In another example, several of the farmers learned about variations in their soil type by directly observing how soil “behaved” using cover crop growth patterns. These farmers discussed that they learned about patchy locations in their fields, including issues with drainage, prior management history, soil type, and other field characteristics, through observation of cover crop growth in their fields. Repeated observations over space and time helped to transform disparate observations into formalized knowledge. As observations accumulated over space and time, they informed knowledge formation across scales, from specific features of farmers’ fields to larger ecological patterns and phenomena. More broadly, using cover crop growth patterns to assess soil health and productivity allowed several farmers to make key decisions that influenced the long-term resilience of their farm operation . This specific adaptive management technique was developed independently by several farmers over the course of a decade of farming through longterm observation and experimentation – and, at the time, was not codified in mainstream farming guidebooks, policy recommendations, or the scientific literature . For these farmers, growing a cover crop on new land or land with challenging soils is now formally part of their farm management program and central to their soil management. While some of the farmers considered this process “trial and error,” in actuality, all farmers in this study engaged in a structured, iterative process of robust decision-making in the face of constant uncertainty, similar to the process of adaptative management in the natural resource literature . This critical link between farmer knowledge formation and adaptive mangement is important to consider in the broader context of resilience thinking, cannabis drying trays wherein adaptive management is a tool in the face of shifting climate and changing landscape regimes .
The underlying social and ecological mechanisms for farmer knowledge formation discussed here may have a role in informing adaptive management and pathways toward more resilient agriculture . In this sense, farmer knowledge represents an overlooked source for informing innovation in farming alternatively. Farmer knowledge provides an extension to scientific and policy knowledge bases, in that farmers develop new dimensions of knowledge and alternative ways of thinking about aspects of farming previously unexplored in the scientific literature. Farmers offer a key source of and process for making abstract knowledge more concrete and better grounded in practice, which is at the heart of agriculture that is resilient to increased planetary uncertainties .Most of the farmers considered themselves separate from scientific knowledge production and though scientific knowledge did at times inform their own knowledge production, they still ultimately relied on their own direct observation and personal experiences to inform their knowledge base and make decisions. This finding underscores the importance of embedding theory in practice in alternative agriculture. Without grounding theoretical scientific findings or policy recommendations in practice, whether that be day-to-day practices or long-term management applied, farmers cannot readily incorporate such “outsider” knowledge into their farm operations. Farmers in alternative agriculture thus may provide an important node in the research and policymaking process, whereby they assess if scientific findings or policy recommendations may or may not apply to their specific farming context – through direct observation, personal experience, and experimentation.Similar to Sūmane et al. , we found that the process for farmer knowledge formation, or precisely how farmers learn, is systematic and iterative in approach. In this study, farmer ecological knowledge was developed over time based on continuous systematic observation, personal experiences, and/or experimentation.
This systematic approach that relies on iterative feedback to learning applied among these organic farmers is akin in approach to examples of adaptive management in agriculture . As highlighted in the results, it is possible for a farmer to acquire expert knowledge even as a first- or second-generation farmer. Documenting this farmer knowledge within the scientific literature – specifically farmer knowledge in the context of relatively new alternative farmers in the US – represents a key way forward for widening agricultural knowledge both in theory and in practice . This study provides one example for documenting this farmer knowledge in a particularly unique site for alternative agriculture. Future studies may expand on this approach in order to document other sites with recent but practical agricultural knowledge on alternative farms.Farmers in this study tended to think holistically about their farm management. For example, when the farmers were asked to talk about soil management specifically, several of the farmers struggled with this format of question, because they expressed that they do not necessarily think about soil management specifically but tend to manage for multiple aspects of their farm ecosystem simultaneously. This result aligns with similar findings from Sūmane et al. across a case study of 10 different farming contexts in Europe, and suggests that farmers tend to have a bird’s eye view of their farming systems. Such an approach allows farmers to make connections across diverse and disparate elements of their farm operation and integrate these connections to both widen and deepen their ecological knowledge base.For most farmers in this study, maintaining ideal soil structure was the foundation for healthy soil. The farmers emphasized that ideal soil structure was delicately maintained by only working ground at appropriate windows of soil moistures. Determining this window of ideal soil moisture represented a learned skill that each individual farmer developed through an iterative learning process.
This knowledge making process was informed by both social mechanisms gained through inherited wisdom and informal conversations and ecological mechanisms through direct observation, personal experiences, and experimentation .As these farmers developed their ecological knowledge of the appropriate windows of soil moisture, their values around soil management often shifted. In this way, over time , farmers in this study learned that no amount of nutrient addition, reduced tillage, cover cropping, or other inputs, could make up for damaged soil structure. Destroying soil structure was relatively easy but had lasting consequences and often took years, in some cases even a decade, to rebuild. This key soil health practice voiced by a majority of farmers interviewed was distinct from messaging about soil health vis-a-vis extension institutions, heavy duty propagation trays where soil health principles focus on keeping ground covered, minimizing soil disturbance, maximizing plant diversity, keeping live roots in the soil, and integrating livestock for holistic management . While these five key principles of soil health were mentioned by farmers and were deemed significant, for most farmers interviewed in this study, the foundation and starting point for good soil health was maintaining appropriate soil structure. The results of this study emphasize that the most successful entry point for engaging farmers around soil health is context specific, informed directly by local knowledge. Among farmers in Yolo County – a significant geographical node of the organic farming movement – soil structure is a prevalent concept; however, in another farming context, this entry point may significantly diverge for social, ecological, economic, or other reasons. Each farming context therefore necessitates careful inquiry and direct conversation with local farmers to determine this entry point for engagement on soil health. For this reason, in some cases it may be more relevant to tailor soil health outreach to the local context rather than applying a one-size-fits all model.The capacity to learn and pass on that learning are essential for farms that practice alternative agriculture to be able to adapt to ever changing social and ecological changes ahead . Across all farmers interviewed, including both first and second-generation farmers, farmers stressed the steep learning curves associated with learning to farm alternatively and/or organically. While these farmers represent a case study for building a successful, organic farm within one generations, the results of this study beg the question: What advancements in farm management and soil management could be possible with multiple generations of farmer knowledge transfer on the same land? Rather than re-learning the ins and outs of farming every generation or two, as new farmers arrive on new land, farmers could have the opportunity to build on existing knowledge from a direct line of farmers before them, and in this way, potentially contribute to breakthroughs in alternative farming. In this sense, moving forward, agriculture in the US has a lot to learn from agroecological farming approaches with a deep multi-generational history . To this end, in most interviews – particularly among older farmers – there was a deep concern over the future of their farm operation beyond their lifetime.
Many farmers lamented that no family or individual is slated to take over their farm operation and that all the knowledge they had accumulated would not pass on; there exists a need to fill this gap in knowledge transfer between shifting generations of farmers, safeguard farmer knowledge, and promote adaptations in alternative agriculture into the future. As Calo and others point out, technical knowledge dissemination alone will not resolve this ongoing challenge of farm succession, as larger structural barriers are also at play – most notably, related to land access, transfer, and tenure .Most studies often speak to the scalability of approach or generalizability of the information presented. While aspects of this study are generalizable particularly to similar farming systems, the farmer knowledge presented in this study may or may not be generalizable or scalable to other regions in the US. To access farmer knowledge, relationship building with individual farmers leading up to interviews as well as the in-depth interviews themselves required considerable time and effort. While surveys often provide a way to overcome time and budget constraints to learn about farmer knowledge, this study suggests that to achieve specificity and depth in analysis of farmer knowledge requires an interactive approach that includes – at a minimum – relationship building, multiple field visits, and in-depth, multi-hour interviews. Accessing farmer knowledge necessitates locally interactive research; this knowledge may or may not be immediately generalizable or scalable without further locally interactive assessment in other farming regions.One of the best ways to plan a garden is to make a map of the proposed area using grid paper and drawing it to scale. Look up the space requirements for the vegetables you’re interested in; consult your local UCCE Farm Advisor or Master Gardener and the publications listed in “For More Information” for advice on this subject. Draw the vegetables in appropriate places on the map. Also include planting dates—this will help you remember when and where to plant different crops. Vegetables need a steady supply of water during growth, so make certain there is an adequate and handy water source near the site. A level garden is necessary for uniform watering, but if the ground slopes, contour planting and drip irrigation allow water to be distributed evenly. Choose a site with rich, fertile soil that is free of weeds, rocks, and debris. Avoid shallow or compacted soils. If your soil is less than ideal, you may need to amend it or plant in raised beds .Full sunlight—a minimum of 6 to 8 hours per day—is necessary for some crops that produce “fruit,” such as tomatoes and corn. Full sun is ideal for all vegetables, but root and leafy crops can tolerate some shade. Look for shadows that may be cast over the planted area; note how much of the garden would be in shade and for how long each day. Keep in mind that shadow patterns change with the seasons. If possible, avoid planting under trees or on the north side of tall buildings. If tall and short plants are to be planted closely together, put the tall ones on the north side so the tall plants don’t cast shade on shorter plants next to them.Soil should be spaded or rototilled when it is moist but not wet. A good time to do this is in autumn before rain begins; it can be done again in spring if necessary. Work the soil about 6 to 10 inches deep, but avoid bringing subsoil to the surface. While working the soil, add preplant fertilizer . Rake the turned seedbed in several directions while it is still soft and full of moisture, so that any large clods or layered soils are broken up. The soil should have a uniform texture to a depth of 6 to 10 inches .