The dictionary definition is basically that to fallow soil means to leave it uncultivated. The supposed benefit is that the land is “resting” and “recovering” lost nutrient. The first is a misconception and as for the second my question is “from where?”. I have stated it before that land does not rest. If it is not turned, fertilized, planted and irrigated it does not stop functioning. The only thing that happens is that the type of ecology going on differs. I am not a soil scientist, but I would be willing to speculate that land that is not cultivated will tend to settle and compact. The air and water chambers will change in size and complexity. If left untended for an extended length of time the ecology will change; a different type of ground cover will become established and a different type of soil flora and fauna balance will emerge.
It is the end of the growing season; the crop has been harvested and all that is left is bare plants. What to do? If the plan is to fallow the soil what to be done is nothing. That is the definition of fallow. If the remains of the crop are turned under all that is being done is that fallowing is being delayed if the aim is to do nothing after a final plowing. What happens in the soil is something else entirely. During the production cycle there are, hopefully, an adequate amount of fertilizer and water to support the plants. The root system is expanding in size and complexity., but it is a homogeneous root system, assuming weeds are controlled, doing the same type of interaction with all the other plants in the field. Granted the overlay of treatments can affect the amount of interaction, but it is still interaction between the same type of plants and the soil. When the season is over whatever fertilizer is left could be dealt with by the soil organisms and that is going to be influenced by the amount of precipitation. In the northern temperate zone where I am familiar with the type of agriculture summer is followed by the transition season of autumn and the harsher season of winter where unprotected production of vegetables is not possible. If at the end of summer the grower walks away with out doing anything to the soil the rows of crops will be taken over by a flush of native ground cover better known as weeds. They to will succumb to winter but as is the wont with weeds they are hardy and ready to spring anew in the spring. If the plan is to not use the soil in the nest year’s growing cycle it is truly fin allow, but what man does not use nature will. Agriculture disrupts the natural local ecology. The soil denizens are radically changed and those that may be benign in the normal system can take on damaging aspects to the crops that are artificially inserted. Letting the land lie fallow begins to reestablish the ecology. There are very few instances in nature where an area will suffer a general, all plant and animal, die back unless something external occurs. Homeostasis is the norm for nature.
If the soil is not disturbed for a full growing cycle, and it goes into a non-growing environment brought on by winter or low rainfall, by the time the grower gets back to the location it will have been transformed into a condition that will require expenditure of time and energy to restore to a condition where an artificially introduced crop can be established. Fallow does not cause the soil to rest. It changes the active organisms that inhabit it. As a species we are long past the hunter-gather, leave the soil until we cycle back, stage. As a species we manipulate everything that surrounds us. If the desire is to grow to survive then the soil needs to be managed. Rather than walk away, if it is possible for the grower either financially or due to labor available, an alternative is to establish a cover crop. Grasses or legumes are generally favored, and there are alternatives about how to manage them when they start faltering in the next year. That will have to wait for another time. It seems that it would be easier to deal with a homogenous crop when it comes time to replant than with a group of unrelated plants that have different habits and just happen to inhabit the same area of soil.
Reviewers of Submitted Manuscripts
In addition to the Editorial Consulting Board, I extend my gratitude to the voluntary reviewers who provide their time and efforts to assure that the quality of the manuscripts meets the standards expected by the journal and its readers. They are: A. Alves-Pereira, N.N. Cometti, J. Fernandes Rodriques, M.P.N. Gent, K.Y. Kantoglu, S. Kumar, H. Mohammadi, A. Obayetu, M.P.N. Tundis, A.A. Sadar, and J. Snider.