G'day mates,

A note from the American Soc. of Agronomy FWIW:

quoting
CONVENTIONAL OR ORGANIC?
Scientists from the University of Minnesota demonstrated yields of
corn and soybeans were only minimally reduced when organic production
practices were utilized as compared with conventional production
practices. After factoring in production costs, net returns between
the two production strategies were equivalent. This research was
published in the March-April {2003, I presume] issue of Agronomy
Journal, http://agron.scijournals.org/current.shtml.
/quoting


Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:57:26 GMT, (Phred) wrote:

G'day mates,

A note from the American Soc. of Agronomy FWIW:

quoting
CONVENTIONAL OR ORGANIC?
Scientists from the University of Minnesota demonstrated yields of
corn and soybeans were only minimally reduced when organic production
practices were utilized as compared with conventional production
practices. After factoring in production costs, net returns between
the two production strategies were equivalent. This research was
published in the March-April {2003, I presume] issue of Agronomy
Journal, http://agron.scijournals.org/current.shtml.
/quoting

Interesting that the yield drag of organic input, compared
to high input conventional, was no more than 7-19%.

(Speaking just from the abstract, I will not pay for the article,
since that would support the US economy.)


better stop eating bread and I shudder to think how much danish pig meat is
made on the back of US feed stuffs.


--

-
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic might
even use the word "banality".

"Jim Webster" wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:57:26 GMT, (Phred) wrote:

G'day mates,

A note from the American Soc. of Agronomy FWIW:

quoting
CONVENTIONAL OR ORGANIC?
Scientists from the University of Minnesota demonstrated yields of
corn and soybeans were only minimally reduced when organic production
practices were utilized as compared with conventional production
practices. After factoring in production costs, net returns between
the two production strategies were equivalent. This research was
published in the March-April {2003, I presume] issue of Agronomy
Journal, http://agron.scijournals.org/current.shtml.
/quoting

Interesting that the yield drag of organic input, compared
to high input conventional, was no more than 7-19%.

(Speaking just from the abstract, I will not pay for the article,
since that would support the US economy.)


better stop eating bread and I shudder to think how much danish pig meat is
made on the back of US feed stuffs.

You could install filters to block all US-originating domains while
you're at it.

On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 23:54:59 GMT, Blanche Nonken
wrote:
"Jim Webster" wrote:
"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:57:26 GMT, (Phred) wrote:
G'day mates,
A note from the American Soc. of Agronomy FWIW:
quoting
CONVENTIONAL OR ORGANIC?
Scientists from the University of Minnesota demonstrated yields of
corn and soybeans were only minimally reduced when organic production
practices were utilized as compared with conventional production
practices. After factoring in production costs, net returns between
the two production strategies were equivalent. This research was
published in the March-April {2003, I presume] issue of Agronomy
Journal, http://agron.scijournals.org/current.shtml.
/quoting

Interesting that the yield drag of organic input, compared
to high input conventional, was no more than 7-19%.

(Speaking just from the abstract, I will not pay for the article,
since that would support the US economy.)

(Snip dimwit comments from previous posters who apparently didn't even
bother to read the abstract. :-)

Another interesting thing (again just speaking from the abstract) is
that soybean had the larger organic yield drag in that range 7-19%, of
the two different crops in the rotations (soy and corn). I'd thought
it would be the opposite way around.

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 23:54:59 GMT, Blanche Nonken

(Snip dimwit comments from previous posters who apparently didn't even
bother to read the abstract. :-)


perhaps we ought to snip dimwit comments from posters who wouldn't read the
article


--

-
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic might
even use the word "banality".

On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:57:26 GMT, (Phred) wrote:

G'day mates,

A note from the American Soc. of Agronomy FWIW:

quoting
CONVENTIONAL OR ORGANIC?
Scientists from the University of Minnesota demonstrated yields of
corn and soybeans were only minimally reduced when organic production
practices were utilized as compared with conventional production
practices. After factoring in production costs, net returns between
the two production strategies were equivalent. This research was
published in the March-April {2003, I presume] issue of Agronomy
Journal, http://agron.scijournals.org/current.shtml.
/quoting

Interesting that the yield drag of organic input, compared
to high input conventional, was no more than 7-19%.

(Speaking just from the abstract, I will not pay for the article,
since that would support the US economy.)

better stop eating bread and I shudder to think how much danish pig meat is
made on the back of US feed stuffs.

Less and less... You might also look at the GM policies of all the UK
supermarkets, which are already GM free for food and increasingly
specifying GM free for animal feed...

regards
Marcus


http://www.vancepublishing.com/FSI/a...05insights.htm

Capitalizing on niches (Consumers)

Consumers in the European Union are denouncing genetically modified
foods and Danish Crown, a processing company, plans to capitalize on
it. The processor is hoping to introduce the first GM-free pork to the
market.

The company is negotiating with producers to supply the meat. The
processor also will pay producers a premium over the standard pork
price to supplement the higher costs of using GM-free feed. The
initial plan is to process 5,000 to 7,000 GM-free pigs a week.

Danish Crown plans to focus on marketing to the United Kingdom where
consumers are especially interested in GM-free meat products.

Meanwhile, a Canadian producer, Breton Natural Pork of
Notre-Dame-du-Lac, has earned the "free-farmed" label from the
American Humane Association and Farm Animal Services.

The free-farmed label is designed to assure consumers that du Breton's
pork cuts came from animals treated according to American Humane
Association's animal welfare standards. An independent Farm Animal
Services inspector audits and certifies the production process. The
standards include provisions that require pigs to be raised in a
stress-reducing environment, have adequate shelter and comfortable
resting areas, sufficient space, proper facilities and are able to
exhibit normal (rooting) behavior.

wrote in message
...

better stop eating bread and I shudder to think how much danish pig meat
is
made on the back of US feed stuffs.

Less and less... You might also look at the GM policies of all the UK
supermarkets, which are already GM free for food and increasingly
specifying GM free for animal feed...

oh yes, I forgot, you believe what you are told by major corporations,
especially if they are supermarkets.
I suggest you run a search to see what actually goes into pig feeds on the
continent.


--

-
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic might
even use the word "banality".