its polluting because it is buying credits from a no-till farmer (or other emissions reducer) in China or Russia." Just imagine - a farmer cranks up his chemical usage by 50% to embrace no till, USDA issues him with a carbon credit certificate,probably without actually measuring the soil carbon level, next step - the chemical corporation buys his carbon credit so that they can be allowed to continue/increase polluting the atmosphere - - dont forget its not only CO2 that comes out of their chimney stack - the gas emissions will always be allowed to carry a percentage of nasties as well (dioxins, heavy metal vapours,assorted other noxious crap,) And in the middle of it all will be some trader company ripping off millions that probably originated as taxpayer subsidies to fun the scheme Lloyd Charles > 10/6/2002 10:08:55 AM, "RiverValley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote in response to a "No-Till" article posted by Jane: > > >I'm wondering if members of the list > >have experience using no-till in a > >small farm, market garden setting, > >particularly in mild climates like the > >pacific northwest US. What problems, > >successes have people had? What types > >of tillage and tillage tools do people > >use and prefer? > > Daniel, modern no-till involves first killing off the > vegetation with chemicals and then planting through the > stubble. For further proof of its insidious nature, I suggest > you go down in the original article a few paragraphs until you > find this sentence: > > "There are economic and environmental drawbacks to no-till, > including the fact that more pesticide is usually needed to > fight the organisms that find homes in the residue." > > The no-till scheme Jane posted is a chemical Trojan horse and I > suggest you stay away from it. I suspect she was just trying > to warn us of the danger. No-till pushers are in the category > of those who coin "war is peace" and "slavery is freedom" > doublespeak phrases. > > The half-inch of woody waste that no-till chemical shills brag > about amounts to dip-squat when measured against the 5%-10% > soil organic matter that good farming practice can achieve with > consistent cover crop plowdown and proper soil > remineralization. > > Having said all that, I'll add that there is one Pennsylvania > farmer who has perfected a no-till system involving a huge > flattening roller that he crushes his cover crops with. He > then plants through the residue. As far as I know, he uses no > toxic chemicals. I believe Rodale made a video of his tomato > operations. > > Regards, > Rex Harrill > > >
