Views of an agronomist on soil, farming, and science. Evidence-based agriculture. Washington State University Extension. https://t.co/RZ11P3ozYm
Same @ on X.
Isn't that Yosemite?

@agronomistag.bsky.social
Views of an agronomist on soil, farming, and science. Evidence-based agriculture. Washington State University Extension. https://t.co/RZ11P3ozYm
Same @ on X.
Isn't that Yosemite?
2 things are true: farmers can be "rich" (assets and resources > many others) AND they are in a volatile, $$$ intensive, low margin business subject that leaves them vulnerable to economic stress, much like their neighbors. Their interests are often more aligned than is recognized by either.
Soil tests to measure it.
Cover crop mixtures to enhance it.
Products to spray it on.
Chasing soil microbial diversity rests on an assumption that turns out to be wrong: cropland soil isn't diversity-depleted.
My latest Perspectives piece: csanr.wsu.edu/microbial-di...
Who owns US farmland? Farmdoc has a new tool to visualize foreign interest in US farmland, created by my colleagues Bruce Sherrick and Juo-Han Tsay at the TIAA Center for Farmland Research. Doing this isn't easy, because the numbers are actually very small.
Hands of Poker demonstrate this - which one wins?
This is also consistent across hundreds of studies: when a mixture gives the best results, it's a non-legume+legume. Here, oilseed+legume gave best results.
"Cover crop composition, NOT diversity, was the strongest driver of changes to, and legacy effects on, soil microbial communities, agroecosystem multifunctionality and wheat yield."
This is consistent across studies.
Open access. besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....
If the problem is double clicking when you single click it, there is a software fix that works well, "double-click fix"
Like I said, there are several versions of agroecology.
The free version on substack, www.speakandregret.michaelinzlicht.com/p/my-p-hacki...
"A scientist who wants to change the world in a particular direction is no longer beholden to the truth. They are beholden to a cause...This is why I have come to believe that science and activism cannot mix. It is a plain conflict of interest."
www.chronicle.com/article/when...
Montgomery with new book; the geomorphologist takes on farm policy.
Regenerative ag, "properly understood," is guided by "minimizing or avoiding both physical and chemical disturbance."
And then he claims that glyphosate degrades soil health, and loses me.
civileats.com/2026/09/09/o...
"...than water."
Not sure where you are, but here in the US, government pressure now means people will go in the opposite direction.
I see a lot based on the "shift in diets" which is a low probability solution. What if diets don't change? Then my point is made.
Your right, it is more complicated than this, but this - the dominant effect of farming on nature - is often ignored while people get lost in the smaller details. And until our population peaks, loss of nature due to conversion to cropping will be the primary factor on nature.
It depends. I work in irrigated cropping systems in an arid environment. Our yield stability and % of yield potential is very high, but our soil health don't score very well on most tests. This tells me that soil health is much less a driver of yield than soil health.
And what is a measure of land use efficiency? Yield. High yield=high land use efficiency for cropping.
The worst thing about agriculture is its use of land. Whether conventional, no-till, organic, or agroecological-regenerative, the biodiversity lost from initially clearing land for crops far outweighs any differences in farming systems.
Recent paper: "There is now overwhelming evidence for the destructive effects of the industrial model of agriculture on Earth’s life-support systems." The fact is that ALL models of crop production that will actually feed us have these destructive effects - it's how crops are grown.