Week 17 Letter from a Farmer

Wall Street appears to have been partying until the lights went out. I really wonder if there is anyone at the wheel looking out for us. Given that, is there anyone in Washington wondering about what happens when we run out of the natural resources we have grown dependent on? Is our dependence on natural resources another short-lived dream? In this case we are all partying. According to Dennis Meadows of MIT and his project team, “Limits to Growth,” we have maybe 16 years of the world’s copper resources left, 24 years of tin, 50 years of oil, 60 years of steel, and 75 years of aluminum. The experts vary greatly on the reserves of potassium and phosphorus for the purpose of agricultural fertilizer. As most of the easily accessible minerals have been removed and the demand from Asia and India has expanded, we should expect the cost of minerals and fertilizers to rise dramatically during the next decade, which will trickle down to the cost of food and other supplies.

There have always been individuals around who provided us with a different perspective on the world. Back in the 19th century, as the world entered the industrial revolution, people like Emerson, Hawthorne, and Thoreau offered us a different road map. Their perspective was viewed as naïve and transcendentalism was looked down on as a quack philosophy. Even if some of the aspects were a bit flaky, imagine if mankind had adopted their world view of nature as a partner and humanity as a unique individual of free choice; where would we be today? Instead we have fully embraced the benefits and conveniences of the industrial revolution, and we have given up our true individual freedom. Only slowly, because there is little left, do we see some reversal of the 19th-century perspective on nature as a savage wilderness, an impediment to mankind, and the opposite of true civilization. But just as individualism is currently expressed in our clothing, our return to nature is still somewhat sentimental. From the perspective of Thoreau, very little of our socio-economic life is based on our respect for nature and its laws.

Rudolf Steiner was one of those visionaries who drew lessons from the laws of nature. In the course of eight lectures he emphasized the farm as a living organism and viewed the farm as an individuality – closed system – (Agriculture June 7-16 1924). Steiner was also a vocal critic of connecting land to capital and credit (World Economy, lecture V, July 28, 1922). He warned that connecting land (real estate) with credit and capital is harmful to the economic process.
He argued that: “In a healthy economic process we must not and cannot give credit based on the security of land, even to a person working the land. He/she too should only receive personal credit – that is to say, credit which will enable him/her to turn the capital to good account through the land.” In light of the housing bailout, I was reminded of Steiner’s words. As it is with most of Steiner’s work, his advice is always highly sensible, but I am reminded that this kind of practicality never gets a foot on the ground, as it is always opposed by personal greed.

Okay here we go, more bad news: “Modern day agriculture contaminates our water supply with the use of mineral fertilizer and pesticides. Researchers say this year's dead zone may be the largest ever recorded due to increased fertilizer use in the Midwest and flooding along the Mississippi River dumping even more water than usual into the Gulf of Mexico.” Over time, agriculture (through excessive tillage) and forestry (through clear cutting) is responsible for the release of trillions of tons of carbon; on top of this, methane out of manure in feedlots and nitrogen oxide out of fertilizer adds even greater to the greenhouse effect.

So, if an enlightened perspective can’t get us out of this other impending crash, can we do it out of self interest? For the simple reason of survival, regenerative agriculture will need to become part of any solution. Adopting these practices will not only help retain nutrients in the soil and keep them out of our water supply, oceans, and atmosphere, we will even be able to sequester carbon. According to Timothy LaSalle of the Rodale Institute, 20% of all carbon emitted in the U.S. can be sequestered if farmers switch to regenerative farming methods. If his figures are correct, this would amount to about 300 million metric tons of carbon a year. So, while I would like to appeal to your highest and noblest intentions – yeah, the Thoreau in you – I remind you that the furthering and adoption of regenerative agriculture will be good for your future pocketbook as well. Organic farming is not only about food safety, it is about global safety. After this crash, we learned that we can’t count on our leaders to take care of this – at least so long as Monsanto and Cargill have their ear. ~Jean-Paul