Viewpoint: ‘Farming is always unnatural’ — German farmers on why the EU needs to stop romanticizing agriculture and start embracing ‘intensive’ farming

One should also say goodbye to the notion that farming “as it used to be” was better. The animals were sick more often, lived in close contact with humans, and many diseases were transmitted and it wasn’t efficient either. Credit: Robin Moline
One should also say goodbye to the notion that farming “as it used to be” was better. The animals were sick more often, lived in close contact with humans, and many diseases were transmitted and it wasn’t efficient either. Credit: Robin Moline

We get too romantic about farming: “Nature is not gentle. Farming is always against nature. If you don’t do anything, almost only weeds grow in the field, pests eat up what little I can still harvest.” [writes farmer Timo Küntzle]. Farming is always the preference of a certain plant over all others. Even plowing kills everything that grew there. So it’s bad for biodiversity. If there were no agriculture in Europe, forests would be almost everywhere as they were before humans settled down. “What we understand by nature is already a cultural landscape anyway.”

Nature is not healthy either: Pests leave behind poisons, some weed seeds are poisonous for humans because they contain alkaloids, for example the deadly ergot alkaloid in grain.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

This is how the qualified farmer Timo Küntzle imagines the ideal agriculture: Intensively cultivated fields next to extensive areas as a habitat for more biodiversity. Sufficient productivity is ensured on the intensive areas to feed us with as few imports as possible – keyword problematic supply chains. 

One could bring more diversity to the cultural landscape by reducing fields, laying them out in strips so that they can still be managed effectively mechanically. But that has nothing to do with organic or conventional. Large organic fields are worse for biodiversity than small conventional ones.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}
screenshot at  pm

Are pesticide residues on food something to worry about?

In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring drew attention to pesticides and their possible dangers to humans, birds, mammals and the ...
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.