Conventional Farming Is A Philosophy Too
GMO Crops, Pesticides, & Synthetic Fertilizers
Synthetic fertilizers are nothing new, as discussed in a previous post (see Innovations in Agriculture Up to WWI ). It is a practice that has been around since the mid-1800s. This style of farming hit its stride after WWI. It is stylized as the boogyman for using GMOs (More on that coming soon), tillage, and synthetic chemicals. The connection to World War II is that chemicals left over after the war were used as fertilizers (nitrogen and phosphorus are used in explosives), herbicides, and pesticides. As these chemicals were applied, farmers could pinpoint the nutrients and prevent competition with plants using synthetic chemical pesticides. This increased yields, making farmers believe that organic methods didn’t work.
Conventional farming is a widely practiced agricultural system employing tried-and-true techniques, tools, and inputs to grow crops and raise livestock for food, fiber, and other agricultural products. This method typically contrasts with organic farming, which relies on natural procedures and prohibits synthetic pesticides, fertilizers, or other artificial inputs. They are contrary philosophies, as conventional farming is distinguished by its adherence to heavy use of synthetic inputs under the guise of producing more food for a growing population.
Philosophies of Conventional Farming:
Farmers strive to reduce resource waste while increasing agricultural yields and livestock production. The foundation of this ideology is the goal of supplying the rising worldwide demand for food.
High agricultural productivity is what we're after. Conventional farmers frequently use modern and scientific techniques to produce the best crop and livestock outputs.
The economic viability of agricultural activities is the main focus of conventional farming. Farmers use synthetic inputs and sophisticated equipment to increase profitability and economic sustainability.
Conventional farmers frequently use predictable inputs and techniques to reduce the effects of pests, illnesses, and bad weather.
Supporting Networks in Conventional Farming:
Fertilizer Manufacturers: Conventional farming heavily relies on synthetic fertilizers to provide crop nutrients. Fertilizer manufacturers produce various fertilizers tailored to specific crop and soil needs. These companies often research to develop more efficient and environmentally friendly fertilizer formulations.
Pesticide Manufacturers: To control pests, diseases, and weeds, conventional farmers use synthetic pesticides. Pesticide manufacturers produce a variety of chemical compounds designed to combat specific agricultural threats. These manufacturers heavily invest in research and development to create more effective pesticide solutions.
Seed Suppliers: Conventional farming relies on high-yield and genetically modified (GMO) seeds for optimal crop production. Seed suppliers develop and distribute seeds resistant to pests, diseases, and environmental stressors. They work closely with farmers to provide guidance on seed selection and planting practices.
Universities and Research Institutions: Agricultural universities and research institutions are crucial in supporting conventional farming. They conduct research on crop breeding, soil management, pest control, and other relevant topics. Almost all of the universities in the US are funded by chemical companies. Some are so heavily involved in the conventional approach that they cannot even conduct proper organic trials. Farmers often rely on the expertise and recommendations generated by these institutions to improve their practices, which further indoctrinates the farmer in conventional approaches to farming.
Agronomy Associations: Agronomy associations at the regional and national levels provide a platform for farmers to exchange knowledge and best practices. These associations offer educational resources, organize conferences, and facilitate networking among farmers, researchers, and industry experts. Again, most of these practices are developed by chemical companies that run their trials through the universities and publish research that is then fed to the agronomy associations. In some areas, agronomists or crop advisors are not allowed to recommend approaches to farming that have not been proven through one of these universities.
Agricultural Extension Services: Government agencies and agricultural extension services provide valuable information and guidance to conventional farmers. They offer advice on crop management, pest control, soil health, and compliance with regulations. These services help bridge the gap between scientific advancements and practical implementation on the farm. Again, the circle of information continues as most of these extension services are part of a college or university.
This philosophy has led to compacted soils, deaths from misuse and exposure, and an increased need for more chemicals. Using chemicals to grow plants has become so ingrained into the farmers’ minds that many think the only way they can make a living is to use these synthetic chemicals. I remember trying to ask a farmer about his soil's organic matter, and the only word I could get out was “organic” before he threatened to throw me off his farm. (Funny because he asked me how to get his farm certified organic three years later.) This indoctrination system convinces the farmers there is no other way, even to the point that some of them even make fun of the organic philosophy of farming. The few who take a risk that succeed…and get out of debt… will make the change.
Today, chemicals have dominated farming, schools, state and federal regulations, and more. Mega-chemical companies fund most college research. The USDA and the NRCS promoted the expansion of glyphosate, promoting it as “no-till” through the clever name of “chemical mowing.” Years later, billions of gallons later, it has been proven to cause several types of cancers and is not found in foods and groundwater worldwide. There are laws under the EPA regarding pesticides that prevent microbial products from ever meeting the necessary requirements, which are based on chemistry.
On the state level, laws are in place, especially in the mid-west, that consider microbe products as “fairy dust” or “snake oil,” which prevent registration and sale of these products or prevent proper marketing of these products. I had first-hand experience with these types of regulators. One phone call with the Department of Agriculture in Minnesota resulted in me being told, “You’ll never get registered here because products like yours don’t work.” In a few states, we were required to run Salmonella and E. Coli tests on our products, despite having published papers demonstrating our products suppressed their growth. Something is promoting this opinion.
The theory of microbes just being snake oil is starting to change. Every major chemical now has some microbial product in its offering. I would argue that they have a LONG way to go. Many of these products use a “silver bullet” microbe that produces a specific result. A common one is Azobacter to fix nitrogen. Another is Bacillus subtillus, mostly as a fungicide. The conventional philosophy is that farmers must keep adding their chemicals and that genetically modifying crops is the only way to increase yields. It isn’t. I have had studies on organic crops using a blend of microbes and outperformed conventional GMO crops.
While it has been criticized for its environmental impact and reliance on synthetic inputs, conventional farming continues to be a dominant force in global agriculture, providing food and resources to meet the needs of a growing population. If you want that to change, don’t buy anything that isn’t organic or regeneratively grown.