Here in Ireland, there is a general air of puzzlement as machinery companies from continental Europe keep introducing mechanical crop care implements that appear to have little relevance to everyday farming as generally practiced this far west.

Yet there is a shift occurring elsewhere, as the the pressure to reduce pesticide use and a new awareness of soil husbandry is encouraging the implementation of weeding methods that had been neglected in the switch to the raw essentials of chemical subjugation.

One of the major barriers to implementation of mechanical weed control is that it requires a huge leap of faith and determination from farmers that have only known farming in the conventional manner, as that is what they have been taught and where their experience lies.

Government measures aimed at changing this overnight will always struggle to meet success.

The intended switch to organic farming being encouraged throughout Europe will trip on the disconnect between the expectations of politicians and bureaucrats and the resistance to disruptive change - rather than gradual implementation - among the farming community.

Yet it is not just a question of political pressure being applied; herbicide resistance and the challenge of new weeds which may not be so amenable to chemical control are also factors driving the move towards mechanical methods.

Over in Germany, the DLG (the farmers' organisation) is taking a great deal of interest in adapting organic methods to conventional farming and has started to issue reports on how best to proceed on this front.

It is not only bodies like the DLG which are taking an interest in this subject. Companies producing mechanical weeding equipment are also starting to formulate and publish ideas around the theme of transferring organic methodology into present day farming techniques.

Einboeck from Austria is one such company. In Ireland, it has carried the image of being a rather obscure but worthy manufacturer of grassland care products, but it is now emerging as a leading light in this wave of alternative weed control.

To underline this commitment and to stress that the company is a serious player in the mechanical weeding sector, it has just introduced a 12m folding frame onto which all its popular hoeing elements can be attached, along with a hopper for sowing cover crops.

Yet the company has taken things further still with the publication of guides to how to use these machines, along with the the coining of the phrase 'Fusion Farming'.

Both Einboch and the DLG see as this integration as a process, and neither views mechanical weeding as a direct replacement for chemical control - that is simply asking too much of it.

Indeed, the DLG notes that while chemical control will often exceed 90% efficiency, mechanical weed control will do well to achieve 70%, and may fail altogether.

It is objective facts like this that act as a further bar to the expansion of organic farming, and are not often appreciated outside of agriculture.

Planting a crop is an expensive business, in which herbicides are considered a necessary insurance - not just a yield enhancement additive deployed by greedy farmers to fatten the bottom line.

Removing that prop involves not just consigning the sprayer to the back of the shed but also the adoption of a whole new mindset.

This is keenly recognised by DLG, who states: "There are no one-size-fits-all solutions.

"Knowledge of crop-specific requirements for successful weed control, such as the relevant developmental stages of the crops and the predominant weed flora, is part of the essential basic knowledge of the farmer and should be a matter of course."

Blanket application of sprays according to the calendar are out, and practical consideration of the crop and the vulnerability of the weeds to mechanical disturbance is in.

The German organisation also notes that: "Farms that have been practicing organic farming for many years have developed their own customised methods for biological and mechanical weed control."

A clear indication that experience gained over time, measured in years if not decades, will be the key to success rather than a sudden imposition of ideas and techniques that are quite foreign to the thinking of most conventional farmers.

A key element to the use of present mechanical methods in the suppression of weeds is timely control in the cotyledon stage, but - as the germination of the weeds will occur over a long period - repeated passes will be required.

However, repeated passes require extra labour and machinery and will add to soil compaction and erosion, all of which are compounded by the reduced width of weeders when compared to sprayers.

Manufacturers are looking to develop machines that will expand this window, with the sun-wheel type rotary hoe as being sold by Pottinger (Rotocare) and Kverneland (Helios) being touted as one approach.

Another development that has occurred recently here in Ireland is the Eco-Extractor, which can remove larger weed plants as they stand proud of the crop canopy,.

However, this machine is still in its early years, though it does show great promise.

Whatever the engineering that goes into new implements, the chemical manufacturers still hold one key advantage and that is the differing physiology of weed species can be exploited to differentiate between crop and undesirable plants.

The process is by no means flawless, but the removal of broad-leaved weeds in cereals can be achieved quite effectively through selective herbicides.

However, there is a third option now gaining momentum and that is the digital approach.

There are two distinct parts to a digital solution, the identification of a weed and then its removal, but as yet there is no universal answer as to the best way of doing either.

This is despite attempts to master both aspects going on for many years now. There is a lot of promise in these techniques, but it is taking time for them to be delivered at an affordable price level.