Basic HTML Version
38
double
10
the next ten years and per–
haps double again in the following dec–
ade. So we see here the same vicious
cyde as with the pesticides.
The Purpose of Weeds
As with insect pests, few seem to
realize that weeds have a purpose. In
the preface to his book
W eeds, Guard–
ians of
the
Soil,
Joseph Cocannouer lists
sorne of the purposes of weeds:
l.
They bring minecals, especially
those which have been depleted, up
from the subsoil co the copsoil and
make them available co crops. This
is parcicularly importanc with regard
co crace elemeots.
2. Whcn uscd in crop rotation
thcy
break up hardpans and allow subse–
quenc crop roots co feed deeply.
3. They fiberize and condition the
soil and provide a good environment
for the minuce buc importanc animal
and plant Iife thac make any soil pro–
ductive.
4. They are good indicacors of soil
condicion, both as co variety of weed
presenc and co condition of the indi–
vidual planc. Cenain weeds appear
when cermin deficiencies occur.
5. Weeds are deep divers and feeders
and through soil capillarity they enable
the less hardy, surface feeding crops
co withstand drought better than the
crop alone could.
6.
As companion crops
they
enable
our domesticated plants co get their
roots
10
otherwise unavailable food.
7. Wceds store up minerals and nucri–
ents that would be washed, blown or
lcachcd away from bare ground and
keep them readily available.
Obviously, these purposes and ben–
efits are 1isted on ly as general guidclines
and do not apply to all weeds under aJI
condttions.
F.
C.
King in his book
The 11'/eed
Prob/em: A New Appt"oarh
also reveals
that weeds build up and protect the soil
and, co-existing wíth domestíc crops,
can help make soil nutrients available to
these crops. This author states that we
are "hopelessly wrong
j¡1
bel ieving
weeds to be useless plants and in
devoting our energy to their suppres–
sion, instead of studying to employ
them" (p. 17).
In England it has been reported that
whcn lawns bccome deficient in lime,
daisies appcar. The daisies are found to
be rich in lime which they manufacture
in thcir tissucs. Lime is inserted into
The
PLAIN TRUTH
the soil when the daisies die and decay.
When the soil becomes sufficiently en–
riched with lime, thc daisy "problem"
disappears.
When weeds become so abundant
that they interfere with crop productíon,
it ought to be rccognizcd that tbe
ca11se
of the problem is not thc wceds, but thc
depleted soil which the wceds are trying
to protect and build up. Instead of
destroying such weeds wholesale witb
herbicides while our soil continues to be
degraded, we need to get busy and
build up the soil so the weeds will natu–
rally reduce themselves.
Solving the Problem
H ere, then, is whcre we stand
tn
regard to the poll ution problem caused
by pesticides, herbicides and such
chemicals.
Is it possible to survive if we con–
tinue to use ever stronger chemicals in
ever greater quantities? No!
Is ít possible to survivc if we quit
using pesticides?
Y
es! Many farmers –
large and small - are successfully doing
it
1
Will this be easy? For many, NO!
This is because the solution to the prob–
lem is to restore
natmal
fertility to the
soil. And as Professor Cocannouer has
well stated :
"Bringing a piece of land back to
permanent ferti l ity is probably the most
difficult of all farm operations. Too
often the farmer fails to make a go of
his soil building because he doesn't
acquaint himself thoroughly, before
starting, with al! thc aclversc factors he
is goiog to havc to fight. He gets dis–
couraged because he does not see the
size of the job of rcmaking land that
has been weakened for fifty or a hun–
dred years. H e has more than likely
been schooled to expect the quick
response that land makes to stimulants.
He forgets that now he is bui lding for
permanency, not mcrely stimulating."
Obviously thc biggest hurdle will be
changing our attitudcs and accepting the
fact that the way to success is to WORK
WITH natural laws, NOT
DEFY
them.
Once this decision is made, the rest is
remarkably simple by comparison.
To build up our land in harmooy
with the natural laws of agriculture
would temporarily disrupt every part of
April-May, 1970
society. Food prices in sorne areas might
fluctuate wildly for a season or so and
therc would probably be temporary
shortages of certain itcms (though no
starvation as many assume). Many have
bcen surpri scd at how smooth and suc–
cessful thc transition can be whcn right
principlcs are applicd.
Hugc tracts of monoculture would
have to be brokcn up and planted into
smaller fields on a crop rotation basis.
Because natural farming methods
ínvolve more intensive care that can
often
be
given only by human hands,
many millions from our crowded citics
would need to move back to the land.
A
crash program in research and edu–
cation to natural methods would have
to
be
carried out immediately - and
administercd by the highest-level gov–
ernmcntal agencies- in order to makc
a succc:ssful transition on a nation,tl
level.
Such
.1
nationa1 program would takc
far more cooperation than putting a man
on thc moon - but it would also be
far more rcwarding.
And it could
be
done!
And the beautiful part of it is that
m:1ny scattercd individuals are alrcady
sold on thc idea and have already
proveu that thc system works on thc
individual leve!. How much better
would it
be
if a whole nation decided
to use thc right system.
Will We Choose the Right Way?
Pesticides nnd herbicides are only onc
aspect of the pollution problem in agri–
culture that must
be
solved if man is to
survive. Future articles will deal with
othcr aspects of the problem and will
also explain further how a system of
¡tgriculture based on worlcing in har–
mony with nature's laws could
be
madc
to work.
Such a systcm, properly applicd,
could rcsult in happy, healthy peoplc,
an abundant supply of wholesome food
for all, a stable economy, an improved
environmcnt and a truly high standard
of living.
Will we choose this solution? Human
nature being what it is, it is extrcmely
doubtful. lf this only real solution seems
too difficult, ask yourself just onc
qucstion:
ls
sttrl'h'tiL
nwth
it?
O