How would you respond if you discovered that the water you use for cooking every day has poison in it? Poison that could lead to terminal illness or complications that alter the quality of your life forever. There is a need for food producers to uphold social values, not only to protect consumers in the market but also to safeguard their families. Lack of integrity in food production not only contaminates the farm produce but also the natural resources such as soil and water, which are the sources of life for all.
Farmers across the country are increasingly gearing towards income generation by producing food for the market. With the desire to maximize the benefits of their hard work, there is a risk of compromising the principles of social values. This leads to detrimental practices such as the use of unsafe chemicals on fruits and vegetables, tubers and grains, to hasten the maturing process and seize emerging market opportunities.
The practice extends to the application of herbicides and burning weeds to save on the cost of production, but eventually these chemicals leave residues on the food, the soil, and water sources, which over time cause harm to children and adults alike.
These detrimental practices that farmers resort to in desperation to save on costs of production, can be replaced with the practice of agroecology. Farmers who have discovered this alternative are thriving, and the results are visible from their sustained improved livelihoods,
through better yields and higher income, without endangering lives.
Here are examples of practices that farmers can adopt to maintain continued stability in yields and profits, without exposing their families and consumers to contaminated food.
(i) Diversification of sources of income
By continuously seeking information on technologies and agricultural ventures that they can engage in, farmers are gradually reaping significant benefits from diversifying their income streams on the farm. This frees the farmer from dependence on one farm produce for income. A case example of this practice is Violet Kageha, a farmer from Kakamega County. As narrated in the article on page 9 of this edition, Violet has diversified her income streams by growing and value-adding indigenous vegetables, sweet potatoes, rearing fish, keeping poultry, dairy cows, among others. Income diversification keeps one from desperation to violate ethical standards in food production, processing, and marketing, since there are various ventures that complement each other.
(ii) Soil health
Recycling farm materials reduces the cost of maintaining soil health; the more organic matter is applied to the soil, the richer the soil becomes over time, producing high-quality farm produce that does not necessitate the use of toxic substances to get the market appeal.
The quality and quantity of yields are also improved by continued use of organic fertilizers, such as compost manure, bokashi, vermicomposting and vermijuice, black soldier fly frass, among others. This edition features testimonials of farmers who have adopted the use of organic manure on their farms, and the benefits they have observed in crop quality and yield.
“The quality and quantity of yields are also improved by continued use of organic fertilizers, such as compost manure, bokashi, vermicompost and vermijuice, black soldier fly frass, among others.”
(iii) Moisture conservation
There are myriad technologies that aid in moisture conservation, such as mandala gardens, cone gardens, zai pits, double-dug beds, sunken beds, cover cropping, and mulching. Some of these technologies, such as cone gardens, mandala gardens, and vertical gardens, maximize space in a way that allows farmers to grow vegetables using a staggered production approach, ensuring a steady supply of produce for the market at all times.What makes these technologies ideal is their low water consumption, even in dry seasons, making crop production possible
throughout the year; hence, income streams are not limited to rainy seasons.
Additionally, practices such as cover cropping and mulching leave no room for weeds, but instead, crop residue decomposes back into the soil, invigorating its fertility. These practices eradicate the need to apply harmful herbicides that kill living organisms in the soil, and at the same time contaminate rivers during rainy seasons when the residues are washed down in runoff.
(iv) Use of biopesticides
Large-scale farmers, especially those producing maize and wheat, hold onto harmful pesticides, arguing that it would not be possible to practice organic farming on large farms. However, today organic input manufacturers have biopesticides for all pests, retailing in local agrovets, and instead of relying on synthetic pesticides, large-scale producers ought to replace them with biopesticides as their efficacy has been proven, and their price range is not any different from the conventional pesticides. Additionally, biopesticides, whether made from plant extracts or purchased from agrovets, have little to no Post Harvest Intervals, (PHIs); hence, farmers can harvest and sell the produce in a safe state, without having to wait for weeks for the chemical residue to break down, as is the case with synthetic pesticides. This protects the consumers from foods that have high chemical residues.
Conclusion
Protecting your family, your neighbors, and your customers from ingesting toxins is possible. We need to stop the default approach to food production and ask this pertinent question: Is what I am applying to crops safe to eat? If not, seek alternatives, for they are available and accessible.