MEDIEVAL PIG-OAK PANNAGE

For most of the year, young medieval pigs had free range of the forests, commons, & fallow (bare) fields around the village, where they would forage on grasses, weeds, varmints, & any other foods they could scrounge up. During this time, their feed was virtually free but growth was generally slow. In the fall, however, they were gathered into herds & brought to specific groves, or copses, of oaks to feed on abundant acorn masts. Rather than wild, unmanaged oaks, these copses consisted of oaks which had been pollarded - that is, cut around head-height or higher & allowed to regrow. This regrowth produced a dense, bushy shock of branches, similar to the trees seen in fruit orchards or along many city streets. With branches concentrated within reach of their cudgels, swineherds could quickly & easily knock loose all the mature acorns from an oak pollard, providing a natural feeding trough of acorns around which pigs would gather & gorge themselves for the day. Between these feedings, pigs would round out their diet with the various wild plants, mushrooms, & invertebrates which abounded in the shade of the copse. By the end of acorn season, most pigs would be fat & ready to slaughter or sell to nearby towns & manors.

As far as productivity, an acre of oaks can produce around a ton of acorns per acre, or roughly three times the yield of cereal grains in medieval Europe, which helps to explain why pork rivaled lamb as the foremost source of meat in medieval diets. Of course, its impressive yields of pork are far from the only benefit of the pig-oak pollard system.

BENEFITS OF POLLARDING

Pollarding is easily one of my favorite agroecological practices. For the medieval peasant, the fruits of pollarding extended beyond meat production, & oak pollards were no exception. Because oak is a hard & versatile wood, the boughs harvested from periodic oak lopping provided sturdy branches which were used for tool handles, farm implements, & material for wattle-and-daub building, as well as an extra source of firewood during long winters. Less obviously, periodic lopping stressed trees & resulted in a gradient of branch maturities, helping to smooth out acorn yields from year to year. In fact, the yield of oak pollard copses was so consistent under this management that the size of copses was measured in the number of pigs which could be masted in each grove.

AGROECOLOGICAL MERITS OF PIG-OAK POLLARDS

Just as oak pollards supported the human economy, the system resulted in a surprisingly ecologically-friendly means of food production, even in a time when agricultural chemicals were unknown. For all but two months of the year, oak pollard copses functioned as an essentially natural, undisturbed forest ecosystem. Plants & animals thrived throughout the spring & summer, growing & producing offspring; only in fall did pigs root & graze the understory, allowing most plants to complete their growth cycle, while also resetting the balance of plant species at the end of the growing season. This yearly reset not only served as a natural balancing of the perennial-annual equilibrium, it also set back herbaceous weeds to allow oaks to thrive & reproduce, as the leaves of young saplings are a relatively unappealing forage for pigs. Further, the yearly rooting of pigs - mediated by the distracting presence of palatable acorns - helped turn up the forest soil, prompting new generations of wild seeds to germinate.

Pollarding itself, in addition to effectively immortalizing trees, also conveys ecological benefits. The low, dense crown of pollarded trees create a perfect niche for insects, birds, & small mammals to nest & move between branches. As the trees age, these crowns & the short trunks of pollards have a strong tendency to hollow out, producing cavities which are important for species which seek out such semi-enclosed hollows for their dens.

AN AGROECOLOGICAL FUTURE FOR PIG POLLARDS

Modern farmers could learn from medieval farmers in regards to creating agroecology systems for raising pigs. Of course, in today's farming environment, one ton of feed per acre is no longer a particularly competitive yield, & oaks have undergone little breeding for higher yields while grain productivity has skyrocketed. Masting pigs on acorns could still be used as a relatively low-input method of raising pigs by homesteaders or farmers who sell direct to consumer, but large-scale farmers would need to modify this method somewhat if they wish to raise pigs profitably.

Three opportunities come to mind in this regard: first, replacing or supplementing oaks with higher-yielding trees; second, complementing mast trees with annual or perennial intercrops in a silvopasture landscape; & third, integrating other farming operations into pig groves & silvopastures to increase overall productivity & profitability.

Replacing oaks with more productive trees is a fairly straightforward proposition. Many trees can yield far more dry matter of palatable mast compared to oaks, with pears, apples, & mulberries being a few examples in temperate environments. Mulberries, in fact, have sometimes been used for this purpose due to their high yields & tendency to drop fruit readily throughout their fruiting season. A mature mulberry tree is said to support one to two growing pigs on its fruit, with older, larger trees naturally being more productive; pollarded mulberry trees would produce less per tree, but a similar amount per acre. At full production age, an acre of mulberries, pears, or apples can yield at least 30,000 pounds of fruit per acre, which adjusted for dry matter content is enough to feed 50 pigs for a month, or over 1,200 pounds of live weight gain. Fruit alone, however, is too low in protein to function as a complete diet for pigs, meaning such a system would require some form of protein supplementation. While this protein supplement could be provided by a byproduct feed such as soybean meal or wheat bran, it could also be provided by crops grown alongside mast trees.

This brings us neatly to our second option, that of growing high-yielding herbaceous crops between tree rows. The high-energy, low-protein fruit and nut masts provided by trees make high-protein intercrops the natural choice for these systems. Even better, such a high-protein intercrops provide the perfect opportunity to plant nitrogen-fixing legumes which fertilize the soil, killing two birds with one stone. As alluded to earlier, these intercrops can take the form of annuals or perennials, or even a mix of both. Perennials offer a number of advantages: they are long-lived, & given that pig grazing only occurs over a short period, they would have ample opportunity to reseed, allowing the stand to persist indefinitely after the initial planting. Perennials are also deeper-rooted than annuals, increasing soil health, & perennial legumes like alfalfa & clovers tend to fix more nitrogen than most annuals. This option would make for a highly ecological mode of pig grazing, with the added benefit of requiring little labor & maintenance.

Annuals also offer attractive upsides in this scenario. Pigs are less capable than ruminants of digesting vegetative matter, & annuals offer the opportunity to add highly digestible grains like peas & soybeans to be grazed where they are grown, as well as roots like turnips which can produce enormous yields of palatable feed. This practice, which I refer to as white forage, has the potential to produce huge yields of meat due to the high digestibility of grains & root crops.

The choice for regenerative farmers, then, is between the high productivity of annuals & the low maintenance & increased ecological benefits of perennials. Another option is to grow annuals & perennials together, though this requires careful planning & management. For example, white clover can be grown as a perennial legume cover & interplanted with annual like turnips. White clover is palatable to pigs while not competing much with annuals & being easy to knock back for planting annuals, while turnips are fast-growing plants whose roots & leaves alike are highly digestible to pigs.

Keep in mind that orchards already host grasses in the space between trees, & farmers could plant with increased space between tree rows to suit the desired level of supplementary forage. In either case, such a system would be a prime example of silvopasture.

The most complex set of options for improving the productivity & profitability in pig masting systems is the integration of additional operations. Indeed, the possibilities are virtually endless - nearly any agricultural endeavor can be added to this system, though some are naturally better suited than others. Particularly well-suited, in this case, are raising honeybees, cultivating mushrooms, the grazing of cows & other ruminants, & of course the harvest of tree crops for humans.

Harvesting tree crops from such a system, while doable, would require careful management, as collecting fruit or nuts soon after pig grazing would pose food safety concerns; any such harvest would therefore need to occur earlier in the season before any pigs access the silvopasture. This can be accomplished one of two ways: either multiple crops can be grown, with the earlier-maturing crop being harvested for food & pigs grazed on the later-maturing crop; or a harvest of human-edible crop can be made at peak production, then pigs brought in to clean up the aftermath & late-maturing fruits. With the second option, fruits can be sorted during picking, with the best fruits taken to market & low-quality or diseased fruits dropped or shaken from trees for pigs to harvest the next day. Under the first option, an early-maturing crop like apples can be harvested throughout its season & a late-maturing crop like acorns can be grazed for the remainder of the growing year.

Mushrooms are a good example of a ‘freebie’, or essentially free additional use of the existing system. Many species of edible mushrooms prefer or require hardwood as a growing substrate, & the pruned branches & pollard loppings which are already produced in the orchard can be gathered into piles & inoculated with mushroom spores. The added expense of chipping & piling tree cuttings would easily be made up by the high prices of oyster mushrooms & other species which can be cultivated on hardwood.

Another good freebie in this system is honey. Fruit trees like apples & pears are good honey producers, & legumes like clover produce abundantly throughout the season, making the pig silvopasture a naturally high-producing honey environment. Indeed, not adding hives to such a landscape would be a massive missed opportunity.

Early season grazing of cows or sheep represents another effective means of extracting more food from the pig silvopasture with no additional inputs. Doing so would also be beneficial to maintaining white clover & other desired perennials, as grazing knocks back competitive weeds & keeps the pasture in a fresh, vegetative state better for pig grazing. This could be an especially attractive option for dairy farmers looking to add more grazed forages, as white clover is an excellent protein source for dairy cows. Further, the shady environment of the orchard makes it ideal for summer grazing, allowing animals to spend more time & energy grazing & less on staying cool. Even farmers who have no existing grazing herd could capitalize on this opportunity, either by buying calves at the start of the growing season & selling them in time for the pasture to regrow or by contracting with local graziers to run animals over the summer for a grazing fee. Silvopastures are well suited to this contract grazing option, as many graziers experience a ‘summer slump’ & are eager to find ways to feed cattle in the high summer - a niche well served by cool, shady silvopasture.

It would of course be difficult for a single farmer to add all of these extra operations, but any farmer could easily add one or two based on their existing operations & local markets. In fact, it is more likely that pig silvopasture will be added to existing farms than entire farms being built around the silvopasture. Orchardists, for example, would simply add clover & pigs into their orchards, continuing to focus fruit as their primary crop - a trend which is already gaining momentum among small & organic orchards. A dairy farmer, meanwhile, might see pig silvopasture as a way to add profitability through diversification & the low cost of grazing white clover.

PIG SILVOPASTURE IN POOR REGIONS

I would be remiss not to relate this practice back to my previous post about the importance of regenerative agriculture for the world's poor farmers. As mentioned in that post, poor tropical farmers could garner enormous benefits from incorporating animal grazing for part of the year, & pig silvopasture is a perfect opportunity to fill this need. For one, pigs can produce more meat than cattle from a given quantity of feed, & fruit-producing trees interplanted with legumes can provide an abundance of high-quality feed which would allow for dramatic increases in pork production in these protein-starved regions.

Conservatively, one season of pig grazing - out of two or three seasons in the tropical growing year - could produce 2-3 tonnes per hectare of quality pig forage, or roughly 250-375 (or more) kilograms of edible meat, plus more in edible offal. This may seem unimpressive, but it would equal or exceed the productivity of grain-fed animals in these regions, where corn yields average less than 2 tonnes per hectare & pigs are generally fed inefficient diets which contain large quantities of low-digestibility vegetation & waste products. Even better, this practice would supplement rather than compete with corn production, preserving more grain for human consumption. If this seems counterintuitive, please read my last post, where I describe how this additionality occurs.

In both poor & wealthy regions of the world, pig silvopastures represent a vital opportunity to add trees back to the landscape, normalizing local weather patterns & improving the environmental value of farmland - & is only one of many ways regenerative agroecology can add more trees, animals, & ecology to a struggling world.

As regenerative agriculture is the core focus of my writing, it is no surprise that I propose regenerative methods as a powerful means of addressing this yield shortfall. Indeed, unlike in the wealthy world where the ability of regen ag to produce competitive yields remains a matter of debate, there is no question, upon reviewing the evidence, that properly implemented regenerative systems can vastly increase food production by the world's poorest farmers.

Understanding why I posit this so confidently requires looking no further than the most limiting factor of production on poor farms: fertility. Regenerative methods provide enormous benefits in this regard, & also address the important issues of moisture, labor, & diet quality.

Before we explore these points, a note on how tropical farming differs from farming in the temperate environments of most western countries.

WET-DRY SEASONALITY IN TROPICAL FARMING

Overwhelmingly, the poor regions of the world are situated in tropical & subtropical climates - in particular, Africa, Latin America, & South-Southeast Asia. While some farmers in these regions enjoy highly productive, year-round growing seasons, the vast bulk of these farmers must wrestle with highly seasonal rainfall patterns which limit grain farming to the rainy season.

Important implications of this seasonal pattern will be addressed later, but for now it is enough to understand that tropical farming tends to be delimited by this wet-dry seasonality in a similar manner to how temperate farming is delimited by summer-winter seasonality.

REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE IMPROVES SOIL FERTILITY

To say that fertility limits farm yields in poor regions is an understatement. In much of Africa, corn yields are generally 5 & in some cases 10 times lower than those in the US¹, despite warm, sunny climatic conditions which are largely favorable to corn growth; it is widely recognized that limited access to fertilizer is the greatest contributor to this shortfall². Lack of fertilizer is compounded by the fact that tropical soils tend to be quite poor in both nutrients & soil organic matter, meaning farmers cannot rely on natural fertility; put another way, the farms most in need of fertilizer inputs are also those least able to afford it.

Regenerative agriculture circumvents this problem in the most straightforward way possible - it creates its own fertility. Or, rather, it allows life to create its own fertility, & uses this abundance to fertilizer its cash crops.

Consider that regenerative farming is currently vying with conventional fertilizers in western farming; even if it falls slightly short of this standard, the fertility provided by these techniques could provide small farmers with nearly the same nutrient usage enjoyed by wealthy farmers, resulting in double, quadruple, or even greater multiples compared to current yields - with no added fertilizers.

Of course, this is meaningless without discussing what this would look like in practice. In today's regenerative systems, the main source of fertility is the planting of diverse cover crops; that is, collections of plants grown in the off-season specifically to produce nutrients & increase soil organic matter to support following cash crops of grains & roots.

In a wet-dry season paradigm, the rainy season usually lasts long enough to support two or three crops before the soil dries out. Let's assume a two-crop season; the first crop can be planted to a high-yielding grain like corn, cassava, or rice, & the second crop can be planted to a diverse cover crop mixture. Legumes, like beans, cowpeas, or perennial legumes like alfalfa can make up the primary component to fix nitrogen, while the rest of the mix could comprise broadleaves like amaranths & brassicas which free up mineral nutrients from soil particles. Such a mix could easily fix 50-100 pounds of nitrogen per acre plus a complement of zinc, phosphorus, & other minerals essential to plant growth³. When this crop matures, it can be killed by mowing or grazing & its residues left on the soil surface as a mulch to preserve moisture over the dry season. It is also important to understand that in most cases this cover would replace a lower-yielding rotation crop like pulses rather than a high-yielding crop like corn, making its opportunity cost fairly low.

While it is difficult to say exactly how much this cover would increase the subsequent grain crop yield, we can make some rough guesses. We know that a pound of total available nitrogen supports about a pound of corn grain, so 75 pounds of total available nitrogen can support about 75 bushels of corn yield⁴. Assuming our tropical farmer only achieves 50 bushels from the same due to other limitations, this would mean a yield of over a metric ton per acre, or over 3 metric tons per hectare - while well short of American yields, this is double or more the average yield for sub-Saharan Africa. Of course, this is by no means the upper limit for natural fertility, & farmers could also continue to use whatever fertilizer & manure they already apply to increase yields further.

Note, too, that cover crops provide additional benefits by building soil organic matter, controlling weeds, & perhaps most of all, providing high-quality grazing.

By grazing cover crops, whether with their own animals or by partnering with local pastoralists, farmers receive a secondary source of food & income. Grazing animals also increase the availability of cover crop nutrients to the following crop, & reduce labor needs by terminating the cover & trampling its residues down as mulch.

Intercrops are another potential tool which can simultaneously increase yields & build soil health. Simply put, intercropping is the practice of growing two or more crops at the same time on the same land, & is already starting to be used by poor farmers with positive results. Research in both poor & industrialized farming systems is showing that appropriately designed intercrops outyield monocrops. In particular, intercrops of high-yielding crops with lower-yielding crops, especially legumes, can produce more than the same two crops grown separately⁵.

Corn is well-suited to this purpose; when planted in double-width rows corn has been shown to produce around 90% of its regular yield while a secondary crop grows in the space between rows⁶. Under this regime, it is reasonable to assume our hypothetical corn farmer can produce a 90% corn yield plus a 40 or 50% yield of a legume like cowpeas - resulting in a total yield (referred to as Land Equivalent Ratio, or LER) of 130%.

All together, our small farmer is now producing a 90% yield of corn, a 40% yield of cowpeas, & a second season worth of grazing, all while building soil fertility.

REGENERATIVE FARMING PRESERVES SOIL MOISTURE

Water is generally the second most important yield-limiting factor in poor areas, & regenerative farming addresses this limitation through three main techniques: first, covering the soil with cover crops & mulches; second, no-till & low-till methods; & third - & perhaps most important - agroforestry, the integration of trees into crop fields.

As mentioned, cover crops can help to preserve moisture by being laid down as dry-season mulches through grazing or by mowing & manual spreading. Additionally, & vitally for farmers in wet-dry seasonal areas, the deep, thick root systems of diverse covers create soil structure that allows more rainfall to infiltrate during rainfall events & holds it there for future growth.

No-till is essential to realizing the full benefits of these practices; when the soil is tilled, mulching residues are removed from the soil surface, & root channels & soil structure are destroyed. Further, tilling brings weed seeds to the surface, creating a new generation of weeds which must be dealt with.

It is commonly believed that ploughing is necessary to break down crop residues, but healthy soils will naturally break down surface residue; tilling residues under simply makes these nutrients available more rapidly at the high cost of increased evaporation & erosion of exposed ground. What's worse, this exposed soil consists of the very finest, most fertile soil particles, perversely allowing already available fertility to be eroded while heavier, immobile residues are protected underground. Instead, grazing can be used to achieve the best of both worlds by manuring the ground without this tradeoff, with remaining residues allowed to break down slowly over the dry season while acting as armor to preserve moisture & fertility.

Even more so, agroforestry can help keep tropical soils moist, & is already spreading in poor areas with much success. The principle here is simple: tree canopies keep the soil moist by intercepting sunlight which would otherwise heat the crops & soil underneath as well as blocking wind, & by drawing up water with their deep root systems.

Over the last few decades a movement known as Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration, or FMNR, has been slowly gaining traction in encouraging agroforestry practices, mostly in Africa. The approach of FMNR is to allow already existing trees to regenerate from stumps & root systems which often persist on tropical farmland as small weedy shrubs, then to prune them based on the needs of the farmer.

Figure: Photograph of FMNR in early growth stages, by Wikipedia user Tony Rinaudo.

In the warm year-round growing seasons of the Great Continent, farmers can regenerate trees to 15 or 20 feet within two to three years, after which they can enjoy the benefits of wetter soil. In other, dryer areas where trees do not persist on the land, or when farmers want to grow other tree varieties, planting trees is of course a similarly valid means of introducing agroforestry. Planting also allows trees to be placed in useful configurations such as straight rows or field boundaries.

Another agroforestry technique with immense potential for wet-dry climates is pollarding. Dating back to ancient Europe, pollarding refers to cutting the central trunk of a tree at shoulder height or higher, at which point branches sprout out in all directions & can be cut periodically to regrow over & over again indefinitely. Pollards are well-suited to silvopasture & areas with heavy pressure from natural grazing animals, as the branches sit high enough to avoid being stripped by most animals but low enough to be pruned & lopped by humans. Cut branches can be used for animal fodder, materials, & firewood, & can produce fruit for human consumption between cuttings.

Figure: Rows of pollarded trees, picture by Wikipedia user charles01. Note the pattern of regrowth.

In particularly dry areas, pollarding could be used to produce low, exceptionally wide tree canopies which provide maximum shade at a given biomass & leaf area, thereby minimizing evaporation & transpiration. This alone could go a long way toward making agroforestry, & agriculture in general, more viable in dry areas where efforts to introduce trees struggle due to lack of moisture.

REGENERATIVE FARMING REDUCES LABOR NEEDS

Unlike industrial farmers, the world's subsistence farmers have little access to mechanical equipment, leading to high labor requirements even for small areas of land. For this reason, farming methods which reduce the need for labor can yield significant production increases for these farmers, as well as improving quality of life.

Thankfully, regenerative methods often do exactly this, primarily by supporting no-till & reduced tillage systems. I say support because tillage produces its own benefits, & these benefits must be replaced by other techniques which are used alongside the cessation of tillage.

Weed control is the primary benefit of tilling in tropical contexts, where weeds quickly crop up anywhere bare soil exists, & farmers without large equipment & cheap pesticides are often forced to weed by hand with hoes & other simple tools. The downside, as in mechanized systems, is that this perpetuates a never-ending cycle of fighting weeds with tillage that brings new seeds to the surface & encourages their germination.

The most effective means of ending this cycle - in both smallholder& industrialized contexts - is to combine no-till with cover crops. Under no-till with covers, new seeds are not brought to the surface, & the constant presence of cover crops, cash crops, & cover crop mulches drown out unwanted weeds & ensure constant competition for light & space during the growing season. Rotational grazing further pressures weeds through the grazing & trampling action of animals, & in doing so reduces the types of weeds which can persist in the system.

Grazing also reduces the labor needed for this practice by terminating covers & trampling them into mulch, replacing the grueling labor of mowing, weeding, & laying down mulch with the easy labor of moving animals.

REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE IMPROVES DIETS

Any discussion of farm productivity requires accounting for the quality & types of food being produced to meaningfully understand the true productivity of farms. After all, the 2-billion-plus people struggling with malnutrition are largely not lacking in calories, but rather are deficient in protein & micronutrients, primarily the minerals zinc & iron & vitamins A, B9, & B12. This pattern of deficiency comes from the grain & root heavy diets of the global poor, which are low - & in many cases completely lacking - in animal foods, fruits, & vegetables⁶.

Without delving into the weeds of nutrition - a topic far beyond the scope of this article - we can easily see how the farming methods described earlier can, & indeed must, increase the production of nutritionally important foods; trees used in agroforestry systems provide fruits & nuts, while grazed cover crops & tree fodder increase production of meat & milk. Increased productivity & reduced labor free up land & time which farmers can devote to important secondary operations like expanded gardens & chicken yards.

Indeed, because regenerative agriculture is rooted in biodiversity, opportunities abound for increasing dietary diversity, & the specific forms this may take are virtually endless - & can, & should, be informed by the climatic & cultural landscape of each regenerative farm.

REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE IS THE FUTURE OF FARMING IN POOR AREAS

I firmly believe regenerative farming is the future paradigm of farming for humanity; it is poor smallholder farmers, however, who will form the vanguard of the transition to these better methods. Regenerative agriculture is especially attractive to poor farmers for the reasons laid out here of increased yields, the preservation of soil moisture, reduced labor requirements, & the increased food diversity it offers. However, another powerful reason presents itself for believing poor farmers will adopt these methods more readily then their industrial counterparts: namely, industrial farmers are already producing high yields & making attractive profits, making it difficult to justify dramatic changes. It is this factor, the relative success of industrial farmers, which will keep them from leading the charge.

In other words, regenerative farming presents a greater potential upside for poor farmers; while industrialized farmers can achieve modest to moderate benefits from adopting regeneration, the benefits to small farmers are potentially life-changing, if not revolutionary.

What remains is for appropriate regenerative practices to infiltrate the sphere of small farmers through a combination of education, experimentation, & efforts to supply the plant & animal life necessary for small farmers to effect this great change.

REFERENCES

1. US corn yields average 170 bushels per acre, or 10.8 tonnes per hectare. Sub-Saharan yields are estimated at 1.5-1.9 tonnes/ha.

2. https://www.cimmyt.org/news/in-sub-saharan-africa-mineral-fertilization-and-agroecology-are-not-incompatible/

“When we look at comparable climate conditions and physical soil constraints, yields of maize – the main source of calories for people – in sub-Saharan Africa are three to four times lower than elsewhere in the world. This is largely due to the fact that mineral fertilizer use (nitrogen, potassium) is on average four times lower there.” (Quotes in original)

3. https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/agriculture/legume-seed-inoculants-0-305/

This source states nitrogen fixation of 44 to over 300 lbs/ac; naturally, we conservatively use the lower end of this for nutrient-poor soils.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11104-018-3810-7#:~:text=Phosphorus%20acquisition%20by%20cover%20crops&text=Their%20strategies%20can%20be%20summarized,3)%20mineralization%20of%20Porg.

This link is difficult to summarize succinctly with a single quote; reading the full text is useful for understanding how scientists believe phosphorus mobilization is achieved by plants, esp. legumes & brassicas.

4. https://extension.sdstate.edu/news/sdsu-extension-releases-updated-2023-corn-nitrogen-fertilizer-rate-guidelines

“The nitrogen fertilizer rate recommendation equation is now: N fertilizer rate = Yield potential × 1.0 lbs N/bu - Soil test nitrogen - Legume credits - Manure credits + No-till debit.”

https://www.cropscience.bayer.us/articles/bayer/benefits-nitrogen-for-corn-production

“Every bushel of corn grain requires about one pound of N; therefore, a 200 bu/acre corn crop would require approximately 200 lb of N/acre.” (note that this is before accounting for soil N, i.e., applied N will be lesser)

5. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-020-00629-0

“Land productivity of cowpea intercropped with maize, sorghum and pearl millet is favourable, with average land equivalent ratios of 1.42 ± 0.47, 1.26 ± 0.35 and 1.30 ± 0.32, respectively.”

6. https://practicalfarmers.org/research/planting-corn-in-60-in-row-widths-for-interseeding-cover-crops-2/

“In 2018, two farms saw no difference in corn yields between the 30- and 60-in. row-widths, while two other farms saw yields reduced by 6–30% in the 60-in. row-widths compared to the 30-in. row-width.”

Other research generally corroborates these findings, though the subject is too nascent for meaningful meta-analyses.

7. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoil.2023.1123931/full

“What is more is that the current diets comprise of (sic) high-calorie, nutrient-poor foods deficient in protein, vitamins, and minerals… The resulting hidden hunger has been devastating for the health of the SSA population.”

In today's parlance, ‘green’ as an environmental adjective has drifted far from any relationship with the plant life from which its name derives & into the realm of technological fixes for problems technology created.

Eventually - and I hope, soon - popular discourse will catch on to the fact that our best & only real green solution is the dark, healing green of an agricultural landscape where natural life and human needs coexist in mutually beneficial harmony. Call this a fantasy; only time will tell whether the techno-optimists or the bio-optimists are the greater dreamers.

I, for one, am not afraid to dream - nor to support visions of dream with hard, detailed analysis.

Until then, this blog will be dedicated to the present & future of regenerative agriculture. A few topics I'll be covering in the near(ish) future:

• Why & how regenerative agriculture will feed 10+ billion humans;

• How agriculture can produce more food while supporting more natural life;

• How better agriculture can lead to better economies & employment;

• Specific practices of agroforestry & integrated farming - in other words, the beneficial use of trees & animals in crop farming systems;

• How farmers can increase profits while healing the Earth;

• Dispelling pervasive but demonstrably false myths about agriculture & its future;

• What farmers of today & the past can teach us about better farming;

• What farmers & consumers can do to help create a more regenerative future;

- and all of this with a healthy complement of numbers, figures, & analysis to back it up.

Happy farming.

Subscribe now