I am disappointed

The green bluster seems to be all hot air. Why else would we persist with such outmoded measures of agri-input development? World fertiliser demand set to grow (5 July, Farmers' Weekly Interactive)

It is silly to plan for chemical fertilizer growth without first ensuring that soil ecology is managed for sustained farm productivity. We need time-bound targets to bring more land under microbes that can fix nitrogen, phosphorus, silica, and zinc in forms that roots can absorb.

Secondly, we have to reduce leaching in measurable ways. This approach will not only safeguard precious potable water reserves, but make available factory production capacities go further.

Then there is this spiel about pricing. Which producer accounts for environmental conservation costs? One of the principal reasons for wasteful fertilizer consumption is that the stuff has all kinds of costs that stay well and truly hidden!

Another gripe: should fertilizer for avocado pears, rare wines, and designer tomatoes, cost the same as for millet? Must a starving peasant pay as much as a wealthy rancher? What about corporate farms?

Hey, I can go on and on, but what about you? Can we do our humble bits to provide for remediation of the effects of our toxic wares? After all, we cannot dodge paying our shares for ever.

Dr. Satya Banerji

Please post your response to this blog post in the Community Forum or email getintouch@stewardshipcommunity.com and the responses will be compiled and  posted for you. Your name can be withheld if you prefer.

 

---