Spring?

With bits of green grass poking through the stubble form last year’s residue spring is finally here. The paperwork for our field demonstration and market development studies has been finalized, and our participants are chomping at the bit to get going. I have also received word that several of our native grass establishments have been planted. As soon as they germinate I will be going to inspect them and will post some pictures here.

The Gristmill has posted an interesting article regarding what we consider a farmer. In many areas in the U.S. being a “farmer” requires somewhere around 1000 acres, a million dollars in green tractors, and possibly several thousand hogs or cows. It is good to notice that this is not always the case, or even common in all parts of the world. This has only been the standard for a few brief decades here in the North America. Few can argue that our agriculture systems have evolved to be largely dependant on relatively cheap energy prices. As energy prices continue to rise and the concept of peak oil seems to be becoming a reality, we have to question the status quo in agriculture. Will industrial agriculture disappear as a result of rising energy costs? Not likely. However, agriculture will most definitely look different in 20 years. Will increasing input costs drive farmers to ever increasing sizes to take advantage of economies of scale or will the pendulum swing in the opposite direction with smaller farms producing more high value food for human consumption food? This will likely be determined by a combination of factors, some of which will be technological advances, federal ag policy and the level of interest in the new generations of farmers. Since we all know change is the only constant, I will leave predictions and prognostications to the palm readers, but I know which team I am cheering for…

So much for the Minnesota River...

American Rivers has issued a report listing the Minnesota River as the 5th most endangered river in the nation. As the report states this is primarily due to the proposed Big Stone II (yes, there is already a Big Stone I plant in operation) coal fired power plant, which will be built on Big Stone Lake, the headwaters of the Minnesota River. The primary problems with locating this power plant here is the copious water consumption and increased mercury deposition in the Minnesota River valley. Not to mention the fact that “clean coal” is nothing more than a myth, much like the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny (sorry kids). This issue is compounded because the Big Stone II plant will be located on the South Dakota side of the Minnesota-South Dakota boarder.

From the mining process to the burning in power plants, the environmental decimation that follows in the wake of the coal industry will be remembered as a blight left on future generations. With fish Minnesota consumption advisories covering most bodies of water in the state with sufficient testing, it is hardly prudent to increase the deposition of mercury in the Minnesota River Basin. With the substantial increase in water withdrawal from the headwaters of the Minnesota River, current impairments to water quality in the Minnesota River will be amplified.

Our Federal and State Government has spent millions of dollars working to improve water quality in the Minnesota River Basin, and much of those gains will be wiped out by an ill-advised scheme as this. The press and the Minnesota state government have also been shamefully silent on this issue. Apparently the citizens of the Minnesota River Basin are providing the leadership our “leaders” seem to be neglecting. We should be thankful we have groups such as Friends of the Minnesota River Valley, CURE and Coalition for a Clean Minnesota River to work in our best interest to stop this foolish endeavor. In a time when permits for new coal plants are being denied on environmental and economic grounds, why is this even being considered? Our leaders need to take a small political risk and stick their necks out for the well being of their constituents.

I really need to get some photos up here to liven things up a bit, but the weather hasn’t cooperated. The spring greening of our fields and forests has been postponed by our seemingly endless limbo between winter and spring. The dreary brown landscape is getting a little old for everyone here in Southern Minnesota. I suppose soon enough the weather will turn and we will be cursing the mosquitoes.

Earlier this month the Productive Conservation on Working Lands Technical Committee approved several new crop establishment projects. These projects will assist the establishment of 180 acres of native grasses and flowers in central Minnesota. These Productive Conservation crops will be used for biomass and seed production. The seeds from these crops will be harvested and used in native prairie restorations across Minnesota. PCWL cooperators Minnesota Native Landscapes has been very helpful in locating land to plant many of these productive conservation crops. We look forward to seeing their plots of native wild flowers once they are growing this summer. We will be sure to post pictures.

For those who feel like they have missed out, PCWL still has funds for another 580 acres of perennial conservation crops! If you are a Minnesota Landowner or farmer and have been thinking about how to make some income on under utilized land, PCWL may be a good match for you. Previously funded projects have included: native berries, hazelnuts, native grasses for seed and biomass, as well as hybrid poplar and willows for biomass. For more information or assistance with the application, please contact us.

The American Farmland Trust, Ag Subsidies, and Ecosystem Services

In a recent American Farmland Trust newsletter they report Washington State passed an AFT supported bill - “Promoting farm and forest land preservation and restoration through conservation markets”. According to AFT, this bill will result in new ecosystem services markets for farm and forest landowners while also potentially improving the performance of existing environmental mitigation and restoration programs.

This bill should serve as a model for other states to implement similar programs. Here in Minnesota, we are lucky to have programs such as Productive Conservation on Working Lands, which is working in parallel to what this new law in Washington proposes to address. Economic viability has long been the weak link in the conservation programs chain. The bottom line is we need to make conservation competitive with commodity crops in the most environmentally sensitive areas. While PCWL is being implemented on a relative small scale statewide in Minnesota, it is attempting to address the three legged stool that is this problem. Without coordinated development of market development, product supply, and agronomic knowledge productive conservation crops will not be competitive with row crops on marginal lands.

For decades we have subsidized the agricultural practices that have resulted in excessive nutrient and sediment loads in our nation’s rivers and streams. To expect farmers to bear the full cost of mitigating these problems is unrealistic. The hyper industrialization of agriculture did not evolve in a market devoid of influence outside of supply and demand. Our federal farm policy has played a profound role in the shaping of domestic and international commodity markets. As unfortunate as it is, we paid to cause the problem, now we need to pay to solve the problem.