Why Regenerative farming isn't the answer.

[treehousesmotors]

The primary goal of regenerative farming is not to lower GHG emissions. Rather, it's to literally regenerate topsoil.
For decades, bad farming practices has eroded the topsoil all over the world. In some places it is gone entirely. This is bad, and here's why:

What distinguishes topsoil from any other strata is its carbon content, acquired through the accumulation of dead, once living organisms over hundreds or thousands of years.
The molecular structure of carbon allows for excellent water and nutrient retention in the topsoil, as opposed to sand or any other mineral grain. This results in greater yields per area farmed.

Through monoculture farming, heavy machinery compacting the soil, making it less porous, aswell as most of our agricultural grains and such having been bred to maximize the seed production (i.e the part of the plants that get harvested by us and removed from the location) at the cost of growing roots, very little plant matter gets left in the ground to turn into topsoil. Through this practice, topsoil generation has effectively stopped all over the world.

One of the main drivers of topsoil erosion is the combination of drought and wind. Poor water retention capacity in the soil renders the topmost layers bone dry after only a couple of days or weeks without rain. Wind picking up these particles results in the removal of the soil from the site, and may create dust storms, something that really is not good for anybody (think of the Dust Bowl in the central U.S in the 30's).
Flood erosion due to rain falling on dry, impermeable ground is also a big issue, leading to sedimentation of creeks and other fragile water ecosystems.

According to some studies on this topic, the average topsoil erosion on a global scale is around 1, 5mm per year. It may not seem like much, and it is admittedly a rather slow process, but make no mistake, at our current trajectory the fertile topsoil could very well be entirely gone by the turn of the next century, leaving no choice than for future farmers to amp up their use of fertilizers even more, something which creates a whole cascade of other problems, like the over-fertilization of our oceans, leading to massive algae blooms, which, as they die and blanket the sea floor, uses up the oxygen at the bottom during decomposition, causing dead zones where basically nothing lives.
A large part of the Baltic sea is practically void of life, largely due to this very phenomenon.
The forecasted global population is expected to rise by several billion people in that time, something that's really not compatible with a substantial reduction in agricultural efficiency.

Humanity is surely at more than just one crossroad that will determine our future, the most prominent one being the concept of climate change. Despite being the most political and talked about, it is important to not automatically assume other issues are solved by controlling the GHG concentrations.

[wearesource]

I sincerely suggest you research regenerative farming much deeper - as your myopic view does an incredible dis-service to the true value regenerative farming / farmers provide. As someone who works with regenerative farmers in Australia, hearing their personal stories and the incredible ecological transformation they have achieved on inter-generation farms is truly inspiring. It takes incredible bravery and guts to go against the flow of main-stream industrial practices and transition to long-term ecological management. Real regenerative farmers are custodians of the land, who deserve our praise and support.

[nicholasports]

You mean to tell me that shipping in the feed and growing the extra grains to feed the cows has no effect how much carbon is out into the atmosphere. Grass fed cows are doing what they would naturally do rather than being fed grains that have to be farmed using machinery and transported to farms throughout the country. Reforestation is great maybe we should use the agricultural land from corn and soy to do it instead.

[VonkieTonkie]

As a biology student that is studying this topic at the moment I have to kinda disagree, he is right about the methane and carbon but not all those grasslands should be forests. So many other positive things come with cattle on a field. Trees aren’t everything, biodiversity is a greet aspect that can’t happen with a lot of trees around. Also not everywhere can be planted trees because of groundwater levels and elevation and the needed resources which cattle can provide.

With these places I don’t mean like the deforested patches of land in the amazon.

Hopefully i’ve made myself clear.

[givinginGCourtz]

WOW, that is quite the strawman you've made for yourself to argue against. Fortunately for humanity, THAT is NOT what Regenerative Agriculture is, or does. PLEASE actually do your RESEARCH next time, and leave the straw in the field or put it in the garden as mulch. Unless you're too busy shining up your precious philosophical concepts.

[Norbingel]

There's much more to regen farming than grazing so that first statement makes the rest hard to take as credible

[mattcrossley]

Regenerative farming is farming in harmony with nature to restore the land and soil. There isnt a problem with it. Your definition, which is wrong, is a cherry picked topic which is completely beside the point. How do you think forests grow? Not with the help of animals and biodiversity?

[mceliniak]

"Regenerative farming is a concept... " and the truth ends there :-)

[CapriciousConch]

Yeah this is Not necessarily what regenerative farming is about. It's about building soil by not taking out of the system more than you put in. This is done by utilizing chop and drop, filling the 7 layers (if possible) of the ecosystem, using nitrogen fixers, perennials, no till, ect. Yes, livestock can play an integral role, but what is described here isn't the true goal. "Succession Agriculture", especially as it is used in "Regenerative Silvipasture" in "Lane Crop" systems, essentially, is the better method. Basically, perennial weeds (or veggie crops for veggie farmers) are planted within rows of trees, which make a "lane crop" system, or a system of alleys. In succession farming, a succession of animals are led throug hthe system, often by timed gates. The pickiest animals go through first, (Cows). As they go through, they poop, bringing in flies. Chickens go next, eating the flies and picking through the perennial weeds like the cows did a little. Then go other animals, 1 species at a time, until we reach the least picky (goats) for instance. The next time, they are led through a different lane, and do not return until the original lane has healthily grown back.

In this way, a number of animals can use a space, fed by the naturally growing perennial weeds (and fruits & nuts fallen from the trees), without over-grazing and destroying the plants. Thus, we preserve the soil coverage, while also adding lots of manure.

You do have to be careful to plan, as some animals can give each other disease, but once you know what you're doing, you put them in seperate systems.

I am a vegetarian so my knowledge of this is purely for the sake of you guys, although, without eating them, animals will still have a place on my farm.

The main ingredients for compost are Browns and Greens. Greens are easy, whatever weeds you pull, whatever inedible prunings you take. On a small scale garden like I'm in now, browns are more difficult. Enter livestock. However, in a small scale there are things you can do. Creating a worm bin for dog droppings can sterilize them and convert them into great compost, especially when combined with the greens of your kitchen and garden compost.

In summary, though I do not know it all, and I can't negate the benefit of deepening roots, the example this guy is mentioning is not complex enough to really be that regenerative. That's just Farming. And to make such a statement as "Regenerative Farming Isn't The Answer" is defiantly what I would consider spreading disinformation :)

We are in such a rush to offer something of value to the digital space. I ask that before you do, you make sure value is what you are Giving, not taking away.

[spiritakarabbit]

They are taking a natural thing and twisting it for meat eating...natural farming is just letting life do it's thing and a good Natural balance obviously, animals play a role because they help sustain the ecosystem So if anyone is going to be involved in Farming in general, it's good to have your animals make themselves at home there and obviously so long as the animals are not food. It's good to have them there because they basically make it their home. As Earth is the home for all, and their lifestyle and natural way of living sustains the area. And this is a good thing, especially for farmers who are plant-based or vegan. ANYONE who lives naturally knows this

[willbass]

You do know that plants use CO2 and sequester some of the carbon back in the soil, right?
When soil microbes exchange various minerals & elements for "sugars" produced by the plant they sequester the C in the sugars

[dustyhendrix]

True, but there are also places where pastures are the optimal use of said land. Reforestation is only good if the land was originally forest anyway. It wouldn't work in the Sahel, for instance. In many areas of the world, pastoralists have been more successful than sedentary farmers because they were able to convert grass into milk and meat, rather than clearing infertile land to be used as cropland, which were we still using conventional agricultural methods would require significant fertilizers. Industrial livestock agriculture has to go, but small scale livestock farms can provide lots of healthy local food by using regenerative agricultural techniques.

[Countryboy]

Except here when the beef guys sell the grain guys buy them up, and bulldoze all forest the beef guys used. There was a whole 160 acres of all forest. Big grain guys bought it, cleared it all up and now it's all sunflowers. And that's just one example.

[jaredhart]

Have you researched White Oak Pastures farm operated by Will Harris?

[Elijah-qilv]

Its not that grass get deeper roots, it is that native grasses are restored in grasslands which naturally have deeper roots (several feet deep). A lot of plants have a herbivore response which causes higher rates of growth and greater root networks leading to a higher deposit of carbon into the soil. Add a mixture of native forbs/flowers as well as legumes and now you got habitat and a reviving ecosystem. A forest isnt the end goal. Grassland relied on grazing and prescribed burns preventing growth of trees. The ocean actually sequesters more carbon than any forest.

[djpaz]

Find the John Kempf regenerative agriculture podcast where he interviews a scientist in this field. She makes a very good point that in her opinion there can't really be an agreed definition of regenerative agriculture because it's about what was accomplished in the system, and not a process or series of checkboxes on how to get there. It will always be system dependent but with major science we now have in a bulletproof narrative. So to talk about cows and grass is too narrow a subject to speak to regen at all. For the most part, cows live their lives in pasture, and the CAFO system is where most of your calculations are based on. On another hand with deforestation, it isn't happening to "feed the world" or fill increased demand, it's a nutritive problem. Brazil as the Crown exporter has the hidden problem of exhausted pastures with zero process for remediation. It's easier to deforest than have a process that doesn't mono directionally extract nutrients until the soil can no longer sustain even grassland. If you fixed those issues and ensured all cattle never ate a single kernel of corn and grains were only standed, everything in your argument is actually incorrect. I think you have a valid idea to observe the current series of barriers to getting towards this goal. However you should incorporate that into the master systement.

[AlliWritesNow]

I’m sorry but you don’t appear to know much about farming or reforestation. Plz grow something outside & learn even that 1 plants needs year after year. If you find yourself in a pickle where you either have to go to the store & buy amend, fertilizer & pest control - THEN you can at-least have a grain of truth to start a conversation: What is better for the environment planting native species & allowing nature to intervene, including animals who release natural gases or Monsanto crops?
Btw, regenerative farms do not house cattle on dry dirt in stalls, even the images you used to make your point tell me you have a long way to go before you’ll understand what regenerative farming is & is not.

[CapriciousConch]

"Regenerative Lane Crop Succession Silvipasture"
= Forests and Animals = Permaculture Oriented.

[baylensmith]

That is a fundamentally incorrect view of regenerative agriculture. Also, White Oak Pastures had a third party test taken, and their cows ARE removing more emissions from the atmosphere than they're giving off.

[judith]

Speaker in this video needs to do further studies there are bison water buffalo and many others that contribute to regenerative farming in a wonderful.