SA Newsletter April 2003
Sustainable Agriculture Newsletter
- SA Newsletter Archive
- SA Newsletter Issue 1 2017
- SA Newsletter -- Fall 2016
- SA Newsletter Spring 2016
- SA Newsletter Winter 2016
- SA Newsletter Spring 2015
- SA Newsletter Fall 2015
- SA Newsletter Summer 2015
- SA Newsletter Fall 2014
- SA Newsletter Spring 2014
- SA Newsletter Fall 2013
- SA Newsletter Spring 2013
- SA Newsletter Fall 2012
- SA Newsletter Summer 2012
- SA Newsletter Spring 2012
- SA Newsletter Winter 2012
- SA Newsletter Fall 2011
- SA Newsletter Summer 2011
- SA Newsletter Spring 2011
- SA Newsletter Winter 2010-2011
- SA Newsletter Aug-Sept 2010
- SA Newsletter May-June 2010
- SA Newsletter Jan-Feb 2010
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 2009
- SA Newsletter Sept-Oct 2009
- SA Newsletter July-Aug 2009
- SA Newsletter May-June 2009
- SA Newsletter Mar-Apr 2009
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 2008
- SA Newsletter Sept-Oct 2008
- SA Newsletter July-Aug 2008
- SA Newsletter May-June 2008
- SA Newsletter Mar-Apr 2008
- SA Newsletter Jan-Feb 2008
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 2007
- SA Newsletter Sept-Oct 2007
- SA Newsletter July-Aug 2007
- SA Newsletter May-June 2007
- SA Newsletter Mar-Apr 2007
- SA Newsletter Jan-Feb 2007
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 2006
- SA Newsletter Sept-Oct 2006
- SA Newsletter July-Aug 2006
- SA Newsletter May-June 2006
- SA Newsletter Mar-Apr 2006
- SA Newsletter Jan-Feb 2006
- SA Newsletter Oct 2005
- SA Newsletter July-Aug 2005
- SA Newsletter May-June 2005
- SA Newsletter Mar-Apr 2005
- SA Newsletter Issue 2 2017
- SA Newsletter Jan-Feb 2005
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 2004
- SA Newsletter Sept-Oct 2004
- SA Newsletter Jul-Aug 2004
- SA Newsletter June 2004
- SA Newsletter May 2004
- SA Newsletter Mar-Apr 2004
- SA Newsletter Jan-Feb 2004
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 2003
- SA Newsletter Sept-Oct 2003
- SA Newsletter Aug 2003
- SA Newsletter July 2003
- SA Newsletter June 2003
- SA Newsletter May 2003
- SA Newsletter April 2003
- SA Newsletter Mar 2003
- SA Newsletter Feb 2003
- SA Newsletter Jan 2003
- SA Newsletter Dec 2002
- SA Newsletter Nov 2002
- SA Newsletter Oct 2002
- SA Newsletter Sept 2002
- SA Newsletter Aug 2002
- SA Newsletter July 2002
- SA Newsletter June 2002
- SA Newsletter May 2002
- SA Newsletter April 2002
- SA Newsletter Mar 2002
- SA Newsletter Jan 2002
- SA Newsletter Dec 2001
- SA Newsletter Nov 2001
- SA Newsletter Oct 2001
- SA Newsletter Sept 2001
- SA Newsletter Aug 2001
- SA Newsletter July 2001
- SA Newsletter June 2001
- SA Newsletter May 2001
- SA Newsletter April 2001
- SA Newsletter Mar 2001
- SA Newsletter Jan 2001
- SA Newsletter Dec 2000
- SA Newsletter Nov 2000
- SA Newsletter Oct 2000
- SA Newsletter Sept 2000
- SA Newsletter Aug 2000
- SA Newsletter July 2000
- SA Newsletter June 2000
- SA Newsletter May 2000
- SA Newsletter April 2000
- SA Newsletter Mar 2000
- SA Newsletter April 1995
- SA Newsletter April 1996
- SA Newsletter April 1997
- SA Newsletter April 1998
- SA Newsletter April 1999
- SA Newsletter Aug 1995
- SA Newsletter Aug 1996
- SA Newsletter Aug 1997
- SA Newsletter Aug 1998
- SA Newsletter Aug 1999
- SA Newsletter Dec 1996
- SA Newsletter Dec 1998
- SA Newsletter Dec 1999
- SA Newsletter Feb 1995
- SA Newsletter Feb 1996
- SA Newsletter Feb 1997
- SA Newsletter Feb 1998
- SA Newsletter Feb 1999
- SA Newsletter Feb 2000
- SA Newsletter Feb 2001
- SA Newsletter Feb 2002
- SA Newsletter Jan 1996
- SA Newsletter Jan 1997
- SA Newsletter Jan 1998
- SA Newsletter Jan 1999
- SA Newsletter Jan 2000
- SA Newsletter July 1995
- SA Newsletter July 1996
- SA Newsletter July 1997
- SA Newsletter July 1998
- SA Newsletter July 1999
- SA Newsletter June 1995
- SA Newsletter June 1996
- SA Newsletter June 1997
- SA Newsletter June 1998
- SA Newsletter June 1999
- SA Newsletter Mar 1995
- SA Newsletter Mar 1996
- SA Newsletter Mar 1997
- SA Newsletter Mar 1998
- SA Newsletter Mar 1999
- SA Newsletter May 1995
- SA Newsletter May 1996
- SA Newsletter May 1997
- SA Newsletter May 1998
- SA Newsletter May 1999
- SA Newsletter Nov 1995
- SA Newsletter Nov 1996
- SA Newsletter Nov 1998
- SA Newsletter Nov 1999
- SA Newsletter Nov-Dec 1997
- SA Newsletter Oct 1995
- SA Newsletter Oct 1996
- SA Newsletter Oct 1997
- SA Newsletter Oct 1998
- SA Newsletter Oct 1999
- SA Newsletter Sept 1995
- SA Newsletter Sept 1996
- SA Newsletter Sept 1997
- SA Newsletter Sept 1998
- SA Newsletter Sept 1999

Sustainable Agriculture Newsletters Archive
College of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences
Volume 11, Issue 4 – April 2003
Do you have a story you would like featured in the Sustainable Agriculture newsletter? Send your submission to misamail@umn.edu and we’ll consider adding it to an upcoming newsletter.
Organic practices result in equal net returns on corn, soybeans
Corn and soybean yields were only minimally reduced when organic production practices were utilized in a University of Minnesota research project. The organic practices were compared with conventional production practices. And after factoring in production costs, net returns between the two production strategies were equivalent, says Paul Porter, a U of M agronomist.
"These results won't surprise producers who are successfully using organic production systems," Porter says. "But the study results will probably be met with skepticism by many in the agri-chemical business who make their livelihood from the sale of synthetic fertilizer and pesticides."
Over 80 percent of corn and soybeans produced in the United States is grown in the Midwest--the vast majority with conventional production practices in a corn-soybean rotation requiring annual synthetic fertilizer and pesticide application. This corn-soybean rotation is practiced on over 100 million acres.
Organic production practices, in compliance with standards defined by the United States Department of Agriculture's National Organic Program (NOP), offer an alternative production system to conventional practices. The study of the influence of rotation length on yield of corn and soybean when grown utilizing organic and conventional production practices is published in the March-April, 2003 issue of "Agronomy Journal," a publication of the American Society of Agronomy. Porter is a co-author of the article.
The study was conducted at two Minnesota locations from 1989 to 1999. Scientists evaluated a two-year corn-soybean rotation and a four-year corn-soybean-oat/alfalfa-alfalfa rotation under conventional and organic management and production strategies.
The analysis of yield data began in 1993, after the first complete cycle of the four-year rotation had occurred. From 1993 through 1999, corn yields from the conventional two-year rotation averaged 143 and 139 bushels per acre at the two locations, while corn grown in the organic four-year rotation averaged nine percent and seven percent less, respectively.
During the same time frame, soybeans grown in the conventional two-year rotation averaged 43.1 and 40.7 bushels per acre, while organically produced soybeans averaged 19 percent and 16 percent less, respectively.
Weed control was a major factor for the reduced yields in the organic production system, Porter says. The larger yield reduction from organically produced soybeans relative to corn was associated with increased weed pressure in the soybean crop because of its placement in the rotation sequence.
While there was a reduction in both corn and soybean yields in the four-year organic strategy compared with the two-year conventional strategy, the organic strategy had lower production costs than the conventional strategy. Consequently, net returns for the two strategies were equivalent, without taking organic price premiums into account.
Conventionally produced soybeans were more responsive than conventionally produced corn to the expanded rotation length, Porter says. Whereas conventionally grown soybean in the four-year rotation yielded from three to six percent more than soybean grown in the two-year rotation, conventionally grown corn in the four-year rotation yielded the same to four percent less than corn grown in the two-year rotation.
These results suggest conventional soybean yields would be increased when grown in a longer rotation than the commonly practiced corn-soybean rotation, Porter says. He may be reached at (612) 625-6719 or pporter@umn.edu.
Researchers want to put alfalfa to work in the environment
Can alfalfa save the world? Maybe not quite, but it can be used for far more than livestock feed. Alfalfa is the most widely grown legume in the U.S, with estimated sales of $6 billion a year, and it is now gaining new recognition for its environmental qualities as well. "We want to find new ways to use alfalfa because it's such an amazing plant for the ecosystem and for farm systems," says JoAnn Lamb, who is leading a team of researchers breeding alfalfa for new uses.
One innovative possibility being researched by Lamb's team is using alfalfa for producing biofuel. In a biofuel system, alfalfa stems would be processed to generate biofuel, while the leaves would continue to serve their role as livestock feed. "The key to success for an alfalfa biofuel production system would be to develop a system that would maximize both leaf and stem yield," says Lamb.
By crossbreeding a large-stemmed European variety with a standard Midwestern winter-hardy variety, she hopes to create an alfalfa variety well-suited for the production of biofuel. Lamb's project has also been using alfalfa to eliminate toxins from contaminated water and land. The process is called phytoremediation (literally, plant remedy). Lamb is working on developing an alfalfa with fast-growing, spreading roots that will take up lots of nitrates.
In a similar project, Lamb's team is looking at improving alfalfa's ability to take up metals such as aluminum from the soil. "We want the plant to be able to uptake those metals and put them into the leaves where we can harvest them out," she says. "It all depends on getting the plant to where it's adapted to the chemistry of toxic soils."
And finally, Lamb would like to see alfalfa tolerant to manure application by farmers. If alfalfa crops can be bred to be tolerant to the ammonium and salt in manure, she thinks, then they can become an environmentally safe destination for manure in the summer season.
The goals for alfalfa's uses may be ambitious, but Lamb is realistic about her team's work. "It's going to be slow, but I think that's okay. We're learning all the time." She may be reached at lambx002@umn.edu. See www.misa.umn.edu/Other/alfalfa.html for the complete research profile. --By Daniel Ungier, MISA intern
There's new evidence that organic crops may be healthier
Organically or sustainably grown berries and corn contain up to 58 percent more polyphenolics, natural antioxidants that are a natural defense for plants and may be good for our health, says a new study by researchers at the University of California, Davis. The work suggests that insecticides and herbicides may actually reduce the production of polyphenolics by plants. "This really opens the door to more research in this area," says Alyson Mitchell, assistant professor of food science at UC Davis, who led the research team. For more information, go to www.directag.com/directag/news/article.jhtml?article_id=1011312.
Consumers want the real organic, poll shows
A majority (61 percent) of consumers don't want milk, eggs, poultry, or meat to be labeled "organic" if they were from animals fed antibiotics, hormones and pesticides, according to a nationwide consumer opinion poll conducted by RoperASW on behalf of the Organic Trade Association, the business group for the organic industry in North America.
The results of the OTA-RoperASW poll fly in the face of last minute legislation hidden in the 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Bill. Signed into law on February 20, the rider (Section 771) enables the label "organic" to be put on products that come from animals raised on feed containing antibiotics, hormones and pesticides. Immediate outrage over the rider has prompted a bipartisan effort in Congress to recommend the passage of the "Organic Restoration Act" in the Senate (S. 457) and its counterpart in the House (HR 955). Both measures call for repeal of the rider.
The OTA-RoperASW poll also found that consumers prefer meat products labeled organic to have a high organic content, including feed. Most consumers (78 percent) said milk, eggs, poultry, or meat should be 100 percent organic to be labeled organic. The special interests behind the rider seek to reduce the organic feed content requirements.
The OTA-RoperASW poll found that nearly three quarters (71 percent) of consumers believe Congress should not be able to change policies on organic agriculture regulations without public discussion. The Section 771 rider was inserted without public comment.
"In a democracy like America's, citizens have the right to provide input on decisions that affect their families and communities, and this includes policy concerning organic agriculture," says Katherine DiMatteo, OTA executive director. "Congress can easily correct this mistake by repealing Section 771 of the 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Bill."
RoperASW conducted the OTA poll. RoperASW completed telephone interviews with 1,019 people selected at random. The interviews were conducted March 14-16. The sample has a margin of error of plus or minus three percent at a 95 percent level of confidence.
For more information, visit the OTA website at www.ota.com or its new consumer website at www.theorganicreport.org.
You can watch 'Rethinking the American Dream" free on-line
A 20-minute video available for free on-line viewing helps viewers think about their current lifestyles. It also presents individual choices that can improve our natural environment and personal quality of life. It's titled "Rethinking the American Dream" and was produced by the Oregon State Extension Service.
The video focuses on what Americans report is most important in life: health, fulfilling work, education, connection with family, friends, community and the natural world, and spirituality. It points out how merely consuming "stuff" and increasing material wealth can get in the way of achieving these important goals.
A free 20-page companion guidebook on sustainable living (published October 2001) is also available for viewing and printing at the web site. The video and guidebook together make a strong teaching tool for individuals and especially for small groups and classroom settings.
"Rethinking the American Dream" is also available on videotape (and DVD soon) for $19.95 at the website below, or soon for free rental at the OEA's Clearinghouse at (651) 215-0232 or (800) 877-6300.
Click on eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/EdMat/trailers/american_dream.html to see the video.
There is some good news for farmers
You can find positive news in this difficult agricultural economy. Farmers and ranchers are turning around problems and discovering opportunities in diversification of farm products, new market niches, water use reduction, and energy production. In some cases, the stories are remarkable, according to BioCycle magazine editor Robert Rynk.
Rynk cites a Texas grapefruit grower who reduced the number of irrigation cycles by 60 percent, and a Colorado hog producer who eliminated rendering charges. Many of these significant case studies will be presented at the 33rd Annual BioCycle National Conference, May 5-7 in Denver, Colo. at the Denver Renaissance Hotel.
The 33rd Annual BioCycle Conference focuses on managing organic materials, such as manure and crop residues, to create products like biogas, biofuels, compost, livestock bedding and other biobased products. For conference program and registration information, visit BioCycle magazine's website at www.biocycle.net. Or, call (610) 967-4135, ext. 22, or e-mail biocycle@jgpress.com.
Calendar of events, 2003
These events are sponsored by numerous organizations. More information is available on MISA's website: www.misa.umn.edu. Also check the Sustainable Farming Association of Minnesota's website at www.sfa-mn.org.
July 29-31. Upper Midwest Grazing Conference, Midway Best Western, Lacrosse, Wis., (563) 583-6496.
Aug. 16-17. Third Annual Windy River Renewable Energy and Sustainable Agriculture Fair in Todd County, (218) 568-8624, davidb@uslink.net, or www.sustainablefarmingcentralmn.com.
What we're about
This newsletter is supported by the Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture (MISA). It's also supported by the University of Minnesota Extension Service, the North Central Region Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (NCRSARE) Professional Development Program (PDP), and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA). MISA is a partnership between the Sustainer's Coalition and the University of Minnesota College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences (COAFES).
Send story ideas to the editor: Jack Sperbeck, 405 Coffey Hall, 1420 Eckles Ave., University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, (612) 625-1794, fax (612) 625-2207, e-mail: sperb001@umn.edu. Other editorial board members: Helene Murray, (612) 625-0220, murra021@umn.edu; and Bill Wilcke, (612) 625-8205, wilck001@umn.edu. Please send address changes directly to: Bill Wilcke, Biosystems & Agricultural Engineering, 1390 Eckles Ave., St. Paul, MN 55108.
Also check MISA's home page at www.misa.umn.edu.
Our mission statement: To help bring people together to influence the future of agriculture and rural communities to achieve socially, environmentally, and economically sustainable farms and communities.
To stimulate thinking and discussion about sustainability, we try to present items that reflect different points of view. This being the case, we aren't promoting and don't necessarily agree with everything we publish.
The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation.