If we think about agricultural practices on a spectrum, there are those that are aligned with the highest possibility of the place, and there are those that battle or resist the natural tendency of a place’s possibilities. 

For example, consider the extreme example of a semi-arid environment. Perhaps, with the right technology, it is possible to tap into a very deep aquifer and irrigate, to use shade cloth or other environmental modifications to protect a tender plant from heat and/or pests, and to produce a harvestable crop of, for example, vegetables. 

However, how often are we considering whether these types of agriculture actually make sense, relative to the natural world? Particularly if the modification to the environment requires extensive use of non-renewable resources, does it make sense to be fighting the natural tendency of the environment and what would best grow there? To continue the example, there are crops that require less water than vegetables. There are ways of capturing the rainfall that is received so it can sustain plants in a renewable way, while not using more water than is received in a renewable way as well. 

Different farmers will have different ways of connecting with the needs of the place. Some may rely on rainfall charts, on temperature and wind climatic information. Others may study the natural environment, noticing what grows well without any or limited interventions. For instance, if the tendency of a place is towards forest rather than grassland, perhaps there are better ways for trees to be incorporated into production systems, such as through agroforestry. And conversely, if the tendency of a place is towards a grassland, then tree-planting might only be done in strategic areas, for instance along rivers or streams. Key in this approach is that there is not a single solution that is appropriate in all places. 

This wisdom of a place on what will grow and flourish there is unique to each place. Farmers already tune into this unique information in many ways, such as not planting corn in the low place in a field, nor trying to plant seeds on the giant rock that’s there. 

On a more fundamental level, truly tuning into the highest and best way for the environment to flourish in that place isn’t a common conversation in agriculture today, in the U.S. or elsewhere in the world. For many operations, it would require meaningful change. There may be a sense that this type of practice would fundamentally be less “profitable” in the traditional measures of profit. In some cases that may be true, though it depends on the unique situation. 

Abundant harvests are possible, though, by working with the land and environment instead of against it. This abundance goes hand in hand with aligning with the needs of the place and tapping into its inherent possibilities.

--11/26/24

Note: An introduction to this series and links to other topics in the series can be found here.