Scheme aims to shift farmers to corn from off-season rice

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed. 

[anon2736434]

1 minute ago, Lee4Life said:

never understood why they don't plow the stubble into the ground so the nutrients return

Because it costs money, Fuel labor etc. and with crop prices so low for the small farmer here they just cant do it. A better way would be to use cover crops in the off system to rebuild the soil but that costs money too,

[zzaa09]

21 hours ago, HAKAPALITA said:

How you get WORK PERMIT to be Farmer.?.

You gonna turn him in?

Alert the authorities?

 

Whatta civilised fellow.

[simoh1490]

11 minutes ago, Lee4Life said:

I agree, never understood why they don't plow the stubble into the ground so the nutrients return to the soil. Isn't that common practice in other places?

It may have something to do with the cost of ploughing equipment versus the cost of a gallon of petrol, and, the fact that many farmed areas are not easily accessible to mechanised equipment.

[CLW]

I  respectfully disagree mono-cropping has been proven to be one of the most damaging ways of farming anything. I believe thats one of the biggest reasons for soil degradation in thailand. Crop rotation is a major factor in helping to not deplete your soil as fast as growing the same crop over and over.

I didn't mean it as the system as it is practised in some areas of the central plain where rice is grown 3 times per year.

I agree with you that there should be a break after each crop with at least some green manure as there is hardly another plant that grows in paddy soils (taro maybe)

[anon2736434]

A crop reserve program as we have in the us would be ideal for thailand. Farmers contract with the gov, to put land in reserve not to be farmed and are paid by the acre yearly to do it. Certain cover crops/grasses have to be grown and no livestock can be on it. It is usually a ten year commitment, helping to rebuild depleted soils ready for future farming. As little as small farmers here usually make this would be a much better expenditure of gov funds towards farming compared to constant useless handouts.

[CLW]

A crop reserve program as we have in the us would be ideal for thailand. Farmers contract with the gov, to put land in reserve not to be farmed and are paid by the acre yearly to do it. Certain cover crops/grasses have to be grown and no livestock can be on it. It is usually a ten year commitment, helping to rebuild depleted soils ready for future farming. As little as small farmers here usually make this would be a much better expenditure of gov funds towards farming compared to constant useless handouts.

Absolutely agree. Since this scheme was introduced in the EU and Germany as a member state many farmers participate in this programme and have a better income and save resources and the environment.

[CLW]

A crop reserve program as we have in the us would be ideal for thailand. Farmers contract with the gov, to put land in reserve not to be farmed and are paid by the acre yearly to do it. Certain cover crops/grasses have to be grown and no livestock can be on it. It is usually a ten year commitment, helping to rebuild depleted soils ready for future farming. As little as small farmers here usually make this would be a much better expenditure of gov funds towards farming compared to constant useless handouts.

Adding to my previous thought I assume even if it makes more than sense it will be hard to introduce this scheme in Thailand.
Many people call themselves farmer even if they are owning just a couple of rai and making not any income at all except rice for own consumption or a few buffaloes roaming along public grasslands and roads.
And for the home grown rice I am sure it would be cheaper to buy from the regular market.
I tried for long time to understand this buffalo system in Thailand but as a westerner with a clear economical view there is no sense in that.
Think of it as a kind of bank or investment.
But the actual value of a buffalo or roadside cow is almost zero. The meat can only be used as ground beef.

Loss of face and no occupation would be the biggest obstacles.

[anon2736434]

I think the biggest problem would be the farmers adhering to the requirements and honoring the contract. No oversight or penalties as in everything here. But heck the grass alone they could grow would feed a lot of beef.

[zzaa09]

51 minutes ago, CLW said:

I didn't mean it as the system as it is practised in some areas of the central plain where rice is grown 3 times per year.

I agree with you that there should be a break after each crop with at least some green manure as there is hardly another plant that grows in paddy soils (taro maybe)

Might you be suggesting that the soil in these regions has been depleted? Or expected to be?

 

Rice has been grown, singularly, within these vast regions for cycling ages.

And yet the soil types have yet to show any wear or nutrient loss. 

[anon2736434]

3 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

And yet the soil types have yet to show any wear or nutrient loss. 

You cant lose what you dont have to begin with. Why are thai farmers using more fertilizers and pesticide/herbicides each year ?

https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/thailand-fertilizers-marke

[zzaa09]

5 minutes ago, Notagain said:

You cant lose what you dont have to begin with. Why are thai farmers using more fertilizers and pesticide/herbicides each year ?

https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/thailand-fertilizers-marke

Because the ideas and techniques were forced upon them? 

When in reality such things were not required for their crops to remain healthy....

[anon2736434]

17 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

When in reality such things were not required for their crops to remain healthy....

That was when adam and eve were walking around naked wasnt it ?

[anon2736434]

1 hour ago, CLW said:

Loss of face and no occupation would be the biggest obstacles.

Even much larger would be the substantial loss of income to a couple of companies from basically a slave labor workforce in perpetual indentured servitude.

[Bill Miller]

In the "for what it is worth" department, members of my Thai family in Chiang Mai already grow corn, and the water requirement for corn vs paddy rice is roughly 10% greater, not a huge difference. It would seem logical to institute the program in the less drought prone areas, to be sure.
They have a co-operative, so the "how to" is already established.
Maize stover, the stubble left after harvest, has economic value, either as in situ animal feed, feed off site, or as feed stock for energy generation. I don't know what the current practice is. I will try to remember to ask next week.☺️
I would be happy if a domestic market and production of grits and corn meal were developed. I miss making cornbread. 

[anon2736434]

1 minute ago, Bill Miller said:

I miss making cornbread. 

Mmmmmm with real butter, wish you hadnt have brought that up.

[anon2736434]

On the topic of water I wonder if any mapping of deep underground water sources has ever been done in thailand. You would think there would be massive amounts of water due to the amounts of rainfall here down there somewhere just waiting to be tapped and utilized for irrigation. 

[simoh1490]

4 hours ago, Notagain said:

On the topic of water I wonder if any mapping of deep underground water sources has ever been done in thailand. You would think there would be massive amounts of water due to the amounts of rainfall here down there somewhere just waiting to be tapped and utilized for irrigation. 

Of some related interest perhaps:

 

I live on the plains North of Chiang Mai, very near the base of the mountain range which stretches into the Mae Sa valley, those mountains are actually the start of the Himalaya mountain range. All around me is rice paddy, thousands of acres of the stuff and the whole area is peppered with a network of klongs (irrigation channels) that are fed by the large reservoir at Mae Tang. At the end of the rainy season in  November the water table is about two to three metres below the surface, I know this because I have a well in my garden which I dip from time to time. By February the water supply from the klongs will have stopped and farmers will begin pumping groundwater. By June the water table will be at ten metres which is about the limit of a traditional centrifugal pump and I will have to engage a second deeper well which uses jet pump technology and this will take me to around eighteen metres if needed - I never reach the limit of that pump before the rains come around May/June. 

[CLW]

On the topic of water I wonder if any mapping of deep underground water sources has ever been done in thailand. You would think there would be massive amounts of water due to the amounts of rainfall here down there somewhere just waiting to be tapped and utilized for irrigation. 

Most underground water in Isaan, the driest region has a too high salt content for irrigation.

[BritManToo]

10 hours ago, CLW said:

And for the home grown rice I am sure it would be cheaper to buy from the regular market.

It isn't.

[HAKAPALITA]

11 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

You gonna turn him in?

Alert the authorities?

 

Whatta civilised fellow.

No smartarse , just that a friend posted something about immigration and was amazed when the IO had read it on T.V..and didnt like it... They do read TV. so dont shoot your mouth. Bit late for you though

[BritManToo]

16 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

a friend posted something about immigration and was amazed when the IO had read it on T.V.

If you're daft enough to post something 'controversial' on an anonymous forum using your real name, you deserve all you get.

[kickstart]

22 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

It may have something to do with the cost of ploughing equipment versus the cost of a gallon of petrol, and, the fact that many farmed areas are not easily accessible to mechanised equipment.

 

 

LIke a lot of things in Thailand and a lot of western countries for that mater ploughing has always been done, in the west now a lot less labor and fuel costs, making it not viable. 

But here in Thailand a lot of farmers are now direct drilling they maize crop, for the second crop of the year ,that is they harvest one crop, then go in with the drill and drill the next crop directly in to the stubble of the previous crop, no ploughing at all ,it more than half's the planting costs .

It has also been done with sunflowers ,with better yeilds than the traditional way of ploughing the seeds in the into the existing stubble.

So some things do change here in Thailand, and around here 90% of the rice farmers do nearly all of they work from a tractor seat, not a lot of hand work done now.

By the way, tractors use diesel not petrol 

[simoh1490]

34 minutes ago, kickstart said:

 

 

LIke a lot of things in Thailand and a lot of western countries for that mater ploughing has always been done, in the west now a lot less labor and fuel costs, making it not viable. 

But here in Thailand a lot of farmers are now direct drilling they maize crop, for the second crop of the year ,that is they harvest one crop, then go in with the drill and drill the next crop directly in to the stubble of the previous crop, no ploughing at all ,it more than half's the planting costs .

It has also been done with sunflowers ,with better yeilds than the traditional way of ploughing the seeds in the into the existing stubble.

So some things do change here in Thailand, and around here 90% of the rice farmers do nearly all of they work from a tractor seat, not a lot of hand work done now.

By the way, tractors use diesel not petrol 

 

Silly boy, of course they don't, petrol powered tractors are still quite common, google it perhaps. ut the rest of what you wrote is sound and interesting.

[kickstart]

Found one

[zzaa09]

22 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

 

Silly boy, of course they don't, petrol powered tractors are still quite common.

Actually, more common.

 

[simoh1490]

2 hours ago, kickstart said:

Found one

I found bunches, but here's an argument that debates the subject.http://www.racquetballkevin.com/petrol-vs-diesel-compact-tractors/

 

Let's not lose sight of the fact that large farms require large tractors and that equates into high cost. The subject being discussed in this thread is farming in Thailand where average farm sizes are small and costs need to be kept at an absolute minimum in order to negate the need for burning.

[kickstart]

56 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

I found bunches, but here's an argument that debates the subject.http://www.racquetballkevin.com/petrol-vs-diesel-compact-tractors/

 

Let's not lose sight of the fact that large farms require large tractors and that equates into high cost. The subject being discussed in this thread is farming in Thailand where average farm sizes are small and costs need to be kept at an absolute minimum in order to negate the need for burning.

 

This subject  of burning Mazie stubble has come up a few times on this thread ,I can say it is  no way like burning of sugar cane ,when maize is harvested a lot of the plant is still green ,when the combine cuts the plant plant the stubble is only 1 meter high ,and as I said still green ,when it is burnt you will be lucky to get a 50 % burn ,and that will not be a burnt to the ground, a lot of crops  have a lot of weed in them that is still green, and will not burn .

I see a lot of farmers trying to burn maize stubble and emphasize the trying bit, for half an hour they is a bit of smoke the farmer spends more time walking around the field trying to find patches to burn,a few will leave the stubble for a week to dry out ,but even then you do not get a good burn .

Most farmers harvesting they first crop need a quick turn around to get the next crop in, most cannot wait for the stubble to dry out, also it is still the rainy season, and a lot of crops are just to wet to burn.

When the second crop is harvested it will be the cool season, and that crops stubble will get ploughed in.

Back to tractors now days even with farm subsidies farm cost have to be kept down, and most large farms have less than half the labor now than say 20 years ago and that limited labor is used to the full effect, farmers buy large tractors and equipment ,a lot of farms no plowing is done just a one-pass machines ,now doing the work of 3 machines and 3 passes of a field ,the cost is high ,so is the output of these big machines ,it is the way to do things .

As I Said in my  last post Thai farmers are now direct drilling they crop ,most do not burn the previous crop straight in with the drill ,job done ,best thing to happen to Thai farming in years, reduces the input costs by half ,all they need now is a good price for the crop .

[zzaa09]

On 10/24/2018 at 5:00 PM, BritManToo said:

It isn't.

And some might be surprised per reasoning. 

[attrayant]

On 10/24/2018 at 8:27 PM, Notagain said:

Because it costs money, Fuel labor etc. and with crop prices so low for the small farmer here they just cant do it.

 

The subject of cost has come up in many replies here.  If the Thai government really wanted to do something for farmers, they'd invest in modernization.  Combines, irrigation systems, the latest agri-tech and whatever else modern farmers have in developed countries.  That could help spawn cottage industries in support technology like farming robotics and safer farming chemicals.

 

The large number of small holder farms is not helping matters either.  Large farms benefit from economies of scale.  In the states, one farmer fed about twenty people in 1950.  Today one farmer feeds nearly two hundred people.  I certainly don't envy farmers and the job they do.  There's a popular saying:
 

Farming is the art of losing money while working 400 hours a month to feed people who think you're trying to kill them.

 

What a thankless job it can be.  As JFK famously said:
 

 

And if I can be selfish for a moment, it would be nice to have some variety too.  Maybe if corn meal and potatoes were more common, Thais would discover all the different things you can do with them.