I dream of a day when vegan passion can be used to help change the legal issues and fight big Ag that challenges regenerative farming from making the impact that it needs. Also better, reliably kinder slaughter practices, and work on removing chemical overuse and poising theough general use across environment. Wishing you well with your work.

@@em945 I'm right there dreaming with you. Do you have a good paper to cite on the scalability issue? This is basically the argument against regenerative grazing that's given in the documentary (by Monbiot and the rancher himself). The work I've done at the micro level tells me that that argument is false, but maybe there's some data I can cite as well?

@@MeatHeals Hi! Apologies for a slow reply. I also cannot help with any papers to cite. I do not believe there have any serious attempts. I did not see the vegan movie but had heard there was so much misinformation, and more importantly, inaccurate comparisons to the grassfed regenerative systems. I also feel the big focus must be on soil building organically , away from the specifics. Soil is the carbon sink interface and the wealth and health of most landscapes. I also think downsizing of farmland is the only way to work with reliance on tractors etc (which I think need to stay in the mix in a basic level or some level of slavery will return). There seems to constantly be a fallback position that what we are doing with all industrialised production will keep going. It will not, and is causing all levels of problems, importantly dead soil. I am on 100 acres looking after my Family's small cattle farm. I make very little money, but at but at least our land is returning to some level of health with alternate practices. Synthetic stimulant additives ONLY damgage soil cycles. There isn't even an argument. They give the short term illusion of fertily and vitality in the same way as a male gym goer can achieve with testosterone injections and cocaine use. The look masculine and vibrant, but over time, the rest of their biology starts collapsing. (I came from the fitness industry and the falsehoods is the same :). However there has obviously been serious attempts to undermine regen efforts etc by BIG AG. There is an enormous amount of money in machinery, chemicals, and industrialised profit systems that will unlikely go down without collapsing...no different from Big Pharma or Big Banking. I think veganism is not a hindrance, very few people maintain health on this diet. It will become clear to many in the west. The reason for my issue with vegans is that I feel they are amongst the only educated ones with the genuine drive to do what would be required to stand up and do the leg work. As long as they eat a little meat first. The most obvious place I have seen the direct misrepresentation and misinformation about regenerative farming in the US (although I am in Australia) Was during an episode from the YT Channel 'Our Changing Climate'. I think in general the channel is good, but almost 3 years ago, they produced an episode ( I am forgetting the title) that had a thumbnail that basically said OCC had changed their mind on grassfed beef etc. The episode continued on siting a science paper from an Ohio Uni (or similar US University) that did a field study on soil etc applying regenerative techniques. The study (and YT episod) was a farce, starting out saying that rarely fadmers are willing to apply the smaller cell grazing techniques (which is true), so they set up the study with an open plan of paddocks, and allowed the cattle to go anywhere. Even the worst farmers know that ruins the paddocks, and at least have smaller internal options for control. Non herders would not know this. Also they said soil building and carbon collection was created by rootsystems dying in the soil and staying there. This is quite comical, but unless you had listened to how the soil cycle works, you could be forgiven for not picking up. It is the organic matter and the rest of ths soil cycle participants that are the carbon sink, but basically everything else including all the plants and anything eating them, that are also the sink. I hope I have this correct, as i am sounding confident😁, but I had learnt this from a Nicole Masters video. She is a New Zealand Agronomist. She and many other alternative voices brought an enlightened perspective to my care for our paddocks after the nasty drought of 2018 and 2019 down under. I had just turned up here to help an ailing Cousin, and was unimpressed with conventional care of animals and land. I did make a comment on the YT episode and said much of the information was incorrect, I was upvoted quite a bit, but not responded to by the channel producers. I then went to a link of all the supporting 'papers' and articles. The Uni paper was there as well as a number of opinion peices and such. It looked like a Press Release had been sent from somewhere and would capture anyone easily from the climate change or vegan community if they were not aware of technical issues. To be fair to vegans, there is so much poor animal husbandry and industrial sized abuse that helps no one. Not the land, the animals, and many humans suffer to from it. I agree with them. Non animal food the same, and some of the insecticides are so obvious detrimental to systems surrounding spraying, I am at a loss for comment. I think the best voices to help rebuild soil in general are the Savory institute People and similar who are taking a holistic approach, making sure each farm or region is cared for from a big picture perspective. There are so many awesome People doing the work. The best book I think you may like is from Australia is called 'call of the reed warbler' and it is targeted to healthy eaters as well. The other big issue I see is societal unrest. I see areas in Africa (that really need help) have either too many roving sheep herders or have violent herders taking over areas. Regenerate or just sustainable production and genuine landcare can only come as we are on the same page and card for our future generations. Here in highly regulated Victoria, our farm now has a non permitted small industrial business that has moved just upstream and is draining into the waterway our main dam flows from. There are no authorities willing to deal with the man, who is known in the area as an entitled bully. My family are in process of selling. All I can do is pray nothing dramatic happens in this time. This land will likely become 'lifestyle'. So sad. Lack of health in the environment affects us all. Best wishes with your endeavours and any soil you have, improve it! Plant stuff, don't over mow it. Every little bit helps!

The finished compost can be agitated in non-chlorinated water (rainwater is best) to release the beneficial organisms into suspension in the water. Then, use an in-furrow injector just behind where the seed is planted with a no-till drill. So, the liquid hits the seed on the soil before the machine covers it. Or make a slurry with the compost, cover the seeds with it, and plant them. Dr. Johnson has a seed coat recipe on online.

Yeah, it bothered me when he said that "mob grazing" is bad. He is so insistent that there's only one way to do things, and that's his way. He seems to really be bothered by people conflating his perfect system with other techniques or strategies that are less than perfect. It doesn't help people understand where he's coming from.

I saw an interview with he and his wife who was a reporter, and she said 'Alan was terrible communication of his systems'. I did not watch this video as I knew what Monbiot would do. The Holistic management does work.

you're missing the monbiot's point, he conceded that holistic management is better than industrial style farming, but it's worse than rewilding

Allan said a lot, but George Monbiot, much of the audience, you and I (initially) missed his point. The debate's title is "Is livestock grazing essential to mitigating climate change?" It's crucial to note what it isn't: - Will livestock grazing directly reduce global warming? - Will it directly reduce carbon in the atmosphere? - Will it directly reduce greenhouse gases? George Monbiot mistakenly equates climate change with global warming and atmospheric carbon increase, but these are distinct issues. Climate change manifests in various ways: - Regions experiencing more extreme temperature fluctuations, making them inhospitable - Increased frequency of extreme weather events globally - Difficulty farming land due to these conditions - Coastal land loss due to rising sea levels Scientists correlate rising greenhouse gases with global temperature increase, and in turn, with climate change. Thus, they prioritize reducing greenhouse gases to combat climate change, a view Monbiot supports. Savory disagrees. He argues that combating desertification is paramount to addressing climate change because: - Deserts experience extreme temperature fluctuations, rendering them uninhabitable - Desertification alters local weather patterns, leading to unexpected extreme weather elsewhere - Desertification decreases land resilience, hindering farming - This leaves only sea level rise as a climate change aspect unaffected by desertification, but losing arable land poses a greater threat than coastal inundation. Savory's "forget carbon" stance isn't dismissing climate change but highlighting his focus on desertification's role. Monbiot misconstrues this as disregarding the debate's theme. However, Savory consistently addressed the core issue. Savory's unconventional approach, rooted in practical experience rather than academic debate skills, frames the issue differently. Ideally the debate should center around "Desertification's Impact on Climate Change and Livestock Grazing's Role." Each side would argue their stance. Monbiot would need to acknowledge that even achieving carbon negativity won't suffice if desertification renders land uninhabitable and unfarmable. Addressing desertification must precede greenhouse gas concerns. Savory proposes that effectively grazing borderline desert land can transform it into fertile grassland, thus combating desertification and mitigating climate change. Monbiot could challenge this by: a) Providing evidence that Savory's grazing method doesn't combat desertification b) Demonstrating that greenhouse gas emissions exacerbate desertification more than improper grazing practices Monbiot's carbon-centric argument left him unable to counter Savory effectively. This also lead the audience to misunderstand Savory's point. Savory's initial hypothetical scenario - assuming zero carbon sequestration and exaggerated animal greenhouse gas emissions - signaled his distinct perspective. Better articulation from Savory or a more receptive attitude from Monbiot could have fostered a more fruitful debate.