Subject: SUSAG SPEECH/RESULTS SARE/ACE PROJECTS
From: [email-masked] (World Sustainable Agriculture Association)
Date: 11 May 1994 17:25:59 -0400
Newsgroups: alt.sustainable.agriculture

The following speech was delivered recently at a conference
in Orlando, Florida.  It includes results of recent SARE/ACE projects,  
which have been submitted by the Citizens Network for Sustainable
Development on behalf of USDA SARE to the UN Commission
on Sustainable Development (CSD) for the purpose of bringing 
environment and development alternatives to the attention of 
policymakers from around the world.  Governmental and non-
governmental representatives will be meeting in New York May16-27, 
1994 to review commitments made at and progress since the UN 
Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro 
in June 1992.  The Agenda 21 topics focused on at this annual session 
of the CSD include fresh water, toxic chemicals and waste, among others. 
 
                                               * * * 

Goals and Realities of Attaining a More Sustainable
Agriculture

by J. Patrick Madden, PhD
Executive Vice President
World Sustainable Agriculture Association

May 6, 1994

Alternative Concepts of Sustainable Agriculture

    The goals of a more sustainable agriculture take somewhat
different forms in various countries and locations, depending on
many physical and social factors.  Physical realities such as the
climate, weather, natural resources, and existing infrastructure
interact with social factors such as population pressure on the
land and starvation, in the context of the history, culture,
institutions, educational levels, current agricultural
technologies, and prevailing beliefs about what can and should be
done to improve conditions on this planet.  These key beliefs are
strongly influenced by each person's direct experience, as well
as exposure to information from sources he or she judges to be
credible.

    During the last four months of 1993 I attended five
international conferences on sustainable agriculture, including
four in Asia.  Reflecting on the various papers delivered during
these conferences and informal discussions with conference
speakers, I have concluded that two fundamentally opposite
paradigms motivate quite difference concepts, definitions, and
actions regarding sustainable agriculture.  The prevailing
paradigm in many scientific and governmental organizations is
what ecologists call Domination of Nature; the competing
alternative paradigm supporting the sustainable agriculture
movement is Harmony with Nature.  This contrast is brought into
sharp focus in literature such as Deep Ecology (Duvall and
Sessions, 1985) and The Universe Story (Swimme and Berry, 1992).

    The Domination paradigm postulates the value position that
humanity's greatest well-being should be pursued by exploitation
of natural resources to produce the maximum output of commodities
having highest value in commercial markets.  This world view
separates humans from Nature, and relies on synthetic chemical
pesticides and fertilizers with little or no apparent concern for
possible detrimental effects on human health, ecological
integrity, or long-term productivity for future generations.  For
example, an internationally prominent speaker at one of the
conferences I attended last year told me privately he does not
believe pesticides have any harmful effects.  He also said soil
organic matter is irrelevant, and that soil erosion should be
ignored because subsoil can be made productive with ample
applications of chemical fertilizers.  Other speakers at various
conferences articulated similar views during their formal
presentations.  The amazing fact that such denial and ecological
naivete can persist in the face of overwhelming evidence is clear
evidence that the Dominance paradigm is still alive and well,
strongly influencing some scientists' goals and their perceptions
of what constitutes valid evidence.

    The Harmony-with-Nature paradigm engenders a wide range of
approaches under titles such as sustainable, organic, biodynamic
and Nature farming.  These approaches seek to minimize (or where
possible totally avoid) application of synthetic chemical
pesticides and fossil sources of fertilizers; they encourage and
support populations of natural enemies for biological control of
pests; they advocate cultural practices such as crop rotations,
mulches, composting, and rotational grazing which are knowledge-
intensive and holistic.  They respect the complexity and
resilience of natural systems.

    The Domination view holds that agriculture must accelerate its
production of marketable commodities -- even if this requires
ecologically ruinous methods of production.  The Harmony with
Nature view recognizes the importance of biodiversity, of life
itself.  The Harmony with Nature approach is sustainable from
generation to generation, because it recognizes that young people
must get started and prosper in farming, and they are more likely
to stay if they enjoy farming, with confidence that their farming
systems are safe for themselves and their children.  The
Domination approach is short sighted, and motivated by short-term
human self interest.  The Harmonious approach is holistic and
magnanimous, recognizing that the continuation of life on this
planet may be seriously jeopardized by the very production
methods advocated by disciples of the Domination view.  An urgent
theme running through the current literature on spiritual
dimensions of ecology is that "all future life hinges on the
choices men and women make now, in the decade of the 1990s..."
(Vivienne Hull, in Earth and Spirit, 1993, p. 20)

    Through conferences, case studies, research, demonstration
farms and other direct observation, the feasibility of farming in
harmony with Nature is gradually gaining credibility as a
feasible alternative to the Domination of Nature through
chemical-intensive farming.  A small but growing number of
scientists, educators and farmers are committed to accelerating
the transition toward more sustainable agricultural development
for all of humanity.

    The credibility of the Harmony paradigm is also enhanced by
actual or impending tragedies in scientific and technical realms.
One recent example, featured on the cover of a recent issue of
Newsweek (March 28, 1994), is the very rapidly accelerating
emergence of antibiotic-resistant germs.  Medical experts are
alarmed that in the very near future, diseases long controlled by
antibiotics may begin killing tens of thousands of people -- and
those who often use antibiotics are the most vulnerable.

    This is a perfect metaphor of the current situation of rapidly
emerging pest resistance to pesticides.  Entomologists and other
pest control scientists are increasingly alarmed that the
pesticides they have relied upon are becoming obsolete at an
accelerating pace, leaving no practical and profitable
alternatives in many cases.  Those of us who have advocated
increased research and education on alternatives to pesticides
have been motivated by a concern both for the food and fiber
needs of humanity and for the well-being of the other animals and
plants that constitute the biosphere, as well as the air, the
water, and the soil so essential to life as we know and love it
on planet Earth.

On the Nature of Pests and Pest Control

What Is a Pest?

    God did not make pests.  Only man creates commercial or
aesthetic conditions where certain species become a nuisance to
man's  purposes.  Then man decides the species has become a pest.
 Agricultural ecosystems are artificial, and they need constant
maintenance (Madden et al., 1992).  Experts assure us that crop
pests are always present, always evolving, and always pose a
potential threat to specific crop or livestock enterprises.
Although the most prevalent image of an agricultural pest is
probably the voracious insect, damaging pests also take the form
of weeds, nematodes, plant and animal disease agents, and even
vertebrates such as rodents, and tigers -- even a deer can become
a pest when it eats man's precious crops.  And pests can cause
enormous losses.  For example, the monetary value of crop losses
caused by weeds is estimated to be more than a billion dollars
just in California.  And if you were to add up all the crop and
livestock losses and the costs incurred by all the world's
farmers in efforts to control all kinds of pests, it would be an
enormous sum -- according to man's economic perspective.

    But from a more holistic perspective, various plants, animals
and microbes become "pests" only when they cause economic,
health, or aesthetic problems for humans.  This occurs only at
particular times and places because of changes in population size
or in behavior patterns that result from natural or human-induced
alterations in the environment.  Therefore, no species, be it
wild or domestic, is inherently a pest.  Only man makes one of
God's creatures a pest.

    But from both a humanitarian and an ecological perspective,
man could sometimes be considered a "pest," especially when his
methods of farming, manufacturing, and disposing of waste cause
losses in human health, aesthetics, and financial well being.  So
when we consider ways to control agricultural pests, we should
bear in mind the precept of Hippocrates, the father of Western
medicine, when he said to physicians, "At least be harmless."

Synthetic Chemical Pesticides and Fertilizers

    Although it sometimes seems that synthetic chemical pesticides
and fertilizers have always been with us, in reality they have a
fairly brief history.  Highly toxic materials such as those based
on arsenic or lead had been used on high value crops since the
19th century, but the synthetic organic insecticides were not
developed until World War II.  Production of nitrogen fertilizers
increased at an explosive rate following the War, as munitions
factory capacity was re-tooled from making gunpowder to peacetime
uses.  In many places, heavy application of fertilizers has
compensated for the declining natural fertility of the soil,
often delaying the realization that erosion, compaction and other
soil illnesses have gone too far.  Once introduced, however, the
use of these chemicals increased rapidly, because they became
enormously profitable for their manufacturers and retail sales
firms, and for some farmers -- especially the early adopters who
reaped the monetary benefits of higher yields and reduced unit
costs of production, before markets became overloaded and the
prices of their crops fell sharply.

    Consumers began taking for granted that food should be cheap.
And as they diverted their former food dollars to the purchase of
appliances, automobiles, stylish clothing, cosmetics and other
consumer goods, the economy was energized by the advertizing
fantasy that happiness can be had through new and different
possessions and by accumulation of wealth.

    The cheapness of food, of course, has been an illusion,
because the full monetary, health, and environmental costs are
not included in the prices of the chemical inputs or the
resulting food products.  But from the short-term commercial
perspective of this year's bottom line profits, the effect of
pesticides on pest populations has often been immediate,
dramatic, and profitable.  Pesticides have been relatively easy
to obtain and use, and in most instances growers consider them to
be inexpensive in comparison to anticipated crop losses.
Environmental and health effects were considered non-existent at
first, but no longer.  Even today, scientists continue to
discover major health impacts of chemicals previously thought to
be safe.  We still no not know the full impact of chemical
agriculture.  Consequently, the full costs of pesticides have not
been included in the manufacturing or retail prices or passed on
to the pesticide users and to consumers of the food and fiber.
Sometimes farm workers and their offspring have paid an awesome
cost in illnesses, birth defects, and death, especially where the
obviously dangerous chemicals (such as the so-called dirty dozen)
are still used.  Populations who consume pesticide-contaminated
foods or drink contaminated water may be paying an even higher
aggregate penalty, but this too is not well understood by
science.  Tens of thousands of wild species including many forms
of wildlife have been destroyed or their populations reduced to
near extinction or beyond.

    Monoculture, the growing of single crops in huge fields,
plantations, and orchards, is largely enabled by synthetic
chemical pesticide and fertilizer application.  Biodiversity has
been devastated by monoculture as natural enemies of pests are
kept far from where they are most needed, thereby enhancing the
further dependence of agriculture on chemicals.

    Furthermore, synthetic chemical pesticides and fertilizers
have enhanced the financial economies of large scale agriculture.
Smaller growers often are squeezed out of farming.  The poor and
uneducated often face the tragic choice between rural poverty and
urban squalor.  The more fortunate ones may reap the benefits of
economic growth by getting better paying jobs elsewhere --
leaving behind depressed communities populated by people with
less marketable skills (NACRP, 1967).  Two inevitable results
have been the concentration of wealth and oligopolistic market
power in the hands of a few businesses, and impoverishment of
countless families and communities through greatly reduced food
self-sufficiency and economic stagnation.

    The chemical mystique that started in America spread rapidly
to other so-called developed nations and ultimately to the
grateful recipients of the "green revolution."  Scientists,
educators and public officials were convinced that chemical
agriculture would be the salvation of mankind, making famine and
hunger obsolete, and guaranteeing consumers a constant and
reliable source of low-cost and wholesome food.  In large
measure, for many years, this promise was fulfilled.  And we all
rejoiced.  All but a few obscure ecologists and wise farmers who
anticipated some of the impending disasters.

    What can we conclude from all of this?  Synthetic chemical
pesticides and fertilizers have been, at best, a very mixed
blessing.  They are credited with helping farmers to feed the
world's rapidly growing population.  But they have also enabled
some countries to produce enormous surpluses of certain
commodities and to export them to other places, simultaneously
making food cheap for consumers and unprofitable for local
growers.  While this process is lauded by economists as economic
growth, it has made entire countries more dependent on non-
renewable inputs and foreign sources of essential foods, and it
has done awesome damage to the environment and the health of the
people (Blair, 1992; Misch, 1994).  This, I contend, is not
sustainable.

    Meanwhile, farmers have often found themselves on a kind of
chemical treadmill, concerned about the adverse effects of the
chemicals, but unable to endure the financial risk of terminating
their use.

Biological Approaches to Pest Control

    Compared with synthetic chemical pesticides, biological
approaches to pest control have a much longer and more obscure
history.  The array of biological strategies used to control
pests fall roughly into four categories: (1) methods that employ
another organism as a control agent, (2) approaches that disrupt
natural behavioral patterns through applications of behavior-
modifying compounds (semiochemicals such as sex pheromones), (3)
the use of pest-resistant or pest-tolerant crops, and (4)
cultural practices that interfere with the normal life cycle of
the pests organisms.

    The most obvious difference between biological and chemical
approaches to pest management is their selectivity.  Most
conventional pesticides kill a broad spectrum of living things --
especially the earlier compounds such as chlorinated hydrocarbons
that are now so inexpensive and readily available in developing
nations.  Because biological approaches target specific
biological vulnerabilities of pest species, most nontarget
species and the rest of the environment remain largely or
completely unharmed.  As a result, the environmental and human
health objections to conventional chemical pesticides are not a
concern for biological approaches to pest control.

    Unlike synthetic chemical pesticides, biological strategies,
have a very long history, probably stretching back to the
beginnings of agriculture.  What is now known as "classical"
biological control (the deliberate introduction of natural
enemies to control a pest population) became well developed in
the late 19th century, with dramatic successes in California and
Australia.  Later it spread to many other locations, as former
students of the early biological control masters returned to
their native lands.  Hawaii has become the national leader in
biological control in the US.  Scores of pests have been totally
or largely controlled by classical methods.

With the advent of synthetic chemical pesticides, however,
biological approaches were often relegated to a second class
citizenship behind seemingly more sophisticated methods.  In the
1950s and 60s, they were displaced by chemical pesticides, and
more recently by molecular biology or genetic engineering.
Biological and ecological approaches are often perceived by
administrators, public officials, tenure committees and
competitive grants review committees to be slow, uncertain, and
lacking in methodological sophistication, as compared with
genetic engineering.  Consequently, the financial and moral
supports for biological approaches to pest control have
diminished to disastrously low levels in many of the reputed
advanced universities and other research organizations.

    As a direct result of these and related trends, much of the
scientific community largely ceased to develop and promote
adoption of alternatives to chemical-dependent agriculture.
Largely in reaction to this situation, the sustainable
agriculture movement began in the United States in the late
1980s.  I had the privilege of participating in the establishment
and operation of a national grants program that is often credited
with being an important catalyst in redirecting a small but
growing segment of the nation's agricultural research and
education resources toward the development of more sustainable
farming methods and systems in harmony with Nature.

The LISA, SARE and ACE Grants Programs

    During the past six years, I have assisted with the
development and administration of competitive grants programs in
the United States for the purpose of promoting sustainable
agriculture. The LISA program (Low-Input Sustainable Agriculture)
was started in 1988.  In 1990, Congress renamed it Sustainable
Agriculture Research and Education (SARE).  In 1991 SARE was
expanded to include the Agriculture in Concert with the
Environment (ACE) program, funded by USDA and EPA. Together the
SARE and ACE programs now provide about $7 million a year in
grants for research and education projects conducted by teams of
scientists, educators, farmers, and NGO (non-government
organization) representatives.  Between 1988 and 1993, a total of
290 grants have been given to LISA or SARE projects, and another
71 grants were given by the ACE program -- a total of some $28
million.

Partnership Philosophy of the Program

A key, fundamental principle has guided the development and
operation the SARE and ACE programs, and their predecessor, the
LISA program. This guiding principle is that the best way to
attain the goals of sustainable agriculture is to provide
producers with practical, profitable, site-specific and environ-
mentally sound methods and systems of production, in readily
useable form.  This approach calls for mission-oriented projects
featuring an integrated team approach linking farmers or ranchers
with scientists, educators, and representatives of various public
and private organizations.  Farmers and ranchers must be directly
involved with the scientists, educators and others in shaping
program priorities, reviewing proposals, designing and carrying
out projects, and evaluating the outcomes.  This philosophy has
been implemented for many years on a limited scope in some of the
so-called "third world" nations by some of the better development
programs. (See for example Chambers, 1989 and 1991).

    Guided by these philosophical principles, the goal of the SARE
and ACE programs is to enable the full spectrum of American farm-
ers and ranchers to move profitably toward production systems
compatible with the concept of Sustainable Agriculture.  The
objectives common to both the SARE and ACE program include:

-   Promote good stewardship of the nation's natural resources by
    providing site-specific and profitable sustainable farming and
    ranching methods that strengthen agricultural competitiveness;
    satisfy human food and fiber needs; maintain and enhance the
    quality and productivity of the soil; conserve soil, water,
    energy, natural resources, and fish and wildlife habitat;
    protect endangered species; and maintain and improve the
    quality of surface and ground water;

-   Protect the health and safety of persons involved in the food
    and farm system;

-   Enhance the quality of life for farmer/ ranchers and society
    as a whole, in part by increasing income and employment --
    especially profitable self-employment  opportunities in
    agriculture and rural communities.  Specifically, a major goal
    is to strengthen the family farm system of agriculture, a
    system characterized by small- and moderate-sized farms that
    are principally owner operated;

-   Promote crop, livestock, and enterprise diversification, and
    the well being of animals; and

-   Strengthen rural communities by creating economic conditions
    that foster locally-owned business and employment opportuni-
    ties.

Results of SARE and ACE Projects

    Descriptions and results of all 361 SARE and ACE grants
totalling about $28 million between 1988 and 1993 are summarized
in a series of four regional reports to the U.S. Congress (Brown
et al., 1993; Magdoff et al., 1993; Schlegel et al., 1993;, and
Waller et al., 1993)  More recent findings are added here to
illustrate the results of the SARE and ACE projects. These
results will appear in forthcoming reports to Congress, prepared
by myself and the four regional Communications Specialists for
the SARE program (Beth Holtzman, Lisa Brown Jasa, Gwen Roland,
and Kristen Kelleher).

Putting Waste to Work

    Matthew Fox observes that "One of the overwhelming sins of the
'First  World' is that of waste.  We are a civilization whose
major product is waste..." (1991, page 93).  One of the tenets of
sustainable agriculture is that waste must become a useful,
renewable input, replacing non-renewable resources and preserving
the ecological integrity of the Earth.  A three-year study under
the direction of Dr. Tina Teague of Arkansas State University is
finding that farms of all sizes can benefit from low-cost, local
agricultural waste products for soil enhancement.

    Waste by-products of the agricultural industry in the
Mississippi Delta -- animal manures, cotton gin trash, rice hulls
and composted fish products -- are being tested at the farm owned
by the Arkansas Land and Farm Development Corporation and on
commercial farms ranging in size from 72 acres to 2000 acres.
Pelletized poultry litter (PPL) with an NPK analysis of 4-4-4 was
applied on fields of cabbage, sweet potato, tomatoes, okra, basil
and collards that had been precision leveled for irrigation.
Precision leveling resulted in barren areas of disturbed soils
where the topsoil had been scraped off. Significant crop yield
increase was observed at the end of just one year. Collards that
received 750 pounds of PPL produced greater yields than control
plots receiving 60 pounds each of nitrogen, phosphorus, and
potassium commercial fertilizers applied prior to planting.
Spinach fertilized totally by PPL out-produced control fields of
spinach chemically fertilized according to commercial soil test
lab recommendations of N,P,K, and S. Zinnias grown for cut
flowers performed just as well on PPL as on standard commercial
fertilizers.

    A more recent component of the project, just getting underway
this year, has already found out that cotton gin trash must be
composted to prevent potential problems with weeds and plant
pathogenic organisms. In another new experiment at the University
of Arkansas Pine Bluff Aquaculture Research Station, wastes from
catfish and baitfish research are being composted and applied to
spring collards and summer peas. In fall 1993 the first trials
were installed for evaluating raw and composted rice hulls on
disturbed soils.

    The implications of utilizing local waste products as soil
enhancements will broaden economic horizons for limited-resource
farmers who predominate this agriculturally rich but financially
impoverished area. (Brown et al., 1993; project LS92-49)

Need for Appropriate Cultivars

    A project at Prairie View A & M University in Texas, led by
Hoover Carden and including three farmers, has found that corn
earworm losses in sweet corn can be controlled with little or no
insecticide, simply by selecting an insect-resistant cultivar.
The economic threshold beyond which insecticide application
becomes profitable is two percent damage.  Losses from corn
earworm ranging from one to nine percent were found among the 20
varieties tested.  Two varieties (Seneca Sentry and Jubilee) were
found to be naturally insect resistant, with damage below the
threshold levels.  The other varieties required up to 21
applications of insecticides. (Brown et al, 1993; project LS88-2)

Improving Vegetable Production Systems

    Agricultural engineers at the Ohio State University have
modified an undercutter that kills cover crops without
herbicides, better fitting the needs of producers implementing
sustainable agriculture practices.  The tool's forward blade
severs the cover's roots 2 to 3 inches below the soil surface.
Then a trailing roller compresses top-growth on the planting bed,
creating a mulch.  Researchers planted tomatoes through the
mulch, which helped conserve moisture and suppressed weed and
disease development.  This is part of an interdisciplinary
project led by Extension Specialist Mark Bennet at OSU. (Waller et
al., 1993; project LNC91-33)

    A study of 20 California farms led by Carol Shennan has found
that enhanced biological processes on organic farms compensated
for the absence of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides.
Researchers found that tomatoes grown on organic farms suffered
less root disease compared with those grown conventionally,
suggesting that organically managed soils suppress pathogens.
Organic farms also had higher and more diverse populations of
beneficial insects, and they achieved similar yields and insect
damage compared with conventional farms. Schlegel et al., 1993; 
project LW88-3)

Tropical Nemesis for Nematodes

    Crops of tomato, okra, squash, eggplant, peanut, cotton,
soybean and many other crops can be rapidly decimated by some
types of nematode.  Many farmers have come to rely on nematicides
to reduce nematode damage.  However, nematicides often
contaminate ground water and destroy beneficial soil organisms.
They are also very expensive.  Large commercial producers
consider them worth the money spent to control root-knot
nematodes on high-value crops. However, vegetable producers with
smaller operations often can't justify the financial investment
in nematicides, thus subjecting their crops to high risk from
nematode attack.

    A SARE project under the direction of a research team led by
D. W. Dickson from the University of Florida  and colleagues at
Auburn University is evaluating the use of alternative cropping
systems to reduce nematode populations. In trials on commercial
farms and at research stations in Florida and Alabama certain
tropical crops suppressed nematodes. Vegetable crops susceptible
to nematodes followed without being adversely affected by root-
knot disease. It is also possible that natural nematode
antagonists may be increased by some of the cropping systems,
thereby suppressing nematode population density for years. Crops
that showed particular effectiveness in the study were castor,
velvetbean, American jointvetch and sorghum-sudangrass. The
researchers suggest further study to evaluate additional cropping
sequences other than the ones explored in this project and to
determine why these crops are so suppressive to nematodes. They
also see a need to determine how to identify soils that are
naturally suppressive to nematodes so growers could avoid
unnecessary nematicide treatment. (Brown et al., 1993; project LS92-46)

Water Conservation and Minimal Pesticides for Cash Crops

    Tomato and pepper crops are major food crops in the U.S. and
the world.  In a three-year study, researchers in California and
Arizona aimed to reduce reliance on pesticides and conserve water
by managing the micro environment of plants:  by strictly
regulating soil moisture and applying plastic mulches.  This is
especially significant in California and other areas where water
use is and will be even more greatly restricted to preserve
wildlife, rivers and bays.  Project results on low-use watering
systems and plastic mulches are already being used and have been
adapted to cantaloupe production as well.

    Two very serious root diseases of tomatoes -- corky root and
Pythium root rot -- were reduced by the use of plastic mulches,
comparable in effect to fumigation with the pesticide
metham-sodium.  Plastic mulches, especially black colors,
significantly increased tomato and pepper yields.  The plastic
mulches moderated soil temperatures and maintained more even soil
moisture, both deterring the spread of diseases.  The mulches
controlled soil temperatures in different climates, allowing for
earlier crop plantings in some geographical areas.  Water
conservation was achieved by lowering the need for moisture.

    Researchers also found that some diseases were greatly reduced
by using the bacterial control agent Pseudomonas cepacia.  The
treatment was better for treating Pythium root rot than standard
synthetic chemicals. Another bacteria, Steptomyces, boosted
tomato yields.  This bacterial strain seems to induce resistance
to some soil diseases as well as some leaf diseases.  It was also
found that plant root health prevented insect attack on tomato
plant foliage. Schlegel et al., 1993; project LW89-13

"Trap Crops" Battle Pests and Bolster Yields

    Using natural enemies to battle pests is being studied by
University of Wyoming scientists who hope to control the cyst
nematode, a major blight to the state's most profitable crop, the
sugarbeet.  By integrating "trap crops" into sugarbeet cropping
rotations, researchers have seen up to 69 percent control of the
pest and increased crop yields of more than five tons per acre --
a 30 percent yield increase compared with aldicarb-treated plots.
Aldicarb is the prevalent chemical treatment for mitigating
nematodes.
    The trap crop method under study integrates radishes, which
are nematode-resistant, into crop rotations following malt
barley.  The radishes allow themselves to become hosts of the
parasite and then trap or stunt the pest's ability to flourish in
subsequent crops of sugarbeets.
    The estimated cost of growing trap crops was about $90 per
acre, which was more than offset by major increases in sugarbeet
yields.  A companion study of grazing lambs on trap crops
suggests that the cost of growing radishes, or another trap crop
of mustard, could also be offset by livestock enterprise profits.
    In addition to boosting profits through higher yields, this
cover crop method can mitigate soil erosion in a severely windy
area; help diversify farm enterprises; enrich soils that have
been farmed intensively for as long as fifty years; and reduce
the use of synthetic chemicals --protecting ground water and farm
worker health. Schlegel et al., 1993; project LW91-22

Sunflowers in North Dakota

    The weevil is one of the most serious threats to sunflower
production in the Great Plains, causing several million dollars
of damage annually.  Researchers led by Entomologist Gary Brewer
at the University of North Dakota testing the use of trap fields
for insect control in sunflower production were able to treat
only about 10 percent of their field area while protecting the
whole field from the seed weevil.  (Waller et al., 1993; project LNC91-
32)

Sustainable Potato Production:  Costs are Comparable; Benefits
are High

    A study of sustainable potato production systems on eight
farmer-owned sites in Idaho, led by Jeffrey Stark, is yielding
encouraging results.  Sudangrass green manure grown prior to
potatoes reduced Verticillium wilt by 60% and increased potato
yields by as much as 38% compared with fallow treatments.
Rapeseed (canola) green manure controlled weeds in subsequent
potato crops in fields with low to moderate weed populations.
This green manure crop also provided up to 80 percent control of
the plant parasite root-knot nematode.  Colorado potato beetle
was effectively controlled by a variety of alternative practices
including bacterial insecticides, biological control agents and
desiccants.  In addition, some green manure crops including
various combinations of alfalfa, pea, and oat provided sufficient
nitrogen to produce maximum yield and quality in a subsequent
potato crop.  Fertilizer replacement values for harvested legumes
and legume green manures ranged from 53 to 120 lb N/acre. (Schlegel
et al., 1993; project LW91-29)

Multiple Water Uses Expanding Farm Diversity

    Finding new uses for irrigated water and diversifying on-farm
products are key elements of a study led by Mary Olsen, based at
the University of Arizona.  Integrating plant and fish production
in the arid Southwest could benefit both the environment and
pocketbooks of regional farmers. Project researchers are
investigating the benefits and costs of multiple uses of water --
mostly irrigated water --by integrating fish farming with crop
production.

    One of the most promising areas for such systems is the
ornamental/landscaping industry.  In greenhouse studies, turf
grass grown with fish discharge water grew better than turf
irrigated with well water.  The best grass growth occurred with
combined applications of fish discharge water and fertilizer --
better growth than when fertilizer was used alone.  In 1993 field
studies, growth rates of mesquite trees significantly increased
when irrigated with water first used for tilapia fish production.
Tilapia fish had an 88.5 percent survival rate when grown in
conveyance ditches, showing that actual field irrigation ditches
can be used as culture ponds.

    When water was shared by a fish farmer and a cotton farmer at
one site, the cotton grower saved about $50 per acre in
irrigation costs.  In the same study of cotton grown with
discharge water, the need for added fertilizers dropped from 180
lbs. per acre to between 40 and 80 lbs. per acre -- a substantial
financial savings and significantly less use of farm chemicals.
Schlegel et al., 1993; project AW91-2

Biological Warfare on a Major Weed Pest

    The destructive weed jointed goatgrass is fast becoming a
threat to fall-planted small grains.  It now infests an estimated
five million acres nationally and is reducing growers' income by
$145 million annually.  Scientists at Washington State University
are pioneering a promising approach to biological control of this
weed by isolating and using soil bacteria to inhibit its growth.
This approach could significantly reduce production costs, the
need for chemical herbicides and tillage that promotes soil
erosion.  In greenhouse studies, four isolated bacteria reduced
grass growth from 30 to 70 percent.  In 1992-93 field tests, two
of the four tested bacteria effectively reduced the goatgrass.
Measurements in August, 1993, showed that above ground weed
growth was suppressed by 20 to 30 percent.  Bacteria was found to
be more effective when used with non-toxic doses of a synthetic
herbicide.  This biological control approach could reduce farm
costs, minimize dependence on pesticides and increase the use of
environmentally sound practices to prevent agricultural-related
pollution.
Schlegel et al., 1993; project AW91-5

Below-Label Rates of Herbicide Use

    Research under the direction of Ford Baldwin at the University
of Arkansas has demonstrated that soybean herbicide rates could
be reduced to a fraction of the rates on the herbicide label,
with no loss in weed control or crop yield.  In Baldwin's
program, herbicide costs have been reduced by 25 to 50 percent,
saving $5 to $10 per acre, with a corresponding reduction in the 
herbicide load in the environment.  Surveys indicate that approximately 
one-third of the Arkansas soybean producers have adopted this herbicide-
reduction technology, at a cost savings of $7 million annually.
Additional savings are being realized by growers in other states
where this technology is being adopted.  Baldwin is expanding his
research to further reduce herbicide application by another 75 to
80 percent, by applying the herbicide spray to only the very
narrow band of soil most in need of herbicide protection.

    Concepts developed for soybeans are being adapted for other
agronomic and horticultural crops (fruits, vegetables and
ornamentals). In horticultural crops, potential reductions in
herbicide inputs by 100,000 to 200,000 pounds per year could mean
cost savings potential of $2 to $3 million. More important than
the dollars saved, are the streams and rivers protected from run-
off that didn't happen. (Brown et al., 1993; project LS91-38)

Farmers and Scientists Partner on Long-term Research

    Farmers, in partnership with a broad-based team of scientists
led by Steve Temple at U.C. Davis, are taking the lead in
educational programs and the day-to-day management of a
twelve-year study in California. .  The project, now in its sixth
year, is comparing the effects of conventional, low-input
(minimal use of synthetic "inputs") and organic farming methods
on a variety of anchor California crops.
    University of California researchers report that crop yields
of processing tomatoes, safflower, beans and small grains were
essentially the same in 1993 across all methods. Low-input corn
and tomatoes -- which receive a mixture of organic and inorganic
fertilizers -- performed better or equal to crops raised
conventionally (with a high reliance on pesticides and other farm
chemicals).
    Soil fertility and weeds were the biggest constraints to
profitability in the organic system, according to scientists.  To
boost tomato yields, the primary cash crop in the rotation,
tomatoes were grown in the field from transplants instead of
seed, which increased yields in both low-input and organic
systems.
    Researchers say their results show that equal yields are
attainable in all types of production methods but costs in the
low-input and organic systems remain high.  For farm economic
health, profitability of the tomato crop must be maximized -- and
using tomato transplants is a promising way to increase yields.
Schlegel et al., 1993; project LW89-18

Soil Test Saves Nitrogen - and Money

     By adapting a soil nitrogen test to New Jersey conditions, a
team from Rutgers University Cooperative Extension and 30 farmers
have shown that corn growers can significantly cut nitrogen
fertilizer while maintaining yields.

    The test helps prevent over-application of fertilizer on
chemically fertilized or manured soils, reducing the chances of
groundwater contamination. The farmers who used the pre-sidedress
soil nitrate test (PSNT) cut nitrogen use by an average of 40
pounds per acre - a savings of $12 per acre. In some fields, the
team reports, farmers reduced nitrogen fertilizer rates from 150
pounds per acre to zero.

    Those reductions translate to benefits for both farmers and
the environment, reports project coordinator Joseph Heckman, soil
fertility specialist at Rutgers. All combined,  the 30 growers
involved in 1993 trials (on 1,720 acres) saved about $15,000 in
fertilizer costs. At the same time, they reduced the risk of
polluting groundwater by applying 25 tons less nitrogen
fertilizer than they would have without the test.  Widespread
adoption of PSNT by corn growers throughout the US and in other
countries could provide a major financial and ecological
improvement globally. (Magdoff et al., 1993; project ANE91.4)

Cover Crops Replacing Chemicals in California's Near Two Billion
Dollar Grape Industry

    With a total value of more than $1.7 billion annually,
California grapes are the leading crop grown in the state. Most
growers incur direct production costs by applying synthetic
pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers.  This on-farm research
project, led by University of California scientist Frank Zalom,
seeks to develop cost effective non-chemical alternatives to
manage vineyard pests, weeds and vine nutrition.  Use of a
self-seeding legume-grass cover crop is proving to be effective
at naturally controlling damaging insects and mites, and, when
cut and blown into vine rows, is also suppressing weeds.

    Findings to date show that cool season legume-grass cover
crops can control such crop pests as leafhoppers and spider
mites.  The presence of the cover crops seems to increase early
season activity of predatory mites, resulting in reduced spider
mite numbers.  Likewise, in vineyards that had suffered from pest
problems, cover crops were shown to reduce leafhopper
infestations as well.  The leafhopper reductions were due to
enhanced activity of leafhopper-egg parasites and some spiders --
natural enemies of the vineyard pest.  On-farm studies are also
showing that yearly accumulation of biomass in vine rows from
cover crops can provide adequate weed control so that herbicides
can be minimized. Schlegel et al., 1994; project LW91-26

Reduced-chemical Tree Fruits and Nuts

    A Michigan project led by James Flore at Michigan State is
studying the effects of reduced-chemical input production of
peaches has identified several options for growers to consider:
1)  the low-input system provided the same control as moderate
and conventional input for the tarnished plant bug; 2) weeds
could be controlled by using a straw mulch rather than a
herbicide; and 3) nitrogen rates could be reduced by half by
using drip application.  (Waller et al., 1993; project ANC91-9)

    There are 600,000 acres of intensively managed pecans in the
U.S. and thousands of additional acres receiving lower levels of
management. About 10,000,000 pounds of insecticide and 50,000,000
pounds of nitrogen are applied to pecan orchards.  An orchard
floor cover of legumes could reduce insecticide applications by
2/3 and eliminate commercial nitrogen applications, according to
a SARE project coordinated by Dr. Michael Smith of Oklahoma State
University.

    Orchard floor legumes can supply from 130 to 165 pounds of
nitrogen per acre (about $30 worth per acre) while simultaneously
reducing insecticide use.  Industry-wide, that could mean
production cost savings of $10,000,000 annually from aphid
control and decrease in crop loss.

    Based on results from three years of tests in commercial
orchards in Oklahoma and Georgia, investigators estimate that
legume ground cover could eliminate one to two pesticide
applications, reduce mowing costs plus supply the total nitrogen
requirement.  Even with the added costs for seed bed preparation
and seed, the net reduction in input costs amount to
approximately $20 to $40 per acre, with no decrease in yield.
(Brown et al, 1993; project LS91-36)

Sustainable Alternatives for Dairy and Livestock Farmers

    South Carolina dairy farmer Tom Trantham came up with the
notion of a year-round grazing program for his 80 Holsteins, when
he noticed that milk production jumps in April, the month with
the most abundant grazing. So now as part of a SARE project
through Clemson University, his herd grazes their way through
nine pastures per year, while neighboring herds stand around
feedlots eating silage. Are the grazers healthier, happier and
more productive than their fast-food neighbors? A few months into
the three-year project, Tom and project investigator Dr. Jean
Bertrand of Clemson University anticipate as much as a 25 percent
cut in feed costs. Additionally vet bills have dropped from an
average of $2,000 per month when the cattle were in total
confinement to less than $300 per month on the grazing program,
and most of that goes for reproductive services rather than
medical treatment.

    By switching from a total silage-based feeding program to a
no-till, no-herbicide, limited commercial fertilizer year-round
grazing system, Tom now spends most of his feed dollars in
planting 15-20 crops per year of early, mid and late cropping
sorghum, millet, rye, wheat and clovers. The cows graze wherever
their taste buds lead them on the pastures. At the end of three
years Tom will have documentation by which to measure herd
health, productivity and profit margin. (Brown et al., 1993; project
LS93-54)

    Intensively-managed rotational grazing has also been found to
be practical and profitable in the Northeast and Midwest.  At the
conclusion of the five-year project led by University of Vermont
scientist Bill Murphy,  farmers reported significant improvements
in farm profitability and farm family quality of life.  This
finding is very significant not only for the quality of life of
the participating farmers, but also for the long-term
sustainability of agriculture.  Unless young farmers and their
families can anticipate having both a decent income and enjoyable
work, they are likely to look elsewhere, and farming communities
will continue to empty out.  This project is documenting a
hopeful opportunity.  Economic analyses show average feed savings
of $233 per cow on well-managed pasture, compared to confinement
feeding. In related case studies, grazing also reduced labor by
up to 59 percent. Feed-study results suggest that cows on
productive pasture may consume up to 50 percent more grazing than
previously thought. If these findings are confirmed, they suggest
that farmers can further reduce supplemental rations and save
even more money.

    The project also developed and demonstrated an effective model
for grassroots diffusion of technology. Fifty Vermont dairy
farmers are participating in the project's Pasture User Support
Group Network. Monthly meetings and pasture walks give
participants a chance to share problems and solutions. Enterprise
analyses of eight of the farmers showed they increased profits
per hundredweight of milk by 71 percent during their first year
in the support group.  Farmers who have adopted intensively
managed rotational grazing report they now enjoy more time with
their families, and they experience less stress during forage
harvest season -- they say their quality of life has been
enhanced significantly. "By reducing production costs, feeding
dairy cows (and other livestock) on well-managed pasture can
increase farm profitability," says project coordinator William
Murphy, an agronomist at the University of Vermont.  (Magdoff et
al., 1993; project LNE88-02)

    Presently in the United States, approximately 50 percent of
the pesticides and 44 percent of the synthetic chemical
fertilizers are used in corn production.  A long-term project at
Virginia Tech has developed a cropping system that significantly
reduced herbicide, nitrogen fertilizer, and insecticide use on
corn -- with no loss of income.

    On-farm research in Virginia has shown that rye and hairy
vetch cover crops can substantially reduce nitrogen fertilizer
need and provide increased weed control in corn silage production
systems. Corn grown using vetch cover crops as a no-till mulch
required approximately one half the non-renewable energy input
compared with corn grown using the conventional practice of
applying 140 kg/ha (125 lbs per acre) of nitrogen supplied by
manufactured nitrogen fertilizer.  No-herbicide corn combined
with a modified strip-tillage practice produced comparable corn
silage yields to conventional methods that rely on herbicides for
killing cover crops and for weed control. For corn planted into
rye cover crops, banded herbicide application plus a single
cultivation with a no-till cultivator, produced corn yields
comparable to broadcast herbicides.

    Results also indicate that reduced chemical input systems
utilizing an increased integration of on-farm resources can
produce identical cattle weight gains with similar net profit,
but with a substantially reduced need for nitrogen fertilizer,
herbicides and insecticides. (Brown et al., 1993; projects LS88-8 and
LS91-37)

Closing Thoughts

    Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. observed, "The means by which we
live have outdistanced the ends for which we live.  Our
scientific power has outrun our spiritual power.  We have guided
missiles and misguided men." (The Green Bible, p. 56)

    As scientists, when we plan the strategy of our scientific
work, we must ask ourselves how our results will improve the
human condition and enhance stewardship of this wonderful but
fragile Earth.  Knowing that all of life is precious and
interrelated, let us resolve never lose that sense of wonderment,
of awe and of joy in discovering the marvelous beauty, the
delicate intricacies of Nature.  Much like the philosophy of
Buddhism and Hinduism, the native American Indians expressed a
wisdom and reverence for all of life and Nature.  For example,
140 years ago, a great leader among the American Indians, Chief
Seattle, said these words:

    The President in Washington sends word that he wishes to buy
    our land...

    If we sell you our land, you must remember that it is sacred.

    ...teach your children what we have taught our children.  That
    the Earth is our Mother.  What befalls the Earth befalls all
    the sons of Earth.

    ...the Earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the Earth.
    All things are connected like the blood that unites us all.
    Man did not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in
    it.  Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself. We love
    this earth as a newborn loves its mother's heartbeat.

    If we sell you our land, care for it as we have cared for it.
    Hold in your mind the memory of the land as it is when you
    receive it.  Preserve the land and the air and the rivers for
    your children's children.

    And love it as we have loved it.

    This we know:  There is only one God.  No man be he red man or
    white man can be apart.  We are brothers after all.

References

Blair, Aaron, An Overview of Potential Health Hazards Among
    Farmers From Use of Pesticides, Surgeon General's Conference
    on Agricultural Safety and Health, 1991.  Publ. No. 92-105,
    1992 National Institute for Safety and Healths Publication
    Dissemination, DSDITT, Cincinatti, Ohio, 45226. pages 229-242.

Brown, William H., Diane Jerkins, Jim Gershey, J. Patrick Madden,
    and Harry E. Wells, Southern Region 1993 SARE/ACE Report to
    Congress, June 29, 1993, 222 pages.*

Chambers, Robert. Farmer First. London: Intermediate Technology
    Publications, 1989.

Chambers, Robert. "To make the flip: strategies for working with
    undervalued resource agriculture" in Participatory Technology
    Development, ILEIA, International Centre for Low External and
    Sustainable Agriculture, the Netherlands, 1991.

Duvall, Bill and George Sessions. Deep Ecology Salt Lake City:
    Gibbs Smith Publ., 1985

Fox, Matthew. Creation Spirituality San Francisco: Harper, 1991.

Hull, Fritz. Earth and Spirit New York: The Continuum Publ. Co.,
    1993.

Madden, J. Patrick, Milton N. Schroth, Thomas C. Baker, Harold O.
    Carter, Donald L. Dahlsten, Howard Ferris, Mary Louise Flint,
    Richard H. McCapes, Michael L. Morrison, Michael K. Rust,
    Charles E. Turner, Patrick B. Vail, and Frank G. Zalom. Beyond
    Pesticides -- Biological Approaches to Pest Management in Cali-
    fornia.  University of California, Division of Agriculture and
    Natural Resources, 1992.

Magdoff, Frederick R., Beth Holtzman, Wendy Sue Harper, J. Patrick
    Madden, and Harry E. Wells, Northeast Region 1993 SARE/ACE
    Report to Congress, June 29, 1993, 225 pages.*

Misch, Ann, "Assessing Environmental Health Risks," pages 117-136
    in State of the World 1994, by Lester Brown et al.  New York:
    W.W. Norton and Co., 1994.

NACRP, the National Advisory Commission on Rural Poverty, The
    People Left Behind, Washington DC: Government Printing Office,
    1967.

Scharper, Stephen B. and Hilary Cunningham. The Green Bible New
    York: Orbis Books, 1993.

Schlegel, David E., Kristen Kelleher, J. Patrick Madden, and Harry
    E. Wells, Western Region 1993 SARE/ACE Report to Congress, June
    29, 1993, 180 pages.*

Swimme, Brian and Thomas Berry, The Universe Story. San Francisco:
    Harper, 1992.

Waller, Steve, Lisa Jasa, J. Patrick Madden, and Harry E. Wells,
    North Central Region 1993 SARE/ACE Report to Congress, June 29,
    1993, 213 pages.*
____________________________
*   For SARE reports: Publications Office, SARE Program, CSRS-USDA,
    Ag Box 2260, Washington, DC. 20250-2200.