Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] Mini-Farming: A Sustainable Farming System

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Mini-Farming: A Sustainable Farming System
  • Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:02:15 -0700


I was hoping someone would question that piece and clear it up, Steve; the
numbers seem off. I post from many sources and I won't even try to
reconcile their differences. Certainly Jeavons isn't no-till. I favor
initial deep digging or building up in framed beds. My own soil needs it.
But after initial preparation, it's no-till - to me, the best of both. I
like to keep a permanent mulch in place with intensive planting, and avoid
most of the weeding and irrigating. Also I can install drip and not have to
move it to till or cultivate.

>But we don't have many commercially viable
>"BIMFs" around these parts, because BIMFs
>aren't well suited to market farming. They
>are extremely labor intensive compared to
>a broad range of market farming techniques
>that include roto-tillers, tractors, mulches, etc.

I have found "BIMF" very labor intensive in the initial setup and soil
work. However, I don't intend to weed much or till and cultivate at all in
succeeding seasons. And double or triple cropping and some simple season
extension should certainly allow far, far more production for a given
amount of labor and investment. I am convinced that if market growers
factor in the cost of land, machinery, and fuel over several seasons,
they'll find that paying labor is actually far cheaper and profits higher.
Given the cost of land and machinery, and relatively low produce yields in
traditional row cropping, I don't see how those kind of market farmers can
turn a profit. My guess is they value their own labor at next to nothing in
order to show a profit on paper - IF they do the math at all.

Perhaps the kind of crops grown make a difference in whether "BIMFs" are
commercially viable or not. Onions and melons aren't likely to be worth the
space and time they take to mature. Now blackberries ...

It makes a very useful debate. I hope to hear all sides on this.

paul tradingpost@lobo.net

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 3/21/2007 at 2:31 PM Steve Diver wrote:

>Regarding the following item:
>
>Mini-Farming: A Sustainable Farming System
>George Kuepper, Kerr Center/ATTRA.
>http://www.countrysidemag.com/issues/6_1998.htm
>
>
>
>The article posted says it was written by George Kuepper,
>but then it has some inserts within the article that are funky.
>For example:
>
>"[Average gross in l998 is $8,000 per acre. A
>family can garden 3-6 acres. KH]"
>
>
>That statement by KH is plain whacky. "Garden writers" need
>to be careful. No families have a garden of 3-6 acres. Gardeners
>are working patches of ground that are measured in 1,000
>square feet.
>
>I can guarantee you that nobody in the USA has a
>bio-intensive mini-farm of 3-6 acres. The whole purpose
>of biointensive beds is to reduce the space needed as much
>as possible and strive for high yields. I am hand-working
>12 beds of 100 sq. ft. each, the classic Jeavons style, which
>is 1200 square feet, on a part-time basis. Jeavons says a
>21 bed system is ideal for a sustainable garden that grows its
>own fertility. You'd have to be a full-time gardener to manage
>21 beds. 21 beds would be equivalent to 2100 sq. ft of actual
>growing space. But I recommend 4' headways between the
>lawn and garden, and 2' pathways. So you'll have more total
>land area devoted to the garden.
>
>Fyi, as of May 2007, George Kuepper will no longer be working
>for ATTRA and in fact is re-joining the Kerr Center where
>he used to work in the "1980s." ATTRA's funding was cut for
>FY2007. Some staff were completely laid off and others are
>cut back on hours. The program remains open for technical
>assistance which is the core service. The publications on the
>web page cannot be maintained with current information due
>to severely reduced funding. People who sit on keyboards and
>think they are accessing ATTRA by using the web page are
>missing the essential reality. ATTRA has always been
>a technical assistance service. The publications you see
>on the web page evolved from the research service.
>
>The other confusing aspect of discussion on this list
>is that biointensive methods of Jeavons are somehow
>grouped as "organic no-till"..... as if no-till is a cure all.
>
>In the first place, the Jeavons method is not remotely
>related to no-till. He distinctly favors double-digging
>or broadforking. The PURPOSE is to create a
>deep rooting zone *because* you are growing plants
>in a small area and producing heavy top yields. It
>is identical to a permaculture principle. Practice
>follows the principle because there is a goal.
>
>On the other hand, I know biointensive garderners
>who dig their beds really well to get started, then
>shift to authentic no-till with heavy mulch and no
>further "digging".
>
>We have many biointensive gardens around town
>because there are many folks who enjoy
>the practical and beautiful gardens that result
>from this method.
>
>But we don't have many commercially viable
>"BIMFs" around these parts, because BIMFs
>aren't well suited to market farming. They
>are extremely labor intensive compared to
>a broad range of market farming techniques
>that include roto-tillers, tractors, mulches, etc.
>
>On the other hand, we have market farmers
>who use parts and pieces of BIMFs in their
>production methods.
>
>There's more than one way to skin a catfish.
>
>Steve Diver
>Crooked Holler Farm
>







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page