These notes are from talks by Jim Guilliford on the EPA's regional perspective,  New farmer-controlled management systems and No- till practices

Peggy Murdock

Regional Perspective
Jim Guilliford US EPA Region VII Administrator

As he had at the Watershed Meeting in Oceola, Jim Guilliford talked Governor Whitman’s priorities for  the EPA, which are cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land.  They want to be able to measure results and form partnerships to work , collaboratively. There have to be innovations because budgets are tight.  She recognizes and supports funding for the watershed approach .

There is only twenty one million dollars for major projects across the region and they are developing criteria for the approach.  The EPA went out at 21 locations and talked about watersheds,  took input from the people there. Strong recommendations were given: to form a tribal watershed forum, launch a national media campaign on water and water quality initiatives asking what we can be doing.  We need to celebrate success. They want to build the capacity of local watershed groups, encourage and develop multi-stakeholder advocacy.

He asked if we can look at some of the larger challenges that we face, such as how our water quality fits into hypoxia. The EPA should be willing to invest money into states that can have cumulative effect. 

There are many opportunities to move forward.  He expects to start with public awareness and education, coordinating efforts.  They don’t want to minimize that need but don’t want to wait and do nothing.  The EPA is the nation’s environmental regulator but can support the kinds of things people want to do.

The EPA will have a physical presence, but their staff is small and region seven covers four states.  They are looking for ways to develop the partnership, holding meetings and talking about the role they will play as an agency.  They need to plan a strategy for agriculture.  They are there to learn what their priorities should be for agriculture.

This is not just an agriculture strategy although agriculture is the most dominant land use in this area. They would like to work with people on compliance using compliance assistance for value-added benefits.  They  don’t have enough people to do inspections and are looking for ways to get the most compliance out of the very few visits they can make.

www.epa.gov

State Perspective on Redefining Farmer Leadership in Natural Resource Management
Doug Lindgren, Iowa Soybean Association

The Soybean Association felt they needed to take a leadership role and became involved in the Raccoon River Project Association where they brought in Roger Wolf, who is now director for environmental affairs.

They are in the process of redefining farmer leadership in natural resource management as social expectations are increasing.  Agriculture is not in denial.  It recognizes the call to redefine its leadership role in improving environmental quality.

The new leadership model of a dynamic system that involves farmers in working with all the factors involved, for example, seed herbicide, and fertilization.  Focusing on a single component such as tillage practices is not an option.  You can’t deal with just nitrogen or  potassium or manure management, you  have to deal with everything as a whole.

Our Best Management Practices have been developed using research on small controlled plots with a single focus without taking the whole field dynamic into consideration. 

Farmers value the environment and most perceive that they are using the best management practices.  There is no incentive not to because increased spending on unneeded inputs doesn’t make sense. However, they can’t spend more money than they make. 

Farmers act ‘ information has come from agencies and institutions in the past.  They also learn from agribusiness, personal experience, neighbors, and farm publications.  Today farmers test the their performance of management practices themselves using global positioning systems and yield monitors.  They  test what they think they know and compare their performance with that of other farmers. This new approach is more than a directionally correct best management practice.  Farmers are gaining better understanding of actual performance and making adjustments as they learn about their own results.

Agencies and institutions are part of the process but have different roles. Advice will be considered and evaluated but not taken for granted.  This is a new leadership model, where farmers collect data, document performance and validate practices with components of the system. All resources will be tailored to the field.

The Iowa Soybean Association and IDALS are providing funding and assisting farmers.

One initiative includes farm projects that analyze nitrogen in an integrated farm and livestock management demonstration project analyzing nitrogen and the yield per acre.

Certified Environmental Management Systems for Agriculture is defining an environmental management system in which the farmer meets certain environmental objectives and improves his performance.  The framework of this program enables farmers to select and evaluate the best practices for application on their farm.  This approach offers the best chance of measurable success.  It depends on synergies and understands the value of partners to enable the farmer to build on his successes.


No Till
Jerry Crew, Soil and Water Conservation District Commissioner and farmer from Clay County.

With tillage there is a 5 ton loss of soil per acres.  With no till it is .1 ton an acre. No till eliminates sediment and is the silver bullet that previous speakers had said did not exist.

In the long term there is no more profitable system, however,  40% of Iowa farmers have never tried no till and John Deere has supported tillage practices.

Tillage takes up a farmer’s time.  In addition there are the costs  of fuel, the wear and tear on equipment and a ton of topsoil.  It buries crop residue, kills worms, dries up the soil and breaks up soil structure as well as making it easier for the soil to compact.

Non farmers can make it harder for farmers to use the no-till system by opposing the use of chemicals.  Roundup is one of the safest herbicides we have.  If you are opposed to chemicals you are opposed to no till. All farmers use chemicals and conventional farmers use more dangerous chemicals.  He opposes organic farming is because they use tillage.  He also opposes the labeling of goods as GMO and non GMO.  You have to use GMO seed in order to use no-till.

The Leopold Center and ISU have failed to promote no-till.  The NRCS has programs to stop erosion, but the only thing that prevents erosion is no-till. 

He concluded by saying that if you are anti GMO, pro organic and anti chemical, you are not a conservationist.