Many of us in the ecological/regenerative ag community are instinctually problem solvers. We look around and see the issues with modern chemical-heavy farming, assess what needs to be done to improve things, and move forward to implement the plan. Problem solved.
In many ways, this is a helpful way to view our callings as farmers, ranchers, agronomists, scientists, etc. It evokes the reticence toward the phrase “sustainable” agriculture — why would we want to just sustain the current system? We want to solve the problems of modern farming and move toward something better.
Sometimes, though, it can be helpful to take a step back and consider the dictum of the economist Thomas Sowell: “There are no solutions. There are only tradeoffs.”
Consider the classic (among us) debate of tillage vs. herbicide. Yes, there are “organic no-till” options that have utility in some situations, for some amount of time — and we earnestly hope these methods will continue to improve — but for the most part, if we want to produce food, we have to remove competitive plants (weeds) via either tillage or some sort of herbicide. As John Kempf pointed out in our April issue, both produce disturbance (even though most of us have been accustomed to think that only tillage is disturbance).
In other words, tillage is not a solution to weeds. We know, first of all, that no single tillage pass is permanent. Moreover, there are tradeoffs involved in tilling: it disturbs soil microbial communities, it disturbs soil structure, it can lead to increased erosion, etc. Likewise, herbicides are not a solution to weeds. As with tillage, the weeds eventually come back — often stronger than ever, as herbicide-resistant weeds! And there are other tradeoffs: the destruction of microbial life, the chelation of vital nutrients, and the potential harm to humans.
To go one level deeper, we would be wise not to think that banning the herbicide glyphosate will solve all our problems. Again, there are tradeoffs, notably that in the absence of glyphosate, many farmers will resort to other herbicides that are even more toxic to humans, microbes and other creatures.
Sowell’s axiom is a healthy rejoinder against thinking in utopian terms. Yes, our collective agricultural practices should, and can, be much better than they are today. But let’s not think that in this life we’ll ever fully remove the thorn, the thistle, and the sweat of the brow — at best, we’ll trade one problem for a different, less serious one.
On a side note, this is the 650th issue of Acres U.S.A. magazine. Here’s to at least 350 more!
And that’s the view from the country.
