Food, grain, oil, drought, and other stuff,...

[topcropper]

Wheat and rice have all had their big bull runs, then pulled back. Now it's corn. Corn at record highs for a third consecutive day.

The US corn crop will be 10% below forecasts of just a month ago after flooding rains through the corn growing areas.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=amM38atm37ws&refer=us


The US corn crop this year will now be some 33 million tonnes less than last year at 300 million tonnes. For comparison, the entire grain production of Australia [as in wheat, barley, beans, sorghum, corn, rice etc] in a good year is not much more than 40 million tonnes.

See ya's.



Chart of corn prices,...
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/CN/M

 

[Aaron Sice]

i wonder if companies like Monsanto (god bless em) are raking in the dollars even more now with their GM "one crop yield per seed" they sell en-masse to the third world farmers.

companies like this need to be closed down. they do nothing but aggravate the current shortage problems.

 

[topcropper]

i wonder if companies like Monsanto (god bless em) are raking in the dollars even more now with their GM "one crop yield per seed" they sell en-masse to the third world farmers.

companies like this need to be closed down. they do nothing but aggravate the current shortage problems.

BC, that's simply a load of rubbish. Who put these ideas in your head mate.



As far as I know, Monsanto don't even sell seed to the third world. The average third world farmer is working a few acres. There are hundreds of millions of third world farmers. Monsanto would need a million sales reps to service the farmers, and the poor peasant farmers couldn't pay monsanto anyway.

However, GM crops are booming in China, but China simply stole the technology. Just like China steals other copyrights. Monsanto get no royalties from China.



Genetically modified crops increase total yield. And they reduce total chemical use. Otherwise farmers wouldn't grow them. A crop that is bug resistant, grows better and healthier without the constant insect attack. Farmers who grow GM crops have to pay massive royalties to the seed company, so if the yield wasn't better and the crop easier to grow, then they wouldn't grow them.

In the US, by 2006, 89% of the planted area of soybeans, 83 percent of cotton, and 61 percent maize were genetically modified varieties.



I don't want to get into a debate about whether GM crops are good or bad. That's a whole new argument, and the debate could go on and on, and no one will really know the outcome for a long time. The plain and simple fact though is that GM crops increase production, and I can't see how anyone can dispute that fact. I would prefer if GM crops never happened, as grain production would be a lot less, and I would make a lot more money.



One crop seeds?
All hybrid seeds are one crop. So thats corn, sunflower, sorghum, some wheat. Hybrids revert back to the parent seed on the next generation. You have to buy hybrid seed from a seed company anyway.
Wheat, canola, barley seed etc, are mostly covered by PVR's or plant variety rights. Farmers can't on-sell the seed to their neighbours anyway. No difference there.

Maybe your thinking about terminator genes?
This was proposed once so that a GM seed company wouldn't have their seed technology stolen, as the seeds wouldn't reproduce. There was a public outcry when this was proposed, so it never happened.



Monsanto invented roundup.
Roundup would have to be the second biggest advance in crop yields after artificial chemical nitrogen was developed. Roundup has increased crop yield by huge amounts. I would conservatively say roundup has increased total production on my farm by 50% in 20 years. Ploughing the soil burned huge amounts of diesel. No-till has ment the soil is far healthier, more earth worms and soil microbes and soil erosion is almost gone.



There is no way known that anyone could blame monsanto for the food crisis. Or GM foods. The food crisis was always going to happen. Farmers were never going to be able to keep increasing production at the rates they were. We have simply run out of new options to get the next big jump. The increases now are small. Plant yields are close to the maximum water use efficiencies.

It's about time the third world woke up to themselves, and started to limit their populations. The disaster that is about to happen is tragic.

See ya's.

 

[aaarghhh]

Hello TC

I thought of your thread when I stumbled on to this link.

"The Coggan’s will today attempt to enter the Guinness Book of World Records by sowing 600 hectares of wheat in 24 hours at their property near Meandarra."

What is the most you have sown in a 24 period?

 

[topcropper]

Howdy aaarghhh.

100 hectares is the most we have ever planted in a day. That was with our 6 metre wide planter. That would have been a 16 hour day. We have a new 9 metre wide planter coming for the sorghum planting, so I suspect we could plant 150 hectares in a day with the new one.

See ya's.

 

[Aaron Sice]

BC, that's simply a load of rubbish. Who put these ideas in your head mate.
Maybe your thinking about terminator genes?
This was proposed once so that a GM seed company wouldn't have their seed technology stolen, as the seeds wouldn't reproduce. There was a public outcry when this was proposed, so it never happened.

Monsanto invented roundup.
Roundup would have to be the second biggest advance in crop yields after artificial chemical nitrogen was developed. Roundup has increased crop yield by huge amounts. I would conservatively say roundup has increased total production on my farm by 50% in 20 years. Ploughing the soil burned huge amounts of diesel. No-till has ment the soil is far healthier, more earth worms and soil microbes and soil erosion is almost gone.

mate i wasn't mining to hit a nerve!

terminator genes were used for a short period of time in India, sold my Monsanto. and yes - i did get my terminology mixed up there. apologies. i wasn;t aware of the fine line there.

can i recommend a book for you?

Naked Ape to Superspecies - David Suzuki.

I'd like you to read it and give me your very experienced opinion on it - because for me, in 2000, it was a REAL eye opener.

 

[topcropper]

Naked Ape to Superspecies - David Suzuki.

I'd like you to read it and give me your very experienced opinion on it - because for me, in 2000, it was a REAL eye opener.

I've read a lot of it on the net. I've read most Jarod Diamond rubbish.

Almost everything these environmentalists/scientists say is true.
Suzuki, Diamond. Plenty of others.
Fertilizer does damage rivers and cause dead spots in the ocean. GM crops are a concern and no one knows how big. Farm chemicals do damage the environment. Agriculture does rely on oil. It's all true.

But, these blokes offer no real alternatives. They offer alternatives alright, but not alternatives that will feed 6 billion people, and soon 9 billion.

All the organic, natural, permaculture, whatever, solutions they propose, involve massive reductions in production, combined with massive increase in farmer numbers. Do you want to work in the fields with a hoe?

We are stuck with oil based, high output agricultural systems. We are stuck with it because the human population exploded with the green revolution and artificial nitrogen fertilizer.

If the population had of stayed at 1.5 billion as it was in 1900, The much higher output of current farming systems could have ment agriculture could have taken very little land. The environment and wilderness could have had most of the land.

You will soon find out I'm right. We will see it soon. Nothing to worry about in Australia though.

See ya's.

 

[Aaron Sice]

why is australia immune?

thanks for sharing your thoughts on those issues as well. i also noticed that they offered no serious alternatives.

still, if everyone learned how to farm a veggie garden in their own backyard i imagine the "individuals acting as a whole" effect could be quite dramatic.

 

[ethereal]

why is australia immune?

thanks for sharing your thoughts on those issues as well. i also noticed that they offered no serious alternatives.

still, if everyone learned how to farm a veggie garden in their own backyard i imagine the "individuals acting as a whole" effect could be quite dramatic.

Haha! I have been trying to do a vege garden in my backyard. It is dreadful. The seeds I bought did not sprout. I tried seedlings, the chooks (Sweetheart and Blackie) scratched them all out. I built a fence from bamboo and covered the gardens with nets. Now it seems to not get enough light or something, because it is still hopeless. I decided to plant a few things on an unused lot we have adjoining our property. The weeds grow faster than the veges so I have to use roundup. The bugs eat everything so I need pesticides. I tried planting marigolds to deter bugs, but the bugs seem to like them too. The tomatoes have nematodes, more chemicals required. A pumpkin vine grew well and covered a huge area, only to produce 2 pumpkins. The chooks didn't lay well until we gave them laying pellets, probably made from GM grain. The need worming and de-licing with some other chemicals. I have spent a fortune, filled my shelves with toxic stuff, driven all over town to get things burning petrol and all I have is 2 pumpkins, a whole lot of passionfruit and a chook with a sore leg who I just can't bring myself to take to the vet (which by the way is opposite KFC).

Growing ones own food is a nice theory but in my experience not very efficient and bloody hard work. I am so grateful for farmers. Food is cheap relative to my efforts.

Louise

 

[topcropper]

why is australia immune?

thanks for sharing your thoughts on those issues as well. .

Australia is immune because we have a large capacity to produce food. Australia exports two thirds of it's food in a normal season. Australia's economy will benefit from the food crisis.

Lots of land. More good luck than anything.

See ya's.

 

[topcropper]

It's about time the third world woke up to themselves, and started to limit their populations. The disaster that is about to happen is tragic.

See ya's.

Ethiopias population in 1984, during the big famine was 42 million.
One million people are estimated to have starved to death in 84/85.
Today it's population is 78 million and growing by 2 million per year.
The average ethiopian woman is having 5 children.
Ethiopia's population will grow by 120% to 169 million in 2050.



From this article,......

http://countrystudies.us/ethiopia/43.htm

......"Ethiopia's birth rate, high even among developing countries, is explained by early and universal marriage, kinship and religious beliefs that generally encourage large families, a resistance to contraceptive practices, and the absence of family planning services for most of the population. Many Ethiopians believe that families with many children have greater financial security and are better situated to provide for their elderly members".......



Ethiopia is doomed. As is a lot of the rest of Africa. So why will people be so surprised when it happens.

See ya's.

 

[Aaron Sice]

because they're "poor" and in a "third world".

being poor is relative. poor compared to me? yes. financially? yes. quality of life? yes. opportunities? yes.

compared to their neighbours and neighbouring countries....?

 

[WinstonWolfe]

BC, in general I think you have your feet on the ground and make good posts. But I agree with TC about David Suzuki and Jared Diamond. Suzuki is just a negative ranter, with no objective way forwards. He is worse than Bob Brown.

Jared Diamond also ramps the negative, but I concede he makes more objective statements than Suzuki.

I'd suggest you also read Bjorn Lomborg, a highly respected Danish professor who does an excellent job of exposing where the propaganda of enviro fascists falls over when analysed using cost benefit analysis.

 

[Aaron Sice]

i will be searching amazon tonite for Bjorn Lomborg - cheers for the heads up.

look i'm new to this whole environmentalist game. the most i know about farming is about resting the fields, cattle/sheep farming and how to get rocky grazing land re-zoned to subdivisable rural. i come from a "concrete the yard and paint it green" kinda family, but am slowly but surely seeing the error of this approach.

i find David Suzuki a very knowledgeable person, but as mentioned he offeres no credible alternative, just points out the problem. certainly something to investigate further and thanks for pointing me down the street.

 

[WinstonWolfe]

Ethiopia is doomed. As is a lot of the rest of Africa. So why will people be so surprised when it happens.

See ya's.

I used to be angry about the genocide in Sudan, but since reading up on it, realize there's not a lot else that can be done. People are fighting over limited food cos too many have been having too much irresponsible fun conceiving too many babies, with no thought for tomorrow and the cyclical drought that has visited the area for centuries.

Younger generations have been enticed away from the strict observance of ancient cultural tradition, half way towards the ways and excesses of the west. And in doing so, created a population explosion.

Much of Africa's woes are the fruit of a population explosion born from wilful ignorance, sloth, and a decay in tribal ethics. Harsh but true.

 

[topcropper]

can i recommend a book for you?
Naked Ape to Superspecies - David Suzuki.

I'd like you to read it and give me your very experienced opinion on it - because for me, in 2000, it was a REAL eye opener.

I might borrow the book and have a read one day.
I certainly wouldn't pay for it though. These Scientist/environmentalists, make a lot of money by telling everyone about all these evironmental problems, yet not giving any ways to solve them without a reduction in the human population of 3 quarters.

David Suzuki regards the human race as a cancer, or virus. Fair enough too. Perhaps he is correct, and if so, he should lead the way and exit from the earth. He should do something positive and commit 'Hari Kari' in a wheat paddock and become organic fertilizer.
I think I will stay around though.

I know what the book is about. Plenty of anti-farmer, anti-agriculture, greeny propaganda.



While googling Suzuki, I came across much anti agriculture garbage, However this article was interesting.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/About_us/Dr_David_Suzuki/Article_Archives/weekly10260101.asp


Have a read of the article and tell me what you think.
I actually agree with most of it. He tells some porkies though. Like he rants and raves about soil erosion. Modern farming pratices are very good in that regard. Stubble is left on the suface. Weeds are sprayed by roundup. The soil is much healthier.

So what is Suzuki on about? Organic agriculture involves ploughing the soil so it all washes and blows away. It involves spreading animal manures. These too get into river systems, as does chemical fertilizer.

Suzuki mentions zero-till at the end of the article, and says how maybe it will be a good idea,.

....."However, other methods to improve biodiversity such as leaving crop stubble in fields overwinter are expected to have better results'.......


So Suzuki has just discovered that zero-till could be a good idea, yet he continues to criticise modern farming technics. Zero-till is what modern farmers do, and is the exact opposite of organic. A bit contradicting.


Suzuki even admits that organic agriculture could result in a loss of production. If you count the time that the land is idle growing the nitrogen through legumes however, production is halved just there and then. He conveniently misses this point. He doesn't tell us how organic fertilizer could possibly provide the nutrients needed, or where they will come from. It's not magic. Organic fertilizer now comes from animal manure. Animals fed grain, grain made from oil.


In summery, Suzuki is a typical greeny. Happy to say how bad current agriculture is. [and happy to make money from his trash books] But he has no real solution to it.

See ya's.

 

[Sunfish]

Suzuki says:as the world's population is expected to swell by 50 per cent in the next 50 years.

It won't. It can't. In the post-carbon world the population is more likely to decrease by 50%. In such a world Mad Max and Chopper Reid will thrive. The educated class will be ill-equipped.

BTW TC, how wide spread are the modern techniques you use? Cane farmers up north seem unwilling to change, but I've not been near a cane farm for years and they may be changing.

 

[Aaron Sice]

it's a few chapters on anti-farming methids, but it's a bit more in depth. talks about the food laid waste int he EU (burning 100mil tonnes a year) just to keep food prices up.

but now, 8 years on from reading it, i realise there was no solution given to that either.

the above commet on the EU has no relation to this thread here either, so i'm not trying to start a new argument!

but how on earth can Suzuki claim that organics is the way, then proclaim about GM crops in the same paragraph?

That's why finding less damaging methods to feed the world population is such an important task. One alternative method may be organic farming, which eliminates pesticides and requires far less of other chemical inputs. Although some critics argue that organic farming can reduce yields and thus increase pressures on the natural world, studies have shown that organic practices for some crops can maintain yields, while greatly reducing overall impact. Another possibility is the use of genetic modification. Although this radical new technology is largely untested and in its infancy, it may play a role in a sustainable agricultural future, if found to be safe.

the conclusion paragraph is very general as well.

Any attempts to reduce the negative impact of agriculture on the Earth should be applauded. As we search for a balance between the need to feed ourselves and the need maintain healthy ecosystems (which in many ways are the same goal), there will always be failures as well as successes. The key is to build on the success and learn from the failures to find a path that is sustainable.

 

[topcropper]

Talks about the food laid waste int he EU (burning 100mil tonnes a year) just to keep food prices up.

but now, 8 years on from reading it, i realise there was no solution given to that either.

.

There was mountains of grain 8 years ago. Massive over production.
Grain production today however has still increased. It's just that demand has caught up and passed supply.



I've got to admit that greeny environmentalists did have a point 8 years ago when agricultural production was in oversupply. You have to admit that.

However today, if an uninformed city person, or worse, an activist greeny naively suggests I'm an environmental vandal because of what I do, I can just laugh in their face. I'm enjoying the food crisis.



BC, these photos are from my 'TC's farm thread'. Just showing you what most farmers are up to in case you haven't seen my farm thread.

Sunflowers planted zero-till into wheat stubble. Photo taken Jan 08.

And wheat coming up in sorghum stubble. Photo taken August 07

Doing this 25 years ago just wasn't possible. It has increased our total production by way over 50%. With ploughing, we only were able to capture 25% of the rainfall in our soil. The rest left with every ploughing. With leaving the stubble on the surface, not ploughing, and not having a compacted soil from ploughing, we now capture 75% of the rain.

David Suzuki is saying we are doing the wrong thing and should go back to ploughing. He is saying we should in effect cut our production, and increase our soil erosion.



I hate these environmentalists with a passion. They say absolute total crap about farmers and agriculture. My rantings and photos are just one small way of setting things straight.

See ya's.

 

[topcropper]

BTW TC, how wide spread are the modern techniques you use? Cane farmers up north seem unwilling to change, but I've not been near a cane farm for years and they may be changing.

On the Liverpool Plains it's over 90%. The only farmers not converted are either too old, or too broke to buy a planter that will go through the trash.

I would say northern NSW it's 80% converted.
Queensland similar, although cotton growers still have to plough the soil to bust heliothis pupae.

Southern cropping areas, I'm not so sure of. When we do farm tours down that way we mainly visit the zero-till blokes, so my memory may be biased.
Zero-till is very big in WA.

See ya's.



ps, crikey! Just googled this up.
http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/a/media/cs040928_tillage.htm

Says WA was 85% zero-till 4 years ago.