How Many Harvests Have We Left?
(Page 2 of 3)
Dependence on artificial, inorganic fertilizers has also
diminished the mineral content of the soil. Consequently,
the food we eat is lacking in nutritional value - at least
in comparison with the farm produce of yesteryear when good
crops were dependent on healthy soil and farmers put back
into the soil what the year's crop took out. (Refining and
processing food also robs it of nutritional value; by the
time we get to eat it, losses may be as high as 50%.)
RELATED CONTENT
Agricultural research is directed at bigger and prettier
crops for supermarket display. Soil health is virtually
ignored. Our agriculture is based on the faith that, no
matter how depleted our soil, it can continue to produce
bountiful crops year after year if shot up with massive
doses of chemical fertilizer.
American farmers are encouraged by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and by trade publications like Farm
Journal to accept the necessity of chemical farming
for high yields, even at the acknowledged expense of
healthy, balanced, nutrient-rich soil. Dr. Commoner has
said: "We cannot speed up the biological cycle, as USDA
policy has tried to do, without getting into serious
trouble."
Dr. Commoner has also noted that nothing will change this
absurd farming system except ". . . a fundamental revision
of the entire economy of agricultural production in this
country." What does that mean?
1 - Agriculture must be viewed in social terms and not as a
business. We must support marginal and subsistence farms
and encourage people (with financial grants) to move back
to the land and return fallow fields to cultivation. This
would ease pressures on the cities, lead to a more evenly
balanced population and create the possibility for further
change.
2 - We must decentralize our entire agriculture system, so
that local areas can raise their own produce.
With thousands of small farms in operation this would be
feasible. It isn't now.
