Cattle perform alchemy that no technology can replicate: Input: - Grass (humans can't digest) - Marginal land (can't grow crops) - Rainfall (falling anyway) - Sunlight (free) Output: - Meat (complete nutrition) - Leather (clothing, goods) - Tallow (cooking, soap, candles) - Bone (tools, gelatin) - Manure (fertilizer) - Milk (nutrition, cheese, butter) Byproducts: - Improved soil carbon - Enhanced biodiversity - Water retention - Nutrient cycling If you invented a machine that did this, you'd win the Nobel Prize. Because it's a cow, environmental groups want it banned. What are your thoughts or opinions about livestock ?💭

I’ve got two very plausible theories that seem to clash, and I’m trying to reconcile them with real-world data. Theory A: Bigger seed = better performance There’s a mountain of university research suggesting that, all things being equal, larger seed size tends to improve germination, early vigour, and often yield. Corn is the classic example: bigger seed frequently wins. Theory B: Higher yield = lower nutrient concentration But in the grain nutrient removal dataset that’s been built, we’re seeing something consistent: As yield goes up, nutrient concentration goes down, especially micronutrients like: • Zinc • Manganese • and other trace elements That looks like a dilution effect: more starch/sugars per kernel, proportionally less protein and nutrient density. The part that’s messing with my head If bigger seeds are often less nutrient dense (more carbohydrates, relatively speaking), why would they increase yield? I think I may have been framing it backwards. I’ve been assuming the “seed advantage” was mostly about nutrient density (especially phosphorus) driving emergence and setting the crop up. But now I’m wondering if the real lever is energy, not minerals. New working hypothesis Maybe bigger seeds help because they contain more carbohydrates, meaning: • more energy to power germination and early growth • better root/shoot establishment • more resilience through stress in the first 10–21 days • which then shows up later as yield In other words: the bang-for-buck might be seed energy reserves, not necessarily seed nutrient concentration. I want your take • Have you seen bigger seed consistently outperform smaller seed on your farm? • Does it show up more in emergence, stress tolerance, or final yield? • Have you ever tested seed lots for nutrient density vs performance? I’m excited (and committed 😅) to keep pushing on the grain nutrient removal testing, and I’m also planning to test seed this season to pressure-test this theory: • seed nutrient density

Society is three missed meals away from chaos. At least I think that’s how the quote goes. Either way, the point lands: food is the backbone of civilisation. Agriculture isn’t “an industry” so much as the thing that keeps everything else possible. Lately I’ve been thinking the same principle applies under our feet. The most efficient growers I see aren’t always the ones throwing the kitchen sink at P & K. Some are applying next to nothing, maintaining levels, and still producing serious yields. High NUE. Strong plant health. Calm, consistent performance. What’s different? They’re feeding the system. Especially the microbes. Sometimes that’s via products, but honestly, most of the time it’s just practices. Roots in the ground. Living cover. Reduced disturbance. Keeping carbon cycling. Here’s the bit that stuck with me: A huge chunk of microbial “food” in soil is tied to WEOC (water-extractable organic carbon) … basically the most available, ready-to-use carbon fraction. So if society starts missing meals, things get shaky. And if microbes start missing meals… soil function gets shaky too. Less biology doing the work means less nutrient cycling, weaker structure, poorer resilience, and a system that costs more to push. That’s it. Just a thought that’s been rattling around my head. If you want to chat WEOC, NUE, or what you’re seeing in your own fields, drop a comment or message me.

I’ve watched Clarkson’s Farm… and I actually quite like it. And yes, you can watch it on Amazon Prime Video. (Prime Video) Which is wild, because before the show, Jeremy Clarkson was one of those people I’d see on TV and think, “Ah yes, Britain’s national hobby: a man shouting opinions at machinery.” But over time, he’s grown on me. Not because he suddenly became a different person, but because the show does something sneaky. It takes a bloke who thinks he’s the main character of the countryside… and then lets the countryside absolutely humble him. Now, I know it’s a TV production. There’s editing, story arcs, and probably a producer somewhere whispering, “Can you accidentally buy 300 sheep? It’s great for engagement.” So I’m not naïve about what we’re watching. But it does raise a real question for us as a community: How do we feel about him? Is he a good influence? Because on one hand, you cannot deny the impact. He has brought farming to millions of viewers who previously thought food just sort of… spawns in supermarkets. People now understand weather risk, input costs, regulation, machinery headaches, and the fact that farming is basically a business where every decision is expensive and nature can still say, “No.” That’s a win. But on the other hand, the question is: what kind of attention is it bringing? Is it building respect for farming… or turning it into entertainment where the lesson is “Look at this chaos,” instead of “Look at this reality”? Is it making people care about farmers… or just care about Clarkson? And most importantly: does it represent you fairly? Or does it accidentally teach the public that farming is mostly disasters, banter, and one competent person (Kaleb) cleaning up the mess? So I’m genuinely curious, and I’d love to hear from real farmers in here: - Has Clarkson’s Farm helped people understand your life more? - Has it changed how your friends, customers, or local community talk about farming? - Does it create more respect for the work, or more stereotypes? - If someone watches it and says, “I get farming now,” do you believe them… or do you laugh until your spine hurts?

Organic or Regenerative? The Difference (and why farmers roll their eyes at the debate) This question comes up a lot: “Is regenerative just organic with better marketing?” And honestly… I get it. If you’re standing in the grocery aisle staring at two labels that both sound like they’re trying to save the planet, it can feel like one of them is just the other one wearing a nicer jacket. At Grow and with our service dApp Kohima, we get asked this all the time. And I’ll admit, even before I got into this world, I was confused too. The terms get tossed around like they’re interchangeable, and from the outside they sound like they’re promising the same thing. What clarified it for me wasn’t another definition. It was talking with the farmers we design and implement projects with. Because farmers don’t experience “organic” and “regenerative” as abstract concepts. They experience them as constraints, trade-offs, and results… across seasons, markets, and weather that does not care about your branding strategy. Here’s the cleanest way I can put it: Organic is process-based. Regenerative is outcome-based. Organic: the rulebook Organic farming is built around clear, strict standards (often legally defined and certified). It’s largely focused on what you avoid: synthetic pesticides and fertilisers GMOs a long list of prohibited inputs and practices That matters, because it creates a shared baseline. It makes certain shortcuts simply off limits. And it shapes real on-farm decisions: more rotations, biological fertility, composts, and ecological pest management. Organic is, in many ways, a commitment to guardrails. Regenerative: the “is this actually working?” test Regenerative agriculture starts from a different question: Is the land getting better? It’s a holistic approach aimed at actively improving soil health, biodiversity, water function, and ecosystem resilience, while also strengthening long-term farm viability (which, by the way, is what supply chains say they want when they talk about “security”).