farmers - The Environment Report

Usda Kills Wildlife

USDA Wildlife Services Killed 90,000 Coyotes in 2007 (Photo courtesy of Michigan Department of Natural Resources)

More than a hundred environmental
organizations want the incoming head of
the US Department of Agriculture to stop
killing wildlife. The agency has an office
that kills wild animals to save livestock.
Jennifer Szweda Jordan has more:

Transcript

The Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club, and dozens of other groups signed on to a letter to Tom Vilsack. Vilsack is President-elect Obama’s pick for Agriculture Secretary. The environmental coalition is upset about the department’s Wildlife Services Agency. That agency removes or kills animals that threaten crops, farm animals, or cause other nuisances. Wildlife Services agents reported in 2007 that they killed more than two million animals, including 90-thousand coyotes, sometimes through poisoning.

Tom Vilsack did not return a call seeking comment about the letter.

The environmental groups say the poisonings and killings disrupt the balance of nature, and can leave persistent chemicals behind.

For The Environment Report, I’m Jennifer Szweda Jordan.

Growing Upward, Not Outward

Valcent's vertical farm has hundreds of clear plastic sheets holding pockets of plants. These hang from moving racks. (Photo courtesy of Valcent)

It takes a lot of land to grow
crops. There are concerns there won’t
be enough land to grow all the needed
food for the rapidly growing population.
That’s why some researchers and business
people are creating what they call
vertical farms. Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

On the outside, it looks like a big green house. Inside,
there’s an overhead conveyer system.

It looks kind of like a dry cleaner. Hanging from the moving
racks are hundreds of clear plastic sheets. Each has rows of
pockets. In each pocket, there’s a vegetable plant.

The conveyor moves them around to make sure the plants
get enough light, nutrients and water.

Glen Kertz is president of Valcent Products, which is building
its first commercial-scale vertical farm in Alberta, Canada –
where it can be expensive to truck in fresh produce.

“A couple of hundred years ago, they couldn’t get fresh
lettuce in the dead of winter. But do they want it today?
Yes.”

Kertz and others think we could vertical farm in cities in
skyscrapers.

But Kurtz says the farm’s heat, lighting and conveyor system
all run on fossil fuels and he wants to switch to renewable
energy.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Cranberries Burst Into New Markets

Cranberry harvest in New Jersey (Photo by Keith Weller, courtesy of the USDA)

One thing we can be thankful for
this Thanksgiving is cranberry relish.
After a sour decade of collapsing prices,
the industry has rebounded with a record
season. Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

One thing we can be thankful for
this Thanksgiving is cranberry relish.
After a sour decade of collapsing prices,
the industry has rebounded with a record
season. Julie Grant reports:

In the late 1990s, the market for cranberries started drying up. Americans didn’t
seem to crave the pucker of our native berry. Some years growers were getting as
little as 8 dollars a barrel and they didn’t know if they could stay in business much
longer.

Today, they’re getting as much as 150 dollars per barrel.

Dawn Gates-Allen is fourth generation cranberry grower on Cape Cod.

“It’s been ten years of suppressed grower return for the price per barrel.”

Prices are rebounding because cranberries have gained popularity as a healthful
fruit overseas. Europe and Japan have started importing a third of America’s
cranberry crop.

But even with that new demand, you shouldn’t see a big jump in prices at the
supermarket this year: the weather has been great for cranberries and there’s a
bumper crop.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Saving Nation’s Seed Supply

Multinational corporations started taking control of seeds around thirty years ago. Now, ten corporations own over half the world’s commodity seed supply. (Photo by Scott Bauer, courtesy of the USDA Agricultural Research Service)

Some small gardening businesses
are noticing more customers want organic
and heirloom seeds. Experts think that
trend might be important for the world.
Kinna Ohman reports they believe
those seeds might be the hope of future
food supplies:

Transcript

John Meshna points to a half empty rack of vegetable and flower seed packets in his
store.

“We’ve emptied this thing at least a half a dozen times this year. I thought maybe
we’d have a rush in the spring and that’d be the end of it. And it looks like it’s
going to be going through the winter.”

Meshna owns and runs DirtWorks – a green garden supply business in New Haven,
Vermont. He’s been selling organic and heirloom garden seeds for more than twenty
years. Heirloom seeds come from vegetables that have almost disappeared. And Meshna
thinks people want those types of seeds more and more because they’re worried about our
food supply.

“People call us just to make sure sometimes before they order, now, ‘these are really
organic seeds, right?’ Yeah, it says it right on the label. It’s gonna make you very
happy when you get that package.”

And it’s making certain experts happy too.

Hope Shand is the research director of Etcetera Group. It’s an organization that’s
concerned about corporate control of the food supply. Shand says when more home
gardeners and small farmers grow plants from organic and heirloom seeds, that helps
keep variety in the world’s food supply.

“This is an incredibly important service. People, gardeners, small farmers, urban
gardeners, are conserving, and saving seed diversity. No one else is really doing that
job.”

Hope Shand says multinational corporations started taking control of seeds around thirty
years ago. Now, Shand says, ten corporations own over half the world’s commodity seed
supply. And she thinks that’s risky.

“The seed is the first link in the food chain. Whoever controls the seed literally
controls the world’s food supply. We can’t afford to have the level of vulnerability
and dependence that that entails when we have a handful of multinational seed
companies controlling the world seed supply.”

(sound of watering)

“I’m growing greens without heat.”

At a small organic nursery in Hinesberg, Vermont, Julie Rubaud is one of those who
wants to get these seeds and plants to more people. For her, it’s not just preserving a
strain of a vegetable, it’s trying to match up those plants with the right gardener.

Rubaud grows close to eight hundred varieties of organic and heirloom plants for her
customers. She says that helps her connect people with the right plants for their gardens
and tastebuds.

“I always start out asking, ‘how much room do you have?’ And then I ask them
how they like to eat tomatoes. It’s nice to be able to cater everyone’s garden plan to
their individual needs because we have so many varieties.”

And if next year’s anything like last year, Rubaud will have at least forty varieties of
organic tomato plants ready for new gardens by next spring.

She wonders – with the economy the way it’s been – if one plant might do exceptionally
well.

“There’s Radiator Charlie’s Mortgage Lifter Tomatoes. Have you heard of that
one?” (laughs)

Radiator Charlie’s tomato has been around since the 1940s. You probably won’t find it
at the big-box discount-store gardening department. It’s one of those colorful, hardy,
productive plants that many people think will help bring back variety to our food supply.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

New Rules About Pharma-Crops

There is a concern that pharma-crops may contaminate food crops (Photo courtesy of the USDA)

The Bush Administration wants to
put new rules in place before its term
ends. Rebecca Williams reports one group
is worried about a proposed rule they say
could leave doors open for drugs in our food:

Transcript

The US Department of Agriculture recently proposed new rules about
genetically engineered crops. That includes crops grown to produce drugs.
It might be something like a human gene grown in rice, or a vaccine grown
in corn.

They’re being tested in the field now, and they’re often grown near regular
food crops.

Doug Gurian-Sherman is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He says
there’s not enough oversight in the new rules.

“If it does take off and these things are grown year after year and widely, I
think under these kind of regulations the chances for contamination will be
you know, very good.”

He says a couple years ago, a grain grown for pig vaccine got mixed into
normal grain. It was caught just before going to market.

But Gurian-Sherman says these genetically engineered crops should be
grown indoors to prevent contamination of food crops.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Fastest Blast in Nature

A botanist has documented what he’s
calling the “fastest flight in nature.” Tana
Weingartner explains:

Transcript

A botanist has documented what he’s
calling the “fastest flight in nature.” Tana
Weingartner explains:

Imagine this: a You-Tube video showing tulip-shaped fungi recoiling and
launching spores like wet cannonballs.

(sound of music)

Nicholas Money is a botanist at Miami University. He and a team of
researchers have used high speed cameras to capture, for the first time, fungi
launching spores.

“Fleas accelerate at 200 g, but we’re clocking these fungi moving at close to 200,000
g in terms of their acceleration. These are astonishingly fast movements.”

Fungi cause billions of dollars in crop damage each year.

Money says knowing how these spores move around can help prevent these
losses. He also says it’ll help allergen and pharmaceutical researchers too.

For The Environment Report, I’m Tana Weingartner.

Can Cow Hormones Help the Environment?

One environmentalist is arguing that hormones in cows may actually be better for the environment (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

The cow hormone known as rBST or rBGH
has taken a beating in the environmental community.
Injecting the hormone into cows makes them produce
more milk. But some people are afraid the hormone
can find its way from the cow, to the cow’s milk,
and into our bodies. The government insists that’s
not the case. Shawn Allee says one researcher
wants to change the debate about rBST – and convince
environmentalists to support the hormone:

Transcript

Before I introduce you to the researcher who supports rbst or rbgh, I want
you to understand what she’s up against.

It’s well-meaning people like Steve Parkes.

Parkes co-owns New Leaf natural food store in Chicago. He decides what’s
on the shelves.

“A lot goes into making that decision. First and foremost, is it something
I would eat myself?”

And as for milk produced with rbgh, Parkes won’t sell it.

“People have been drinking milk for thousands of years from animals
that didn’t have have rgbh in them, so, I think I’m a little more
comfortable drinking milk from a cow that didn’t have rgbh than I am
from something that is a very, very new technology.”

A lot of people distrust rbgh, and that’s changed the milk market.
For example, some retailers like Starbucks won’t buy milk from dairies that
use it. More and more dairies are asking farmers to pledge not to use the
hormone.

The trend has frustrated researcher Judith Capper.

“People aren’t questioning the science basis of it.”

Capper is with Cornell University. She argues environmentalists and
consumers should take another look at the hormone, and see it as part of the
solution to global warming.

Capper recently co-wrote a study that began with a simple observation – in a
few decades, there will be many more Americans.

“The US population will have gone up from about 300 million people to
377 million people and we wanted to look at the environment impact of
producing enough milk to feed all those people.”

That scares Capper – because producing milk can make the global warming
problem worse.

That’s because feeding cows, and the cows themselves, lead to more
greenhouse gas emissions.

“Okay, there are six major inputs and outputs in terms of carbon.”

I won’t go through six, but here are a few.

First, there’s the feed that cows eat. Tractors have to plant grain. That burns
fossil fuels. Greenhouse gasses. Then feed is trucked to the dairy farm.
More greenhouse gasses. More cows, more greenhouse gasses.

So, you want as much milk as possible from each cow.

“If you give rbst to a cow, it will produce an extra ten pounds per day,
that’s quite an increase.”

And then there’s the other greenhouse gasses. From, um, the ugly end of the
cow equation.

The manure puts off other potent greenhouse gasses. And Cows belch
methane. Cows that use rbst poop and belch, spare the atmosphere even
more carbon.

All this leads Capper to a startling conclusion.

She says if farmers gave a million cows the hormone –

“Using rbst would be like taking about 400,000 cars off the road, or
planting three hundred million trees. Those are really big numbers.”

Judith Capper says she expects scientists will challenge her research – and
she welcomes a good debate about rbgh and rbst.

She says that’s better than this vague idea that the hormone might somehow
be bad without understanding the whole story.

“Choose organic, choose rbst-free, whatever, but base it on facts and
science, not on consumer perceptions that may not be factually correct.”

But, Capper’s got her work cut out for her.

Government statistics show consumer fear about rbgh has made farmers cut
the percentage of cows injected with the hormone.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Cellulosic Ethanol Breaks Ground

Getting fuel from plants like corn
and sugar cane is not that efficient. That’s
why researchers are working on so-called
cellulosic biofuels. The process turns things
like corn stalks, wood chips, and grasses into
fuel. As Mark Brush reports, some new
cellulosic refineries are breaking ground:

Transcript

The new refineries are being built with money from the federal government. The hope is
to perfect a fuel source that a) doesn’t come from food, and b) is much more efficient
than corn-based ethanol.

The problem is it’s hard to get at the sugars inside the
plants. But the payback could be big. For every one unit of energy going in,
cellulosic ethanol could spit out about five to ten units of energy.

Brian Davidson is with the BioEnergy Science Center. He says industry officials are
hopeful, but he thinks these new refineries are just a first step.

“They believe that those technologies will be more widely applicable, but I actually
believe that we’re going to need further technology improvements to go from these first
few handful of plants, handful of bio-refineries, to make them widespread.”

Davidson says scientists still have not perfected ways to break down the plants in a
cost-effective way.

For The Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Growing Grass for Ethanol

Eric Rund raises corn and soy on his Illinois farm but is experimenting with 'Miscanthus x giganteus', a hybrid grass that could become a major feedstock for cellulosic ethanol - if the market ever matures. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
Stephen John is an agronomist with the Agricultural Watershed Institute, which is helping the area around Decatur, Illinois cut down on soil erosion and fertilizer pollution; he believes perennial grasses such as miscanthus may be part of the solution. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
Gary Letterly dips his hand into a hopper of miscanthus pellets in the furnace room of his University of Illinois Extension Service office in Taylorville, Illinois. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
These pellets were produced from miscanthus grown in Illinois; they're fed into a modified corn furnace to heat office space. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
This furnace was originally built to burn pelletized corn, but Gary Letterly had an Illinois manufacturer modify it to burn miscanthus pellets; corn and grass (miscanthus and other grasses such as switchgrass) produce different amounts of ash when burned. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

The US is in the middle of an
ethanol revolution, or at least it’s
supposed to be. Scientists want to
develop ethanol that doesn’t use corn
– so food prices won’t go up. They’ve
found a tall grass called miscanthus that
can produce loads of ethanol – but they
haven’t perfected it yet. Shawn Allee reports some are trying to grow
miscanthus before the ethanol revolution
arrives:

Transcript

You won’t find much miscanthus near Decatur, Illinois.

Nope. Corn is crop number one.

But all this corn-growing has a downside.

Agronomist Stephen John offers to show it to me.

Shawn Allee: “Where are we?”

Stephan John: “Well, we’re near the upper end of Lake Decatur, looking across at
the city’s dredge. Right now that dredge that is sucking up sediment from the lake
bottom.”

John says corn can leave ground bare, and rain washes dirt and fertilizer pollution into
this lake.

“Some of that nitrogen gets into streams and ditches into Lake Decatur, which had
to develop a facility to protect drinking water.”

John wants farmers to protect soil from erosion and use less fertilizer.

One option is to grow grasses that hold soil and use less nitrogen. One candidate is that
miscanthus grass the ethanol industry’s interested in.

Problem is, no one buys miscanthus yet.

“So, the trick is how do you make it economically viable to get those grasses onto the
land, how do you make that attractive?”

John says people are working on that problem.

Farmer Eric Rund stands near a patch of miscanthus grass. He’s a pretty tall guy, but the
grass is even taller.

Shawn Allee: “I’m putting my hand through here.”

Eric Rund: “It’s like a jungle in there, it’s like bamboo growth or something.”

Rund says corn farmers get kinda freaked out by miscanthus. It doesn’t grow from seed,
and unlike corn, it takes years to produce.

He says farmers need to experiment with it.

“And if we do that now, when ethanol production comes along, we will then have a
reliable source of biomass for the ethanol plant.”

Rund says some farmers would grow miscanthus just to protect water and soil. But to
make it mainstream, it’s gotta be profitable.

“That’s the key. No farmer’s going to plant much of it unless there’s a market for it
and there’s no market for it unless there’s a steady supply of it, so the two are going
to have to grow together.”

But what if that takes a while for the ethanol industry to come knocking? Who would use
Rund’s miscanthus?

I meet a guy who’s working on a solution.

Gary Letterly: “What would you like to do, where would you like to start?”

Shawn Allee: “I want to see your furnace.”

I’m with Gary Letterly. He works with the University of Illinois.

He says in corn country, some people heat their homes with corn pellets.
That gave him an idea on how to heat his office.

“And what you see here, it was a corn furnace, and we thought it would be just
great if we could use that furnace and burn grass pellets.

Right next to the modified furnace, there’s a plastic hopper full of miscanthus pellets.

They look like rabbit or hamster food, and they smell like grass.

“Look at high energy costs. This was very competitive with natural gas, and the very
nice thing is being able to keep this value very close to home. The grass was
produced within fifteen miles, the furnaces were produced within five miles, and the
grass was processed into a pellet within 30 miles.”

Letterly says miscanthus offers enough local economic and environmental benefits that
people should look into it now.

It already has potential to be a kind of super-star plant, with or without help from an
ethanol industry may never come.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Recycling on the Farm

Steve Mohoney (left), of the Clinton County Soil & Water Conservation District, gives dairy farmer Dale Tetreault his first look at "Bigfoot". (Photo by David Sommerstein)

Over the last 30 years, plastics
have become indispensable on America’s
farms. They save farmers time and money.
The problem is agricultural plastics are
filling up landfills. In some places,
farmers actually burn the plastic. That
releases dangerous chemicals into the air.
David Sommerstein reports
on a new effort to bale plastics and recycle
them:

Transcript

Farmers must have been paying attention when Dustin Hoffman got that
famous piece of advice in ‘The Graduate’.

“I just want to say one word to you, just one word.”

“Yes, sir?”

“ Are you listening?”

“Yes, sir, I am.”

“Plastics.”

Plastics are all over the farm today. Plastic greenhouse covers. White sheets
to wrap hay bales. Black plastic feed troughs.

(sound of moving troughs)

Dale Tetreault shakes a tall pile of the feed troughs on his dairy farm in
northern New York State.

“They’re a hard plastic and they hold molasses and minerals.”

Tetreault says the plastics are handy – essential, really – to keep feed fresh
for his 500 cows. But the material’s hard to re-use because it gets dirty and
tears easily.

So Tetreault’s left with a decision – spend a thousand dollars a year to truck
them to the landfill. Or burn them, polluting the air and water.

“Yeah, exactly, I mean, we’re not talking about some light piece of plastic
here. We’re talking about heavy duty plastic.”

A new machine is giving Tetrault a third alternative. It goes by the name of
Bigfoot.

(sound of motor starting up)

Bigfoot is a portable hydraulic press. It crushes used plastic and ties it up
in bales.

“Quite an interesting contraption, that’s for sure.”

Tetreault’s been saving up used farm plastics for a couple months for this
test run.

“Alright, we ready to try this?”

That’s Steve Mahoney, a farm educator with the local soil and water
conservation district. He bought Bigfoot with a $35,000 state grant.

(sound of engine running)

Mahoney and some farmhands stuff dirty plastic sheets into the baler, then
Bigfoot crushes it down. That makes room for more.

(crushing sound)

“Okay, so go on back up.”

Mahoney teaches the farmhands how to run Bigfoot. With the help of the
local farm extension office, he’s baled plastics at nine farms so far. He
wants all of the area’s farmers to share Bigfoot, to keep plastics out of the
landfill or burn pile.

“It’s an obvious problem on the farms. It’s necessary, but the disposal of it
is a problem.”

The big plan is to recycle the plastic. Mahoney’s coordinating with a
recycling firm in Minnesota to pick up 40,000 pounds of plastic bales. They
could be made into plastic lumber or shingles or road filler.

The thing is, there isn’t much of a market for low-grade, dirty plastic right
now. Lois Levitan directs New York’s Ag Plastics Recycling Project at
Cornell University. She says as fuel costs rise and more farmers bale their
plastic, that might change.

“Markets want to know that there’s a certain quantity of product at a
certain level of quantity and they’re going to become increasingly interested
when they know there’s a steady stream.”

(sound of Bigfoot machine popping out a bale)

“Ok, that’s it, that’s the finished product.”

Steve Mahoney presses a button and out pops a thousand pound bale of
plastic. Farmhand Lennie Merculdi brushes his hands.

“Put it this way, trying to put it in a dumpster, to the barn, and never having
enough room for the garbage, that’s not good either. What’s a few minutes?
You get rid of the plastic, it’s convenient, you tie it up and away it goes.”

For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Tag: farmers

Usda Kills Wildlife

Transcript

Related Links

Growing Upward, Not Outward

Transcript

Related Links

Cranberries Burst Into New Markets

Transcript

Related Links

Saving Nation’s Seed Supply

Transcript

Related Links

New Rules About Pharma-Crops

Transcript

Related Links

Fastest Blast in Nature

Transcript

Related Links

Can Cow Hormones Help the Environment?

Transcript

Related Links

Cellulosic Ethanol Breaks Ground

Transcript

Related Links

Growing Grass for Ethanol

Transcript

Related Links

Recycling on the Farm

Transcript

Related Links