How productive is primitive farming (like the Ahmish)?

Question

How productive is primitive farming (like the Ahmish)? I know primitive farming uses more labor instead of machinery, but is the land as productive as modern farming?

Answer 1

Re Jeremy F's answer....we are not doing it the same way anymore NOT because it isn't productive, but because it is EASIER using machinery.

Have any of you actually seen an Amish farm???  They are lush and green, the animals are sleek and healthy, they do not pollute the environment.  They are also probably the cleanest people I have ever known.  How "productive" is all modern farming??  The product is inferior in quality to that raised by the Amish, they pollute the land, and they don't preserve their land, as the Amish do.  It really is a treat to see these magnificent Amish farms....if you get a chance to visit one....especially if you have already visited a modern farm -you will be awe struck - as I was.

Answer 2

I'm a small farmer.  We actually farm in a lot the same manner as the Amish do, but with old tractors, instead of horses.

Farming in traditional manners as the Amish do, is actually SIGNIFIGANTLY more productive than modern farming.

If you are farming 160 acres of land, your going to know ever inch of your land, and get the best production from your land.  If you are farming 16,000 acres of land, it's not worth your time and trouble to fix some "minor" problems and not so productive areas.

Also of course the Amish farm in permaculture ways.  Basically that means the farm in closed loop systems that closely mimic nature.  Their livestock produce manure.  The manure is spread on the fields to fertilize them.  The fields grow crops which feed the animals, and humans.  The livestock provide the muscle power, as well as some producing dairy, eggs, and meat for the humans.

The Amish will also not sell their hay.  They believe selling their hay is selling of their land a little bit at a time.  In this belief, they are correct.  Returning the hay to the land, as manure after it has run through their livestock is a vital step in their farming.  If they sold off their hay, they wouldn't/couldn't produce the manure needed to fertilize their fields and continue the cycle.

A small farm that is closely worked by the famer is VASTLY more productive than the agri business farmer growing one giant mono crop.

A small farmer averages $1,500 profit per acre from their farm.  Farms that are over 1000 acres in size average just $200 per acre profit.  Farms that are really small, only 5-10 acres can average $15,000 per acre!  The really small farms often grow very high end products that need a lot of tending, but have a very high market value.

Modern farming methods are not building up the soil.  Indeed they are stripping the soil of very valuable mineral possible.  The modern farmer has charts that show him exactly how much chemical fertilizer he must put on his land, to produce his crop.  There is no build up, or improvement of the soil itself.

The way the Amish farm, the soil itself improves year after year, having more nuetriants and minerals returned to the soil than are taken by the crops, and livestock.

So the answer to your question is no, the Amish land is VASTLY more productive than modern farming.

~Garnet

Homesteading/Farming over 20 years

Answer 3

This is not a clear question. As several others have mentioned, you do not supply the yardstick by which you wish to measure "productivity". If it is simply yield per acre, then per what? . . .  year? 5-year? decade? same acre? same crop?

Your only modifier (like the Amish . . ) is pretty resrictive, but I can tell you this . . . I can easily say that Amish methods are highly productive -- they are very savvy farmers -- and they have been engaging in the same farming methods for generations. I would argue that they are probably the most productive of all "primitive" farmers, or even of most "modern" farmers. They do not rely on subsidies from government, they maintain a highly socialized family structure that makes little demands on welfare systems, drug abuse counselors, the police, and/or the "legal" system.

They are healthy people -- fewer demands on hospitals, doctors and "medicine".

And overall, their carbon footprint is probably pretty right on down there next to nothing . . .

So, lets all agree, and vote the Amish as the most productive all around earth oriented low carbon "primitive" farmers on the globe.

(Consider -- if we all lived like the Amish we wouldn't have global warming, now would we, we wouldn't have the environmental/ecological disasters looming in our very immediate future, we wouldn't be patting each other on the back reassuring ourselves that it is all going to be OK while looking over our backs at the gathering storm and wondering just how fast can I run . . .)

^-^

d

Answer 4

no or we would still be doing it that way.

re: Jim

i measure productivity by profit/cost, not by the quality.  Yes they will have better quality of food, but less quantity.  Maybe i just misunderstood the question.

Answer 5

If you disregard the massive amount of human effort their system requires they actually do produce more product per acre. Unfortunatly paying all those people would make whatever they grow too expensive

Answer 6

It is highly productive when you look at the return vs. cost.

Interesting, too, that in third world countries where years ago the "solution" to feeding the hungry was giving farmers tractors and modern equipment, it fixed nothing.  They couldn't afford the fuel or repairs!!

I buy all my produce from my Amish neighbors.

And Garnet...interesting about the hay up where you are.  I've bartered for hay from our Old Order neighbors, when they've had excess.  Beautiful, loose, weed free alfalfa, not stemmy at all.  I actually took a nap in it.  We had drought this year, so we are shipping it in from Wisconsin, together with the Amish.

Answer 7

check out this book.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/11/books/...

Animal Vegetable Miracle

Answer 8

At least in southern Ontario, Amish farms are at least as productive of profits as other farming methods. Now that is dodging the question, as the likely intent is directed to kg per hectare.

We have variation in other farming results too. Amish are not producing more than all others, not less than most.

Now In years gone by our Amish have been using herbicides and paying to get chemical fertilizer applied to their land, so we are not really discussing very primitive agriculture. In more recent years several of them have gone to certified organic production. They adapt fairly well to this because they have in most cases been meticulous in controlling weeds, not just using herbicides but never letting any weeds put down seeds. Horses have not created a lot of deep soil compaction, but again most of their land is not heavy clay.

All in all, I can not describe results as spectacularly better or worse. But few of these farmers are city folk with no practical experience either.