Contact: George Boody, LSP, 651-653-0618; gboody@landstewardshipproject.org
Bruce Vondracek, USGS, 612-624-8748; bvondrac@umn.edu
Patrick Welle, Economist, Bemidji State U., 218-755-3873: pwelle@bemidjistate.edu

1/27/05
Farming systems that rely on perennial plant systems such as grass and hay while incorporating dairy cows and other livestock could significantly improve Minnesota’s water quality, according to a new modeling study of two watersheds in the state.

The results of the study (http://www.landstewardshipproject.org/
mba/Multifunc_Jan05_BioSc.pdf) appear in the January issue of the journal BioScience. It found that on hilly land, replacing row crops such as corn and soybeans with grass, hay and diverse crop rotations could significantly reduce sedimentation, pollution runoff and flooding. It also found that through policy changes, benefits could be attained at little additional cost to taxpayers while benefiting farmers financially.

“These results show the positive benefits of getting more dairy cows out on the land eating perennial plants like grass and hay,” said George Boody, Executive Director of the Land Stewardship Project and one of the authors of the study. “But farmers need to be given specific incentives and support for making transitions into such systems.”

The “Multiple Benefits of Agriculture” analysis was conducted over a three-year period in southeast Minnesota's Wells Creek watershed, and a sub-watershed of the Chippewa River, in western Minnesota. Biologists, economists and rural sociologists from the U.S. Geological Survey, University of Minnesota, Minnesota State University-Mankato, Bemidji State University and Iowa State University conducted the study. The Land Stewardship Project coordinated the research; the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy also participated in the analysis.

Four scenarios were examined in the watersheds, ranging from continuing current trends of fewer farms raising increasing acres of row crops, to converting a significant number of acres to grass and forage-based farming and utilizing other perennial systems such as wetlands. Under this last scenario, sediment levels in the waters of Wells Creek and the Chippewa River dropped 84 percent and 49 percent respectively. Nitrogen in the water, which can be a major pollution problem, plummeted by 74 percent in Wells Creek and 62 percent in the Chippewa under that scenario. These environmental benefits occurred even as the number of dairy cattle was increased from 5,427 to 12,212 in Wells Creek, and 271 to 911 in the Chippewa sub-watershed study areas, under the scenarios.

“This study shows a direct correlation between getting more year-round plant cover on the land and improved water quality and fish health in the streams,” said Bruce Vondracek, a co-author of the BioScience paper and an aquatic biologist at the U.S. Geological Survey’s Minnesota Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. “It also shows these benefits can be gotten on working farmland—permanently removing livestock and idling acres near streams isn’t the only way to improve water quality.”

The profitability of farmers in the watersheds rose as the diversity of their farming systems increased, according to the study. In general, pasture operations have lower production costs when compared to row cropping systems, and sales of livestock products can increase income. Under the scenario utilizing the most diverse plant systems, significantly fewer acres were planted to corn and soybeans, so government commodity payments for these row crops dropped. Even though government payments for enrolling farmland in the Conservation Reserve Program increased under this scenario, the overall taxpayer cost was lower because of the decrease in commodity payments.

And the public is willing to pay farmers who protect and enhance the state’s water and wildlife habitat, according to the study. Multiple Benefits of Agriculture researchers conducted a random statewide mail survey in which they asked what people were willing to pay farmers for a 50 percent reduction in soil erosion and a 50 percent increase in wildlife habitat, among other benefits. On average, the 394 respondents said they were willing to pay $201 annually per household for such positive results.

Boody said transitions into farming systems that incorporate more year-around plant cover and diverse crop rotations are not likely to take place without changes in federal commodity policies that currently penalize Minnesota farmers for not planting corn and soybeans. On the state level, the study showed that providing information on alternative production systems such as managed rotational grazing was key if farmers were to make such transitions. Information gathered by the researchers showed the need for institutions to provide more information on alternative marketing and transitioning to diversified farming systems.

“Although not part of the study, the results support the expansion of successful educational programs like the University of Minnesota’s Alternative Swine Program and its farmer-to-farmer hoop groups to include dairy and other livestock,” said Boody.

-30-

EDITORS: For charts in pdf format showing the relationship between perennial plant cover and water quality, visit http://www.landstewardshipproject.org/mba/water_qlty_chrts.pdf. For a complete copy of the BioScience paper, “Multifunctional Agriculture in the United States,” visit http://www.landstewardshipproject.org/mba/Multifunc_Jan05_BioSc.pdf.