There's an interesting piece on the Telegraph's website by Oliver Walston, attacking organic farming. Whether you agree with Oliver or not, he's certainly never been afraid to speak his mind

One has just to agree with Oliver in that organic farming is not going to feed the world.

It is not wrong however to maintain a style of agriculture as a viable model of 'difference.'  The processes of organic farming and its outputs gives a lot of happiness to a lot of people and so, like Opera is to music, it is worthy of attention and care as a form of human expression we should nurture and keep. 

The problems always start when zealots of one kind of human expression or another, insist on proselytising their view as though everyone else should follow it.

• Organic good. OK
• Modern methods good. OK

However, it is always as well to keep one's eye on the 'modern' whether it be agriculture or music, just to make sure that, in the case of modern agriculture it does not poison us, or in the case of modern music  deafen us.

yes, oliver is not afraid to speak his mind, and an empty tin makes the most noise.

I cannot recall hearing the man's name before, so after reading the article, I did a quick Google and read one or two more of his articles. He writes in a lot of different places!!  It seems he is first and foremost a journalist but owns a lot of land.

If as he says he is farming unsustainably, and I agree that he is with his permanent arable, then he should cease doing so. He obviously has no thought or care for future generations, only his own profits. That is stewardship at its worst. He should stick to writing and let someone farm the land who does care for the future.

I am not an organic farmer, never have been and never will be. I use grass breaks grazed by livestock because I think they are essential, and use as much FYM as I can produce, but also buy inorganic fertilisers, and sprays when the occasion warrants it. I believe my system is sustainable. I also believe there are other sustainable systems.

It's people like Oliver that make life interesting, whether you agree or not.

I am currently farm sitting on an organic livestock farm and while beating my way through the nettles and thistles to check the stock I started wondering why people turn organic? Is it because they were seduced by the grants available for conversion and the higher prices they could charge at the end, or do they truly believe in the philosophy? I will be putting this theory to the owners when they return, particuarly as it is a deer farm (with a small sheep flock)which are generally seen as very close to organic anyway.

BTW I have worked on a mixed organic farm and have now chosen to farm conventionally, albeit with very low inputs.

l was told to farm organically you needed to farm convetionally for 10 years to biuld up the fertility.

then convert, collect the money for 5 yrs, use up all the fertility, then revert to conventional.

Having visited a few organic units l can understand the argument 

boveyfarmer:

l was told to farm organically you needed to farm convetionally for 10 years to biuld up the fertility.

then convert, collect the money for 5 yrs, use up all the fertility, then revert to conventional.

Having visited a few organic units l can understand the argument 

With the exception of a couple of very well run organic units locally, this seems to be what most organic farms end up doing. Many converted to organic when livestock prices were at rock bottom and now, with prices having vastly improved and with a lot less stock to sell ( with little or no bonus ) they're counting the days 'till their 5 year agreements end.

yes, they may have less stock to sell, but they are still in business!

organic aid payments have saved many a farm business from ruin, mine included.!