[secondmortgages]

In the past, farming advances seemed more about large scale and /or more intensive / broadacre "improvements"
They often seemed to carry significant environmental costs.
This, though, seems different and interesting, despite being an old report.

I wonder what it has led to, if anything.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-1...900/?site=eyre

"Research set to transform farm practices

By Flint Duxfield, ABC Rural

Updated April 17, 2012 14:48:14
Professor Wayne Meyer

Professor Wayne Meyer predicts a transformation of farming



A South Australian researcher says Australia is on the cusp of the biggest transformation of its farming landscape since the arrival of Europeans.

Professor Wayne Meyer says precision agriculture and soil mapping will allow farmers to be more selective about how they use their land.

He says it will mean less land use for broadacre crops, leaving more land available for carbon planting and biodiversity protection.

"We'll actually farm to the intrinsic land capability and that means that we'll end up with not straight lines in terms of what lines look like, but they'll start to become more like a mosaic," he said.

"There will be specific areas where there'll be high producing and highly responsive areas for crop production and animal production, together with areas where we've got biodiversity protection, carbon plantings and connectivity of corridors around the landscape."

Professor Meyer says farmers are starting to consider what else they can do with areas of their properties that are not productive for cropping.

"Rather than farming on average, we'll farm to land capability at a level of precision and a level of scale that we've never been able to do before," he said.

Tags: agribusiness, rural, research-organisations, science-and-technology, agricultural-policy, climate-change, university-and-further-education, adelaide-university-5005, adelaide-5000, sa, mount-gambier-5290, port-augusta-5700, port-lincoln-5606, port-pirie-5540, renmark-5341, australia

First posted April 17, 2012 14:48:14 "

[Wvq9InTM]

Should be in the good news thread but probably deserves its own thread.

[Biradallo]

Colour me cynical, but it sounds like yet another academic making noise and not living in the real world.

Mosaic farming is the traditional "family farm". It's not new. It's been around for thousands of years. It's not cost effective for broadacre production. That's why broadacre farms exist in the first place.
Farmers already know the soils on their properties. They already have highly detailed maps in their heads. I wonder if the good Professor thought to simply ask the farmers about this.

Farmers accept that some areas will have lower production value than others. You've not going to increase yields from high productivity areas using this idea. In less fertile areas, lower production is better than no production so they plant it anyway.

[Wvq9InTM]

Colour me cynical, but it sounds like yet another academic making noise and not living in the real world.

Mosaic farming is the traditional "family farm". It's not new. It's been around for thousands of years. It's not cost effective for broadacre production. That's why broadacre farms exist in the first place.
Farmers already know the soils on their properties. They already have highly detailed maps in their heads. I wonder if the good Professor thought to simply ask the farmers about this.

Farmers accept that some areas will have lower production value than others. You've not going to increase yields from high productivity areas using this idea. In less fertile areas, lower production is better than no production so they plant it anyway.

Yes, to all of that. Though it is true that efficiency rates have improved.

[secondmortgages]

So you two don't think there would be any merit in recording / quantifying / confirming what was once regarded as common knowledge?
Still is, in many quarters.

I attended a 70th birthday celebration for a farmer who works in what would be(no, IS) regarded as someof the poorest farming country on eyre Peninsula a couple of weeks ago.
As you say, he makes a go of it by careful observation and cautious working.
However, what he regards as the bleeding obvious is no use to him when banks etc require more than "I just know; here's my 46 years of maintaining a profitable farm" (by virtue of an average of one excellent year ever 20 and one good one every 7or so).

Like so many things derived from seat-of-the-pants knowledge, when taken for granted and not critically examined* whether in farming or fishing or any other "primary industry" is fraught with the contaminating dangers of "old wives tales" reputations; they might be correct or incorrect but if they are to be supported by plicies that will make the jobs easier to be productive in sustainable ways then they need confirmation beyond "personal experience.

That's fine, as far as it goes, but it is no longer far enough with resources under the pressure that they are today.

* ie with solid, robust, studies.

[Pipindula]

There are a lot of new farming practices that are becoming more widely adopted, 'specially in areas like cropping. These days farmers no longer drive machinery all over their land, they confine it to certain areas (guided by GPS). Even have stuff like cameras mounted underneath that can assess the health of the crop and adjust the amount of fertiliser required. Amazing tech when you think about it

[Pipindula]

What I meant by the last post is through better efficiencies, farmers are able to make better use of low-production land. If they have methods available that make it cheaper to sow and harvest, they have more land available before it becomes uneconomic.

[Pipindula]

Sort of on topic in sense of "mosaic" effect on farms

http://www.landcareonline.com.au/new...rse-plantings/

[Wvq9InTM]

Thing is, we cannot continue with the fossil fuelled tractors forever. We need an alternative.

There's no use showing me flash linked movies. They won't play, they won't download.. However I've been there done that. Planted a couple of thousand trees in a weekend and watched a bulldozer knock down more than a thousand an hour on the other side of the hill.

[Pipindula]

Thing is, we cannot continue with the fossil fuelled tractors forever. We need an alternative.

No, but until we can find ways to do that it isn't a bad idea to use the fuel we do in the most efficient and productive way.

There's no use showing me flash linked movies. They won't play, they won't download.. Wasn't posting it just for your benefit

However I've been there done that. Planted a couple of thousand trees in a weekend and watched a bulldozer knock down more than a thousand an hour on the other side of the hill. The topic and gist of the video I linked I linked to was about planting a substantial area of farmland with a mix of native species in order to link two areas of land and provide a wildlife corridor. 30,000 plants involved, so a pretty large project.

In the OP jj posted was the following

'"There will be specific areas where there'll be high producing and highly responsive areas for crop production and animal production, together with areas where we've got biodiversity protection, carbon plantings and connectivity of corridors around the landscape."

I would contend that in certain circumstances it is beneficial for farmers to devote areas of land for the growing/protection of native habit, plants and wildlife for purely economical reasons with considering the environmental gains. Having diversity amongst native plants birds, insects and other critters offers can help keep pest species in check and this result in greater returns to the producer because more saleable crop can be harvested, whilst at the same time reducing input costs from things such as the purchase costs of pesticides and the labour involved in applying them.

Good thread this one, plenty of food for thought so far.

[secondmortgages]

Yes, Woollybutt. Nothing new under the sun might be an accurate response, but each generation can (re)discover and (re)commit to working well.
I'm sure we all know farmers who have always known and practised those good things.
Doesn't mean refinements and new research can't keep pushing into even better.

[Wvq9InTM]

Wasn't posting it just for your benefit

Yeah.. I know..

The topic and gist of the video I linked I linked to was about planting a substantial area of farmland with a mix of native species in order to link two areas of land and provide a wildlife corridor. 30,000 plants involved, so a pretty large project.

I've been involved in quite a few.

In the OP jj posted was the following

'"There will be specific areas where there'll be high producing and highly responsive areas for crop production and animal production, together with areas where we've got biodiversity protection, carbon plantings and connectivity of corridors around the landscape."

I would contend that in certain circumstances it is beneficial for farmers to devote areas of land for the growing/protection of native habit, plants and wildlife for purely economical reasons with considering the environmental gains. Having diversity amongst native plants birds, insects and other critters offers can help keep pest species in check and this result in greater returns to the producer because more saleable crop can be harvested, whilst at the same time reducing input costs from things such as the purchase costs of pesticides and the labour involved in applying them.

Good thread this one, plenty of food for thought so far.

True. Many farmers have tried and tested these ideas and found them beneficial. Just need to change that statement to most farmers..