Agriculture of the future starts today: The story of a Danone Partner
Dairy Farm in Gęsin

Several farms are involved in the ClieNFarms project. In this article we present a testimonial from a Danone partner dairy farm in Gęsin, a farm participating in the ClieNFarms project and other pilot projects carried out by Danone together with local partners and partners from Danone’s Partners 4 Growth (P4G) initiative.

The dairy farm in Gęsin is run by Ryszard and Beata Krychowiak, supplying milk to Danone Poland. With a tradition spanning five generations, the farm covers 150 hectares and specializes in dairy cattle breeding and crop cultivation for feed purposes. In 2019, in response to challenges related to drought and declining yields, the decision was made to implement regenerative practices aimed at improving water retention in the soil, increasing its fertility, and strengthening the agricultural ecosystem.

Ryszard and Beata have been managing the farm together since 2005. Today, it is home to 300 cattle, including 160 dairy cows. While not yet fully modernized, the farm is undergoing a gradual transformation, including the introduction of automated milking systems and plans for a fully automated facility.

Did the process of transforming your farm towards regenerative practice also started with a certain vision. When did you embark on this path?

Ryszard Krychowiak (RK): The breakthrough year was 2019. That year, there was a prolonged drought during the growing season, and when harvesting our crops, I realized that they were very poor, both in terms of quantity and quality of the crop. I remember when I was compacting the corn silage, I was wondering: “What did I do wrong? How can I fix it?” My wife and I started to delve deeply into the topic and look for information on how to manage our soils differently? One of the sources was internet forums where we found training.

Additionally, we asked about different types of machines at agricultural fairs. The first step we decided to take was to enter no-till cultivation. Somewhere there was information about aggregates, just such for no-till cultivation, modern ones that allow for one pass instead of several. This, of course, involves a large financial expenditure on the purchase of the machine, but the bonus is less labor input. Additionally, thanks to this, we pollute the environment less, do not destroy the soil structure, and do not dry it out. We were very keen to fight the lack of water and retain it in the soil.

Beata Krychowiak (BK): Unfortunately, we run the farm in a place where there are large rainfall deficits. The predictions are that droughts will unfortunately progress. RK: The no-till practice itself is, I would say, 50-60% of the actions. The next stage is the question: what do we do after the harvest? That is, do we leave the soil uncovered, completely bare, or do we leave it covered with greenery. The next step is to rely on soil tests and match nutrients to the needs of the soil. Determining the proper fertilization method is very important. Some elements cause the soil to dry out, others cause the soil to clump
too much, so the ratio of these elements is very important.

What was the most difficult in this transformation? What was the biggest challenge?
RK: The biggest challenge was actually the first year. It was a collision with reality. Let me put it differently: plowing is an action that allows you to cover up mistakes made in conventional soil cultivation. Without plowing, it’s a different story. There is no way to hide these mistakes. The biggest problem is weeds. Fighting them is very difficult, especially since many active substances that can stop the weed development have already been banned in the European Union, and in the case of the no-till system, they unfortunately have a better start.

BK: It was also only the first and second year, where we actually had a big problem with this topic because we had to hit the point perfectly when it came to performing treatments. After these 5 years, we already know how to fight weeds. For me, the first and most important challenge was the decision to change the approach to cultivation. Transitioning from traditional methods to modern ones was difficult, especially since there were not many examples around to follow. We had to gain knowledge and experience ourselves. At first, it was hard, there were even moments of doubt because the effects did not come immediately. On the contrary, the first harvests were worse. We wondered if we did the right thing by switching to no-till. Only after two or three years did we start to see real benefits and were sure that it was the right path.

RK: Yes, from the perspective of 5 years, I see that our yields are not at the same level as before, but even higher. Of course, you can already see life and movement in the soil, e.g., earthworms. I try not to talk about them too often because I think everyone is talking about them now, but they are very important. It is really much better. The soil is more friable. What we observe is the real restoration of life in the soil. After many years of intensive cultivation and using conventional methods, the soil was increasingly depleted. Now we see how it gradually regains its structure, friability, and also the richness of living organisms – from microorganisms to earthworms. This is a sign that our soil is returning to balance.

BK: You also have to be prepared for the looks of neighbors. Some looked at our fields and thought we were leaving a terrible mess. In traditional agriculture, there is a belief that a well-managed field should be clean and even. In regenerative agriculture, the field looks somewhat chaotic, but the soil is healthier and more fertile.

You mentioned that one of the main reasons for switching to modern methods was cost savings. What specific financial benefits did this change bring?

RK: First of all, fuel savings. In traditional cultivation, we used 40 to 50 liters of fuel per hectare. Now it’s about 18 liters, which makes a huge difference. Another saving is less fertilizer use, even close to half – not only because we want to be more ecological, but because fertilizers are precisely dosed directly to the plant, not scattered over the entire field. The last of the most important savings is reducing human working hours. These are not, of course, the only benefits. There are more. I will add, for example, reducing CO2 emissions per hectare and saving sown seeds. Besides, regenerative cultivation does not end only with sowing, but it also involves plant care. We want to go a step further and are thinking about mechanical weed removal, which involves limiting the use of plant protection products. We have introduced, for example, precise sowing adapted to soil quality– on weaker soils, we sow seeds less frequently, which reduces competition between plants and strengthens their condition. We notice an improvement in the quality of yields, especially in terms of the nutritional composition of feed. Yields are comparable, and sometimes even higher than before the change in cultivation method.

What would you say to someone considering switching to the regenerative path?
RK: The most important argument is money. At the moment, it is difficult to raise the price of the products in agriculture, so the biggest chance to improve the financial situation is to reduce costs. Fuel savings, fertilizers, working time – all this makes farming more profitable. But there is also a second aspect – a change in mentality. You have to be ready for a different approach to cultivation and accept that not everything will look like it used to. It’s a big step, but definitely worth taking.

Do farmers who want to switch to regenerative agriculture currently have support?
RK: It’s better than a few years ago. Training and conferences are organized, equipment manufacturers advice, and there are plenty of materials on the internet. However, the problem is financial support. EU programs are often unavailable for larger farms, and smaller farms cannot always afford large investments. Better-tailored solutions are needed so that more people can benefit from these methods.

BK: I will emphasize once again – the most important thing is a mental change. The land is our future. We live on it, we build on it, and it decides the quality of yields, and for many years we have exploited it too much. Therefore, it needs to be taken care of – not only thinking about current profits but also looking at the soil long-term, with a sense of properly fulfilled duty towards the land.