Activity 3.3 – Regenerative Agriculture Part 2

1.0 Points of View

1.1

From the abstract, in the beginning paragraph, I believe the author, Briske, the leaves strongly that there has been a misconception of “oversimplification of 

rangeland function and denouncement of science”. He would be defending the science behind range land function. It really seems that the TEDTalk speaker had stepped on some toes in science.

1.2

They start out by mentioning that he is a soldier, basically allowing him to see other areas of the world. adding the in also gives him a more human appeal. There is a wide conception that all soldiers are inherently good. I believe we are speaking about the same person as the first article. He is suggesting a controversial topic about how it is necessary to keep livestock in areas to prevent deforestation. After seeing this happen over his lifetime he wanted to help slow this process. We also have remnants of that Ted talk where he has said he has seen this over decades giving him more credibility. 

2.0 Purpose

2.1

The purpose of this article is to correct and educate on matters of science. There seems to have been a misuse of research. The author, but also likes to put out the lack of evidence. 

2.2

This author is writing to show the side of Mr Savory. To re-humanism after a controversial topic. I am glad that we weren’t thrown into this without seeing that Ted talk that was informational. 

3.0 Questions at Issue

3.1 I can feel the author's presence while reading this. They feel strongly wronged. The author feels that there is no science backing up Mr. Savory's claims of a grazing method to re-introduce the carbon back into the earth. This method was developed to help reverse climate change. It also seems that Mr. Savory's claims were bold without backup. 

3.2

Since this is such a controversial topic, whether having or taking away livestock, will help slow the desertification in areas. This goes into a wider Span of details for his ideas and claims. 

4.0 Information

4.1

There is no definitive proof that occasional livestock trampling will discourage desertification. It seems that there is another. I’m going to assume  scientist who is one of Mr. Savory's supporters, Mr Goodloe, have some concerns. The author is not completely disregarding that livestock could help in some cases. It comes to a section where the other viewpoint is responding. In short, they say that they are not disregarding previous ways of grazing. As they are not suggesting, continuous grazing is ideal. And instead mentioned that the continuous grazing would be a comparison. I would assume this would be similar to a constant without human manipulation. 

4.2

He suggested increasing the number of livestock per acre for ranchers. Something shocking is such a big promise. He suggests that doing such could bring the carbon levels down to pre-industrial levels. In the end, I am almost left. Disappointed that there isn’t a new exciting method that could possibly help since so many people are against it. But it does clear up some of the questions that I had previously.

5.0 Interpretation and Inference

5.1 Briske et al (2014).

This author comes to an end with the newer theory , as well as others, having the idealistic outcome as a forefront. That they are not just regarding other ways of grazing. And that the search for a single most effective way should stop. They were not trying to apostasy the current method.

5.2 Briske et al. (2014).

I believe in the section the biggest issue they have is the oversimplification of this issue and it’s solution. In the end they come to the conclusion that there are too many different factors that were not considered in his theory. They also mention how narrowly this focuses. They don’t believe that his work will reverse desertification, but in fact, create more desertification. And I agree with the fact that Ted talks and oversimplification can give hope where it’s not due.

5.3 Ketcham (2017).                 

Is nice to come full circle and hear both sides of the story of this issue. I have a very small backyard and I have two larger dogs. From the point that we moved in a little over a year ago till now, our grass has suffered. So after listening to that Ted talk I was unsure if it was applicable for such a small area. This made me think that this is a solution for bigger corporations versus backyards. 

6.0 Concepts

6.1

The author at the end mentions there may have been some confusion of multi paddock grazing. Multi padlock grazing is life socks, in high, does cities in small areas to help the growth of grass and other plants. (Carbon) sequestration which is the process of taking carbon out of the atmosphere and putting it back into the ground which is the goal to help keep climate change at bay. 

6.2

Many scientists listened to this Ted talk and it gave a different idea to the ecology of grazing. His theory  went as Cows or livestock managed in the proper way can mimic how native Cow used to benefit the land. His ideas also introduced something called carbon sequestration which is basically capturing the carbon dioxide in the air and putting it into soil to help reverse climate change. 

7.0 Assumptions

7.1

In the beginning there was an assumption that I would’ve made too. Seeing this TEDTalk, which are usually very persuasive and call people into action for a problem with a solution. I feel anyone would believe this was a way to change the current method. 

7.2

Something that could've avoided such a controversial uproar, is more inclusive language, and mentioning the added benefits versus making people think he was trying to replace the current methods. Personally, I think it’s a worthwhile idea. In my last post, there was mention of a small farm. Something similar in the fifth video which they saw benefits in using life sock in certain areas to help reverse some of the deforestation taking place. 

8.0 Consequences

8.1

From an outside view, the author needed to write this in order to keep a method current. People suggest me going through college or just finding Ted talks extra exciting don’t always have prior knowledge of the topic. Furthermore, the likelihood of them researching it in other forms is limited. Without this type of correction as somebody else’s work. There would be whole groups having a slightly off opinion on how they can help climate change. 

8.2

With his different take on ecology grazing there are also ideas of lower tills, butter, management of rotation cropping and as a mention especially with cover crops. On my family's land, there is a section of dirt that is mostly dust up towards the top of the hill. While they have animals that would manage the land similarly to cows like chickens, donkeys, and dogs. There are still obvious differences between the top of the hill and the bottom of the hill. I believe that the runoff from rain would take that soil down. So I understand why it’s not simply having livestock on land to prevent desertification. I don’t think it’s down to an equation, yet it still needs some research to make it applicable for more people. 

References

Biggest Little Farm. (2020). The biggest little farm synopsis. https://www.biggestlittlefarmmovie.com/synopsis/

Holmgren, D. (n.d.). About permaculture. Holmgren Design. https://holmgren.com.au/about-permaculture/