English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

19 answers

Well of course it is possible.

Look back into history and ask yourself, how so many humans survived and nourished there body's without modern science?

The question is do we have the patience to allow nature to take it's own course in the growth cycle of plants.

We are all about - the quickest result possible not the best.

2007-06-09 03:13:33 · answer #1 · answered by mitymouse30024 2 · 1 0

Well, that all depends on what you call fertilizer. Compost and green manure both will enrich the soil and make garden plants grow better and produce a better yield. So they are considered fertilizers. But you can use these things instead of Chemical fertilizers.

They will not be as likely to leach into the water table and since they decompose rather quickly, have an almost instant boost for the plants.

There are also many alternatives to chemical pesticides. The problem with them is that they are not cost effective to use on large scale farming. It is very time consuming to apply hot pepper soap to 500 acres of tomatoes to keep the bugs out. Those types of pesticides are what make organic farming and organic foods more expensive than the non organic counterparts.

The things you can do for patch farming just won't work an the grand scale needed to feed the world. If everyone in a neighborhood grew a small patch farm of 3 or 4 different foods, then swapped around for the things they didn't grow themselves, then you could get fresh, high quality organic veggies for the cost of seed and your time. Just a thought.

2007-06-09 06:51:32 · answer #2 · answered by novalunae 3 · 0 0

Absolutely. It's the use of chemicals that created the giant farms that now dominate our agricultural industry. Organic methods open up opportunities for small, family run, community farms. It's not just rich people who can afford organic produce. The last two communities I've lived in have community supported agriculture programs. I pay for a share of the crops in advance to help the farm get started. Then I share in the yield during the growing season. It costs about $15/week for all the produce I need. Another benefit is the energy savings from not having to transport food hundreds or thousands of miles.

2007-06-09 04:07:39 · answer #3 · answered by yakngirl 5 · 0 0

YES before but now harvesting 3 or even 4 times a year sucks all the soil nutrients leaving us no options but to use fertilizers and pesticides. No more crop rotation to fertilize the soil so I think we are to blame for the result.

2007-06-09 04:34:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, using fertilizer is not a bad thing. There are also ways to make pesticides without causing harm to the environment.

Rabbit droppings are one of the best fertilizers for tomatoes. They are low in acids, originated from grain and veggies, and 'maters love 'em.

Fish Emulsion is an excellent fertilizer! Different strengths for different uses.

The main thing to remember is run-off. Water in itself is used more efficiently if it is allowed to travel in its natural course. If your terrain is such that you can water your garden(s) from uphill to a lawn or field, you are making the most use of your water, and are letting your natural fertilizers do as much good as possible.

One of the best pesticides created are other insects or pests (or as I like to say "Critters"). Lady bugs are great, I'm not a bug expert, but many are around here so they can elaborate.

One of the things that today's Americans have to keep in mind regarding Natural Growing....The fruit doesn't have to be showroom quality. If there are brown spots, or a blemish or two, that doesn't make the fruit or veg's bad.

Good Luck & Happy Growth

2007-06-09 03:38:29 · answer #5 · answered by Wood Smoke ~ Free2Bme! 6 · 1 0

Everything grew in the wild centuries ago but it was available to birds, pests and rot. So if you want good production you have to use some kind of fertilizers and pesticides, etc. but you just need to use "more friendly" ones, and those that are used for "organic farming" make it possible.

2007-06-09 04:20:07 · answer #6 · answered by sophieb 7 · 0 0

well, of course it is. It is called "organic" farming. There are books on the subject. To sell your produce as organic, you have to have your farm certified, which means the land must be pesticide free and you cannot use any chemicals at all.

It is only in the last 100 years (less) that we have begun using chemicals and science for growing our food. So, all through history people farmed without chemicals.

Good Luck!

2007-06-09 03:24:25 · answer #7 · answered by rebecca h 2 · 2 0

They make equipment now that when planting seeding or spreading fertilizers will actually do minimum tilling and won't make the soil to loose. This helps prevent run off of the top soil. Also some farmers will keep the lowest part of last years crop in the ground because that also helps prevent erosion.

2016-04-01 12:09:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Look around you, plants grow all by themselves and there are plenty of green alternatives to pesticides and ways of replenishing nutrients in the soil by crop rotation, lying fallow, etc.

2007-06-09 04:34:55 · answer #9 · answered by John M 2 · 1 0

Yes.

But it's impossible to feed the whole world without them. "Organic" farming works for a relatively small number of people in wealthy countries with lots of good farmland. Not for the poor overpopulated countries in Africa and the Far East, with limited and often low quality farmland.

We don't have to stop using them. We just have to use them intelligently and carefully.

Johnnie B is right about this one.

2007-06-09 03:15:29 · answer #10 · answered by Bob 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers