#AgHistory
Did you ever wonder about fertilizer? Why was it developed, why it is used, and which is best (organic vs. conventional')? This is an aspect of agriculture with a significant amount of history, as well as myth, which needs to be understood if policy that doesn't repeat itself is to be developed. First, as a historian, one must consider WHY the search for a better means of fertilizing our crops. A great deal of debate exists in scientific circles about claims made from organic marketing, and these claims are at the center of this very question. It is crucial to accurately compare what we call organic methods with non-organic methods to understand why our ancestors shifted. One of the first papers I have come across and which I recommend reading: Seufert, V., Ramankutty, N. & Foley, J. Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 485, 229-232 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11069. In it, you will see that "...The performance of organic systems varies substantially across crop types and species... For example, yields of organic fruits and oilseed crops show a small (3% and 11% respectively), but not statistically significant, difference to conventional crops, whereas organic cereals and vegetables have significantly lower yields than conventional crops (26% and 33% respectively)." While the researchers note that this subject needs further research, it does correspond with centuries of study that led to the development of chemical fertilizer in the first place. While space is limited in this format, we can still travel back in time to George Ville, who in the 1860's, scientifically studied this very subject in a manner we are familiar with. It is interesting to note that the Experimental Farm' of George Ville in France conducted many of the same types of research we would expect from our Cooperative Extension Experimental Stations' to this very day. Mr. Ville noted in his book ‘Chemical Manures' (3rd edition 1871) that natural manure composition varies (as we might expect depending on livestock health and pasture variations amongst the livestock). In short, chemical fertilizers were less expensive and produced better yields than manuring alone. Prior to the development of ‘chemical fertilizers', our own agricultural history has periods of attempting to find a better method than traditional manuring alone. Use of lime as a soil supplement for example, predates the Revolutionary War in the Susquehanna Valley, and Plaster of Paris (gypsum and sulphate of lime) shipped primarily from Nova Scotia until about 1815. Bat guano was shipped to Boston as early as 1830. In the early 1700's, farmers along Long Island sowed white fish in immense quantities, as much as 10,000 fish per acre (a glaring example of how ‘organic' and ‘sustainable' are not necessarily synonymous). There is much more to be said on this subject, and factual history must be understood as we look to feed future generations.
AgFuse © 2023 
