Week 3, Work at the Orchard and Harvest on the Terraces

Week 3 of the Summer 2016 semester (May 17th and May 19th) consisted of work being done on both the Orchard (on the Tuesday) and the Terraces at Richmond Campus (on the Thursday).

On the Tuesday our little group of people accomplished a lot of work, starting with the sorting of yet to be planted strawberry plants. We were fortunate that most of the plants were still healthy enough for planting, but it was most certainly time to put them into the ground.

The students then went on a quick tour of the fields in which we had planted carrots, onions and beans the previous week. There were some irrigations issues that had needed correcting (such as location of drip tape) and it was observed that some weeds had germinated ahead of the crop seeds. In the carrots it was discovered that there was a healthy population of recently germinated lambs quarters. We briefly discussed the fact that some people cultivate lambs quarters as we pulled them up and consumed them which much eagerness. Identification of this most delectable weed was made through the waxy coating that exists upon the first leaves at and just after emergence. This blogger would agree with others in saying that it does taste like a 'wild' spinach. In the onions it was found that the previous year's squash had reseeded itself and those seeds had just germinated. Even though a few students made the attempt to consume these as well, it was agreed that they certainly did not taste as good as the young lambs quarters. We then moved over to the beans and found that the Earthway seeder had not done a great job at covering up the beans that had been seeded the week previous. In fact, almost all of them were still above ground, looking very much like they just came out of storage.  Luckily for them we spent some time sinking them back into the ground while the irrigation was running, giving them the best  restart possible. Mike (one of our professors and companion planting wizard) made a comment at that point that considering the amount of weed emergence that had occurred (and lack of crop emergence) that it would be the perfect time to do some flame weeding. It was much to his delight that we discovered a flame weeder, in working order, at the Orchard.

The students then went over to the fruit trees and spent some time thinning out the pear trees. The trees were pretty full of fruit, about the size of the end of a thumb. Some were already damaged though, and needed to be removed, along with those who heavily populated an area. We were instructed to remove fruits so that the ones left looked healthy, and that only about one fruit was left per 5 inches of branch. It made some of us feel bad to remove fruit that would have tasted great in a short period of time, but knowing that by thinning the tree we would spare it the chance of injuring itself by being overburdened with fruit made the process more bearable.

While Mike worked on flame weeding the students then moved over to helping get the plastic down (laid by the blue tractor and the row cover layer) for plating the 120 strawberry plants into. For this blogger, it was probably the most entertaining part of the day since all hands were needed to get the recycled plastic to feed through the implement and hold down the plastic so the momentum of the tractor did not pull it out of place. As can be seen in this video, once we knew what we were doing, the row creation with plastic covering didn't take too long.

Rebecca (another of our professors and resident cranberry expert) then showed the students how to plant the strawberries into the plastic. Two rows of strawberries were planted, staggered at 6 inches apart from each other between rows and 12 inches apart within rows. Two people, one person on either side, cut the appropriately placed holes, while two others planted. Rebecca recommended that each plant should be planted with the crown just above ground. The video below describes nicely the game plan that was laid before us before we started our task.

Just before the end of class Mike called us back over to show us what he had been able to accomplish with the flame weeding. Although some of the cover crop had been well singed, the squash germinants looked untouched. That was, until we squeezed the leaves between our fingers. The leaves were left with a dark green impression, a good sign that the flame weeding had done its job of bursting the leaf cells.

On the Thursday we spent our time at the Terraces in front of the Richmond KPU Campus. Two weeks previous harvesting had occurred on this site and when looking at the crops it was apparent that harvesting had to occur again.

However, before harvesting happened, we took a walk through some of the garden to observe and note what had been happening in the garden since the last visit. Insect damage on the chard was observed, as well as on the cabbage. Most of the lettuce looked like it had come back nicely from being harvested two weeks previous, however, it was noted that one plant had been harvested more recently than that, located behind the sign. A second theft of goods, already, this year. It is hoped by this blogger that the person who took it really needed it. We did find an encouraging sight on the back of a cabbage leaf, though, a mummified aphid. A sure sign of the presence of parasitic wasps. A friend on our side in our quest to grow food.

After some more inspection, a few students went over to unload a truckload of compost onto a part of the terrace that had not been previously worked. Others went over to start harvesting lettuce, radishes, kale and peas. Harvesting took most of the rest of class since all of the harvest was weighed out and washed before it was brought inside. The most impressive collection of vegetables occurred with the radishes as 45 pounds was harvested in total! WOW!

Philosophical portion:
Mike had asked each student to write, in their blog posting, a small philosophical paragraph about something related to what we have been doing the last three weeks. Since this blogger is also taking a crop physiology class, and some of what we have been talking about is philosophical, it would only seem appropriate that some crossover should occur.

The latest copy of "Modern Agriculture" landed in my the mailbox at the start of the long weekend. It was quickly argued over by myself and other members of my family (can't you tell we are all involved in agriculture) and I made the argument that "My name is on the sticker, so I get first read of it!". Reluctantly, I was allowed to browse through it first. Reaching the middle of the volume I snarled at the magazine and rather angrily tossed it aside. My mother leaned in and asked if I was finished with the magazine, I didn't answer. Page 23 contained a quote from Dave Smardon, the moderate for this year's BC Tech Summit that took place in Vancouver. Unfortunate for my quick temper, the quote had been taken out of context, but I will repeat it to you as it is presented on the page and let you decide if I was rightly annoyed. He states, "As we approach 2050, we are going to have to produce more food in one year than we have produced in the entire history of the planet." My first thoughts of rebuttal went back to our most recent crop physiology class when we discussed the capacity of production by modern varieties. About the only variable that humans have not been able to 'rev up' when it comes to plant efficiency had been photosynthesis. We seem to have reached our capacity with most if not all of the other variables that go into plant production. And its not that we have done it without consequences; Figure 20.4 in "Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainability" compares different agroecosystems on their returns on energy invested. The below picture is that figure, and I do believe it speaks for itself. Note how inefficient modern production methods are.

It was words just as Mr. Smardon spoke them that started the green revolution, and look what it produced. The green revolution produced more food, inefficiently. Not only that, but if one was to look at Figure 20.10 from the same textbook, it would appear that part of that inefficiency comes from our obsession with oil. That figure (see below) nicely displays the components of the 10 million kilocalories of cultural energy used for corn production in the USA,  and shows that 35.7% of the pie that is taken up by nitrogen fertilizer. That same nitrogen fertilizer contains commercially produced, ammonia nitrate from crude oil. We cannot produce more food with the methods we have, and we cannot afford to be more inefficient in producing it either.

Now, if one is to read farther into Mr. Smardon's quote, they would see that this gentleman is not all about just flat out producing more food, there is some logic in what he is saying, "If we have to feed 10 billion people steak, pork, poultry and fish, we would be in deep trouble. Add to that the fact that the amount of arable land we have on this planet is finite, and is going to be more degraded each year, putting downward pressure on how much productivity we get out of that land, you can see how something like a perfect storm is waiting to happen here. With climate change...the issues become more and more complex." At least he is noting that we have looming issues such as the recovery of degraded ag land and climate change to deal with. However, I still think he is missing a very crucial point. One that might get us much closer to solving the problem of feeding a large population by working backwards. Why is so much of the food we produce thrown away (often times even before it reaches the consumer)? Do we produce so much that it has become so cheap that people (anywhere in the production system) don't care if it goes bad? I know its probably a poor example, but probably a fair bit of that 50 plus pound harvest we did on Thursday at the Terraces went to waste. That small little plot of land that produced 45 pounds of radishes was far more than 8 people and their families could consume. We did give away as much as we could, but grocery stores are not allowed to do it. And there are not a lot of numbers out there talking about how much food goes bad on its way travelling to its destinations. My point is that all people should try, as supermarkets in France have done, not to throw away food that is still good, even if it is passed the expiry date on the box. I think all people should attempt this: companies that produce food, those who sell it, and all that consume it, to reduce the amount that is not consumed before it goes bad. It is at that point, when we know exactly how much is wasted, that trying to produce more again to make up the shortfall should be considered. Producing more in a system that wastes so much will not contribute to the answer; if anything it'll contribute to the problem.

References:
Gliessman, Stephen R. Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainable Food Systems. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: CRC, 2014. Print.
Pedersen, Cate. "Agri-Tech and the 9 Billion: Feeding the World in 2050." Modern Agriculture: British Columbia's Agriculture Magazine May 2016: 22-25. Print.