TILTH PRODUCERS OF WASHINGTON

USDA Organic Farming Systems Research Conference
March 16-18, 2011 — Washington, DC

The USDA held a national conference to examine findings from U.S. research on organic farming systems, including two key types of research—long-term farming experiments and nationwide economic producer surveys. The agenda can be found at
http://www.ers.usda.gov/ConferenceCenter/OrganicFarmingSystems/ . A number of the presentations were captured as webinars by eOrganic and will be available on their web site in the near future.

USDA has set a specific goal to increase the number of organic farm operations by 25% from 2009 to 2015. This is in their strategic plan for the first time, and represents the leadership of Kathleen Merrigan, Deputy Secretary USDA, a person very involved in crafting the Organic Food Production Act of 1990. Organic agriculture has a much higher profile in the current administration largely due to Dr. Merrigan’s role. The conference was intended to highlight the results of some of the long-term studies in the U.S. (many funded by USDA) as well as the recent USDA surveys of organic producers. Increasing (or maintaining, in the face of budget cuts) support for organic agriculture funding was likely an unspoken goal of the event. Dr. Cathy Woteki, USDA Chief Scientist, described how organic research is embedded in the USDA priorities, and said that non-earmark funding for organic is holding up so far in the President’s budget.

WSU was well-represented at the conference. Recipients of USDA OREI grants were encouraged to attend and present posters if they were not on the agenda. For WSU, these included organic grain (Steve Jones group, western WA; Ian Burke project, eastern WA) and organic apple (Mark Mazzola, USDA-ARS). The WSU organic farming special research grant was represented by David Granatstein with 2 posters. John Reganold delivered the opening presentation on comparing organic and conventional agriculture – what can we measure? Mykel Taylor (with co-author David Granatstein) spoke on preliminary findings from the USDA ARMS survey on apple, the first ever done on a specialty crop. Anne Schwartz, organic grower and WSU advisory board member, was part of the regional perspectives roundtable, representing Tilth Producers of Washington.

The conference featured corn-soybean systems to a large extent, probably more than is representative of organic agriculture on the ground. Most of the long-term studies were in these systems, and a number of them appeared to be quite similar and duplicative. The long-term trial at USDA Beltsville showed how the organic system built up N mineralization potential over time and also increased N2O flux from some of the organic rotations. Weeds were the first drag on yields, followed by nitrogen. In Iowa, their organic plots generally yielded as well as conventional. Protein levels in corn and soybean were also the same between systems. The organic soils were higher in particulate organic matter and had greater nutrient use efficiency. For 2010, the organic plots had lower production costs ($100/ac) and higher sales ($100/ac more). The long-term trials in Wisconsin showed more yield variability in organic, and somewhat lower organic soybean, corn, and wheat yields. Weeds were a bigger problem in wet years for organic due to problems with timely cultivation. Also, untreated seed in the organic systems had more disease and a poorer stand in wet, cold years. This is the same situation as organic sweet corn growers face in the Columbia Basin, and is the project that Lindsey DuToit is working on with special grant funding. Overall, organic yields were about 90% of conventional taken over the 18-20 years of the trials. Production looks ‘sustainable’ (flat or increasing yield trends). An organic grain trial at Cornell (NY) has been through two rotation cycles. It is using a base rotation of soybean/spelt-spelt/red clover – corn, with two fertility levels and two weed control levels.

There were presentations on organic seed, organic blueberries, organic muscadine grapes, and organic dairy farming. An on-line organic dairy course is being developed in Vermont. On the last day, a Danish researcher presented an excellent talk on organic vegetable systems. They had an 8-year vegetable rotation that used no imported nutrients. There was a huge benefit to conserving soil N in the fall to keep it around for spring use. Fodder radish roots grew to >2 m depth by November 1, and were able to recover much N from the soil. One organic rotation required 28 kg N/ha versus 150 kg N/ha in conventional.

Organic cotton production in Texas was also discussed by James Wedel, president of the Texas Organic Cotton Marketing Cooperative (TOCMAC), and Caterina Conti of Anvil Knitwear, Inc. The two presented the current market for organic cotton and noted the large demand for organic cotton that cannot currently be met. Anvil Knitwear is a company who works closely with organic cotton growers in Texas to source as much organic cotton as they can for their t-shirt business. Anvil was recently told by TOCMAC that in order to expand organic acreage, some support for transitional acres would be needed. In response, Anvil Knitwear developed a t-shirt line that is made of 50% organic cotton and 50% transitional cotton. Marketing of this t-shirt line has been very successful and enabled Anvil to pay a premium for cotton grown on transitional acres as well as certified organic acres. The two organizations continue to work together to expand U.S. organic cotton acreage.

Profitability of organic farming was discussed in another panel, based on long-term trials. Karen Klonsky, UC Davis, shared the findings from the SAFS project, a tomato-based system. Organic with tillage had yields similar to conventional for the tomato crop, while organic corn yields were typically quite a bit lower. The organic net returns were higher due to the price premiums. The low-input system had the worst economics. Organic rotations used more water than conventional. Organic rotations sourced half their nitrogen from cover crops and half from manure, and there was more loss of N from the organic systems. After 20 years with the LTER trial in Michigan, Scott Swinton reported a slight reduction in grain yields for organic. He calculated some estimates to reduce environmental impacts: $0.87/lb N not leached would be sacrificed from net returns, while it would cost growers about $200/ton CO2e to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Fallow had the least GHG emissions of the agricultural plots. Willingness to pay for water quality by non-farm residents was about $0.54/person/yr per lake. Providing more ecosystem services did raise direct costs to growers. The Cornell rotation was profitable for organic over 4 years, using a 30% premium in year 4. In Minnesota, the 2-year conventional was more profitable than the 4-year conventional, while the latter was equal to the 4-year organic without premiums. The Wisconsin trial results were based on 18 yr of data. The 10% yield reduction for organic was reiterated, driven by wet spring years. They also have a rotational grazing system, and in this, the gross margins for organic without premiums was the same as conventional.

A second economics panel looked at USDA survey results. The dairy survey showed organic dairy cows producing less milk per cow (13,600 lb/yr vs 19,000 lb/yr conventional). Organic cows had more pasture feed which was lower cost but also led to lower milk production. Organic milk was more expensive per cwt as the forage base increased. Costs decline with herd size. In 2005, costs were $15/cwt conventional and $22/cwt organic. Pasture based dairies had a small cost differential. Reported soybean yields were 47 bu/ac conventional and 31 bu/ac organic, greater than the finding from the long-term studies. There was 97% adoption of herbicide tolerant soybeans on conventional farms. Based on the dairy results, organic technology was estimated to be 13% less productive than conventional. Both systems had similar efficiency (81% org and 83% conv). It was important to compare organic farms to similar conventional ones for an accurate assessment. Mykel Taylor presented preliminary findings from the USDA ARMS survey on apple, the first ever done on a specialty crop. This survey covered both conventional and organic apple, and results from it were compared with enterprise budgets developed for conventional and organic ‘Gala’ apple at WSU. The results were similar for most aspects, an encouraging finding and one that may provide justification for future ARMS surveys of specialty crops. The ARMS data showed considerably higher labor costs for organic orchards, but somewhat lower costs for fertilizer and pest control inputs. Washington organic apple production will be compared to other states if possible, but small sample size from other states is a challenge.

Environmental impacts were a topic as well, but not as clearly presented as could have been given the long-term studies. Organic systems in Ohio had 3 times as much tillage as conventional. There was no difference in soil C between organic and conventional when soil was corrected for bulk density. The organic soils had more N in microbial biomass, and were different in nematode community structure but not for microbial DNA fingerprint. In Minnesota, subsurface drainage water was monitored for water quality. There was more flow in conventional. Nitrate concentration in conventional was 17.2 mg/L compared to 8.2 mg/L in the alternative (including organic) systems. For total P, the difference was 8.2 mg/L conventional versus 0.04 mg/L alternative.

One speaker, Doug Constance, addressed the social dimensions of organic research, and touched on such topics as “conventionalization, bifurcation of organic, Deep organic vs lite organic, eco-input substitution farming, organic global value chain.” He had some animated slides showing consolidation of the organic food sector. His conclusion was that the conventionalization of organic agriculture drives it to be less sustainable. He highlighted a number of authors addressing the dichotomy of regional food systems and global consolidation of many sectors of food production. His focus is on Regional Food Analysis in an attempt to focus on Ag in the Middle, scaling up for small producers and looking at how Ag Institutions enable or reduce regional food systems.

Perspectives from growers and NGO representatives were wide ranging. Eric Nordell, an innovative direct market grower in Pennsylvania, shared some of his techniques and how they had evolved over time, and his interaction with organic research projects at Cornell. He said he has virtually eliminated weeds on the farm, using a more extensive land approach with bare fallow and mature cover crops. He is testing relay and intercropping of cover crops to improve the system. More work with Native American tribal members was suggested, as well as research and development of small scale equipment. The whole organic seed topic was highlighted, with broad interest among growers in variety screening and development for organic systems and the role that seed saving by growers can play. Research could be targeted to specific problem areas of the NOP, such as materials on the National List for which alternatives are needed. [An example of the disconnect within USDA on this is the phase-out of oxytetracycline for control of fire blight on organic apples and pears, passed by the NOSB in 2010. In that same year, a proposal for research on organic compliant fire blight alternatives from a leading researcher was not funded].

In addition to researchers from universities in the US and Europe, there was useful input from several farmers and organic farm organizations. These organizations play an important role in getting research results to their farmer members with a number of programs. MOSES has developed one day intensives “Organic University” before their annual conference that go into detail unavailable via the average 90 minute conference session. NOFA –NY partners with Cornell every year to host a forum to discuss research, priorities, applications and give the farmers the opportunity to work with the researchers. Tilth Producers host 10 annual farmwalks with WSU and a conference every other year to create opportunities for farmers and researchers to come together. Everyone discussed the challenges of funding, outreach and integration of research into effective and economical farming systems.

Nadia Scialabba from the organic program at FAO provided a useful international perspective. She pointed to the contrasts of a world food system with 1 billion hungry, 1 billion overweight, and annual food losses of 20-60% to suggest that improving food governance is more critical than increasing production in the near term. Her program has led review studies of organic yields, profitability, and energy use (mostly due to no synthetic N on organic farms). She is nearing release of a new meta-study of effects of organic farming on greenhouse gases. FAO is trying to develop a universal sustainability definition and tool for growers (Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture), with guidelines by late 2011 and a software tool after. .
One of the challenges of farming systems research is when and how to change treatments over time as learning occurs and new technology emerges. This is a problem many of the speakers mentioned, but there was not much discussion of how to address it. Another point was systems studies versus component research. While the conference focused on systems, and several growers railed about reductionist research, one grower stated that growers adopt those parts that fit “their system” and seldom adopt the whole system from a research trial. A researcher gave the example of the impact of grated tomato transplants – ungrafted had 100% loss, while grafted had 100% survival, showing the clear value and potential adoption of a component based study.

In an open forum session, many farmers came up to give their wish lists to the assembled researchers and funders. Jim Riddle (MN) provided an excellent list of research needs by certified organic farmers, including: more science on composting; how to reduce pathogens, pesticides and other environmental hazards in the composting process, nutrient movement in the soil, buffer requirements, and water quality in organic systems. Anne Schwartz (WA) identified the need for true cost economic analytical tools, other growers identified needed research on organic livestock parasite management, and infectious diseases, food safety, and insect management on small farms. Heather Darby (VT) noted the need for research on forages for dairy production and discussed an online resource for Veterinarians; ODairy.

The conference was heavy on corn-soybean, and light on specialty crops and livestock. There was little discussion of pest management (other than weeds) and biocontrol advances. Dealing with pest emergencies, such as Spotted Winged Drosophila and Brown Marmorated Stink Bug, was not brought up at all, and these pests pose very serious risks to organic farmers with their more limited toolboxes. While activity is increasing on crop variety selection and breeding, the same is not true for cover crops, one of the backbone practices of organic farms. There are opportunities within USDA to partner on cover crop improvement, using the Plant Introduction centers, ARS, and NRCS Plant Materials Center. More solid findings on the environmental impacts of organic and conventional systems would have been useful; nothing was presented on toxin release, erosion, or wildlife, and little on greenhouse gases.

Overall, the conference brought together an energetic and optimistic group to share research-based findings on organic agriculture. It was an excellent venue to become familiar with the breadth of work undertaken and many of the players involved.

– submitted by David Granatstein, Anne Schwartz, Mykel Taylor