Year: 2000

Some researchers are beginning to believe farmers could produce cropsmore cheaply if they get back to nature. They think some insects foundin the wild and even some weeds could help. The Great Lakes RadioConsortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Some researchers are beginning to believe farmers could produce crops more cheaply if they get back to nature. And they think some insects found in the wild and even some weeds could help. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.

Just 20 years ago it was common to see farmers or some young kids they hired
cutting weeds out of soybean fields. It was a point of pride to have a clean
field- nothing but the crop.

“I am one of those older farmers that grew up with the idea that
you shouldn’t have a weed in the field.”

Tom Guthrie farms nearly 800 acres in southwestern Michigan.

“If you had a weed in the field, that was competition and that
was going to lessen the number of dollars that ended up on your bottom line.
But, we didn’t at that time understand the relationship among all systems.
And the weeds and the insects and so forth are part of those systems.”

Guthrie says farmers are now beginning to understand that they can’t just
rely on chemical fertilizers and pesticides to replace nature. At least not
without some harm to the environment. That’s why he has been watching with
some interest the research going on just a few miles from his farm.

Michigan State University’s Kellogg Biological Station is trying to find out
whether farmers could benefit more from some of the things in nature. They
already know that pollinators such as bees and butterflies, as well as
microbes in the soil are all needed to help crops grow well. But the
researchers are learning that there are a lot more connections between the
natural world and growing crops. Kay Gross is a plant ecologist at the
biological station. She says researchers are finding crops grown near
natural areas are helped in other ways.

“Because those hedgerows, old fields, and woodlots often provide
habitat for the beneficial insects that can serve as predators against pests
in agricultural systems.”

Gross says there are lots of examples. For instance lady bugs, or what some
people call ladybird beetles, eat aphids, a pest that damages soybeans. A
wasp that lives along the edge of timber destroys the European corn borer,
which is a major pest in corn fields. Without the natural areas where many
of these bugs live. Gross says farmers have to rely more on chemical
insecticides.

Gross says weeds also can help. low growing ground cover can help retain
nitrogen in the fields and help reduce soil erosion. Gross says the trick is
to find the kinds of plants that will help farm crops- not compete with
them.

“I mean, ideally you could come up with a crop rotation, tillage
management system that would get only the best out of the weed community and
none of the negatives. That may not be possible.”

Researchers say they’re just beginning to understand the inter-relationships
between nature and growing food. Finding a balance that makes economic sense
will take a lot more study.

Phil Robertson is one of the project leaders at the Kellogg Biological
Station. He says there might soon be a day when farmers leave a patch of
weeds in the center of the field, or leave strips of natural areas to take
advantage of nature’s resources.

“At this point it’s too early to make specific recommendations
other than the generalization that diversity at some level is likely to be
very beneficial and will likely save producers money over the long haul.
But, as to how much diversity is needed, how much diversity is desirable,
that question still awaits further information from studies such as the one
being conducted here.”

Robertson says unfortunately, farmers might have hurt their prospects in
recent years in an effort to become more productive. Many farmers cleared
away fence-rows and timber areas to make it easier to use much bigger
tractors and implements. The idea was to get more crops planted and
harvested to meet the demands of new world markets.

“Well, it’s very likely there’s has been a cost to removing
those fence-rows and removing that landscape complexity that we don’t yet
fully understand. But, certainly we know that maintaining the diversity of
the surrounding landscape will improve the ability of that landscape to help
provide services to the cropping system.”

Farmers who visit the biological station are intrigued. After a lifetime of
viewing bugs and weeds as pests to kill, farmer Tom Guthrie says it will
probably be the next generation of farmers who actually turn back to nature.
Not the ones who’ve already spent a good portion of their lives
hand-chopping and tilling weeds out of the fields.
For the GLRC, this is Lester Graham.

A growing number of farmers in the Midwest are turning to more humaneand natural ways to raise animals in an attempt to save their smallfarms. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

A growing number of farmers in the Midwest are turning to more humane and
natural ways to raise animals in an attempt to save their small farms. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports.

Some hog farmers are trying to preserve their way of life by raising animals that can be sold in health food stores and at high end restaurants. Theresa Carbrey of the Iowa based Pioneer Co-op Organic Foods company says she is seeing an increase in meat providers who are trying to serve this markets to avoid losing out to large, corporate farms.

“I think the persons that are interested in more naturally raised meats,
like those persons who are interested in crops that are produced without chemicals and pesticides, are a real market, and they answer a concern that the small operators have, and that’s how to stay in business.”

Carbrey says meat that is raised without chemicals, and in more humane and natural ways is a growing business. She says it can also serve multiple purposes of treating animals better, growing safer food, and saving small family farms. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

Corporate farms are causing havoc for many small livestock farmers inthe Midwest. It’s hard for the smaller producers to compete with theirmuch larger neighbors. So rather than compete, some farmers are lookingfor ways to become different, like adopting more humane methods ofraising animals. For those who do, they see it as a way to save thefamily farm, and preserve a special way of life. The Great Lakes RadioConsortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

Corporate farms are causing havoc for many small livestock farmers in the Great Lakes region. It’s hard for the smaller producers to compete with their much larger neighbors. So rather than compete, some farmers are looking for ways to become different, like adopting more humane methods of raising animals. For those who do, they see it as a way to save the family farm, and preserve a special way of life. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports.

(ambient sound — at the pig farm)

About two hundred pigs are running around in a large outdoor pen on a farm in
Peoria County, Illinois. Half of the area is covered with a Quonset hut type roof and a mesh tarp. The other half is open, and the floor of the pen is covered with straw. This is the old way to raise hogs. The way farmers once did it before the development of indoor steel and concrete pens that make up factory style farms. Steve Christy owns this farm, and makes a living as an independent farmer. He is one of the last independent hog farmers in the county. Christy says he survives by not competing with the big companies.

“We play a different game. Because we are catering to a certain crowd of people and we know who our buyers are.”

Christy says he was on the verge of losing his farm to a large agriculture company until he found a new way to compete. Some of the hogs he raises are certified as organic. That means he meets strict standards for the care of those pigs. And he doesn’t use any chemicals to raise them. The rest of his animals are raised in what is called a humane and natural way. Some chemicals, such as pesticides may be used in their feed, but the pigs are not confined in tiny pens throughout their lives. Instead, they can wander the farm and lead more natural lives until they go to slaughter. Christy says all this makes his
pig’s meat more tender. And when he takes them to market, he only sells the best parts of the animals. Between using only higher quality cuts of meat and the way the animals are raised, this product is being sold for two to three times as much at health food stores and high-end restaurants. While organic and natural farming methods have long been a way for small crop farmers to stay in business, raising meat this way is just now getting more attention. Theresa Carbrey is with the Pioneer Co-op, an organic foods company based in Iowa City. She says increasing the number of organic and humane livestock producers will lead to safer food and the preservation of more family farms.

“We’re seeing the decimation of the small producers. They simply can’t compete. But this niche marketing gives them an opportunity, and it’s something a small operation can do better. In fact a large operation, I don’t know if they really could do it — giving the individual care to animals, attentiveness to all these little details, that real people on modest operations can do very, very well.”

Tom Garrett is with the Animal Welfare Institute, a Washington D-C based animal rights activist group. He says the group encourages small livestock farmers to practice humane and organic farming techniques because the animals are treated better. But he also says having small farmers focus on the market for humanely raised animals can be a financially realistic way to help preserve the way of life on family farms around the world.

“It can work economically, especially in the E-U, as the E-U Market opens up. Because right now today the overall organic market in the European Union is about ten times as large as it is in the United States.”

Garrett says an increasing number of people in the United States and Europe are
becoming more concerned about where their food comes from. Hog Farmer Steve
Christy agrees. He says he thinks consumers are also willing to pay a premium price for quality meats that come from more natural farming practices.

“I call it the evolution of the food industry. I think people are going to be more concerned about what they eat as time goes on here, and want to know where it came from. In combination with that, they are getting tired of buying poor meat at the store and having to throw a lot of it away.”

While farmers are pursuing organic and natural food markets to save their farms, the issue of quality may be more important in the long run to the businesses involved. Lori Janssen is the Quality Manager at Niman Ranch, a company that specializes in meat from humanely raised animals.

“If you don’t have good quality pork, no one is going to want it. Even if
somebody is eating it because they’re saving the family farmer, if it’s not tastier than the eraser on your pencil, they are not going to come back and buy it.”

Janssen says while producing quality meat, it’s an added benefit that this style of farming can lead to more humane treatment of animals, protect the environment, and perhaps even save some small, independent family farms. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

It used to be that horsepower, lots of chrome and cool colors soldcars. But now, automakers are using something different to market theirproducts: the environment. For the first time, they’re competing overwho’s the most green. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Halpertfiled this report:

Transcript

It used to be that horsepower, lots of chrome and cool
colors sold cars. But now, automakers are using something different to
market their products: the environment. For the first time, they’re competing
over who’s the most green. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie
Halpert filed this report.

“Introducing the new Silverado. It’s bigger. It’s more
powerful. It’s the truck from Chevrolet.”

This ad, with men working in a foundry, plays to the size and strength
of the General Motors truck. For years, car companies have succeeded in
luring customers by ascribing macho characteristics to their vehicles. But
now, they’re trying a new tactic. This ad, by Honda, takes place in a car
wash.

“The 75 Civic was the first in Honda’s line of clean cars.
Today, more than 88% of our cars are low emission vehicles. We’re planning
for tomorrow with our zero emission fuel cell vehicle. Is it any wonder
Honda was recently named the cleanest car company in the world?”

A few years ago, if you tried to plug the environmental attributes of a
car, buyers wouldn’t bite. But now, with gas prices near all-time highs,
consumer pocketbooks are being hit hard by driving big cars. And at least
some are feeling guilty about causing pollution. So automakers are
responding — trying to make their cars greener. Or at least they’re saying
they are.

In July, Ford Motor Company pledged to produce the cleanest sport
utility vehicle by 2003. Ford’s Neil Golitely says the time is ripe for
marketing on the environment.

“I think you’re seeing it more and more. In some of our
corporate advertising, for example, we’re kind of pointing to our seriousness
about environmental issues.”

After Ford’s environmental announcement, other automakers also
started trumpeting their accomplishments.

“We think our record stands on its own and it’s hard to
see anyone in front of us in terms of our environmental performance as a
company across the board.”

That’s Denny Manano, chief environmental officer for General
Motors. He says that GM wanted to make clear that it takes no back seat to
Ford on the environment.

“All we did was quite simply indicate that our
performance in model to model comparison in the SUV area and the truck
area already led the industry. That means that the plan we put in place not
this year, but the plans we put in place in 96, in 97 has led to products out
there that are the lead in fuel economy in product by product comparisons.”

Japanese automakers, though, were among the first to bring out the
heavy environmental artillery. For many years, they’ve been trumpeting their
environmental innovations. Toyota’s Michael Love says those innovations
have led to real results. He says his company is a leader in meeting federal
fuel economy requirements, known as CAFE.

“We’ve had better fuel economy for a multitude of
reasons for a long time. We’ve never had a problem complying with the
CAFÉ standards, and right now our fuel economy is roughly where Ford
says they want to take theirs in 2004.”

Still, some are worried that automakers are more flash than sizzle, that
saying you’re green doesn’t necessarily mean you are. Jason Grumet is with a
group of northeast state regulators. He said automakers need to stop focus on
changing current technology, which is limited. Instead, they should begin
thinking more about dramatic changes that could bring huge environmental
benefits.

“So I think the notion that we are going to have more
than incremental change, but actually a revolutionary change, in the ability
to propel ourselves around, seems to me is what’s going to be necessary in
the long-term.”

But car manufacturers say that kind of radical change could be
spurred on by the current fierce advertising competition over the
environment. And automotive analyst David Cole says it’s not just the
advertising that will do it. He says that automakers will provide the cleanest
cars because consumers are finally demanding them.

“It’s really nice to see them, in a sense, competing on the
basis of improving fuel economy and reducing emissions versus who can
build the largest, least fuel efficient vehicle and I think it’s one dimension of the transformation that the industry is going through right now.”

Automakers say they are ready to race each other on the environment.
And Ford’s Neil Golitely says the competition carries big benefits.

“We’re quite pleased with the competition, the fact that
other companies feel the need to sort of one up one another on the
environmental front is, quite frankly, good for the industry and it’s good for
society and it’s good for the customers.”

Meanwhile, with all the environmental consciousness raising,
consumers should expect to see many more green ads in the coming months.
For The Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Halpert.

Ford Motor Company chairman William Clay Ford, Jr. largely has his nameto thank for his quick rise to the top. But after just two years on thejob, he’s decided to take on a challenging mission: improving theenvironment while making cars people will buy. Can Ford carry out thisplan while leading a profitable company? The Great Lakes RadioConsortium’s Julie Halpert reports:

Transcript

Ford Motor Company chairman William Clay Ford, Jr.
largely has his name to thank for his quick rise to the top. But after just two
years on the job, he’s decided to take on a challenging mission: improving
the environment while making cars people will buy. Can Ford carry out this
plan while leading a profitable company? The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Julie Halpert reports.

In 1970, the nation’s cities faced a severe air pollution problem. So
Congress passed the Clean Air Act that, in part, tightened standards on auto
exhaust. Car makers said those standards couldn’t be met, yet they were
quickly able to do so. Still, over the next twenty years, automakers
consistently fought new pollution and fuel economy standards as costly. And
every time, they complied with the rules without breaking the bank.
With this kind of track record, it’s not hard to see why domestic
automakers have a credibility problem when it comes to environmental
issues.

But now, Ford Motor Company is trying to set itself apart. Bill Ford
has declared his intent to address all types of pollution coming from cars.
For instance, he decided to tackle the controversial subject of global
warming in a recent speech to environmentalists in London.

“What role should the business community play in
addressing this issue? Well, there’s no doubt that business was overly
cautious — some may even say obstructionist — in its initial reaction.
Whatever reasons there were, and however genuinely felt they were, I
believe now there is more than enough evidence to warrant an immediate
and comprehensive — and considered response.”

Ford’s statement was shocking, since the auto companies typically
have fought initiatives to curb global warming. But it should not has come as
a surprise, because when Bill Ford took the reins of his company, he
announced his plan to make Ford the most environmentally friendly
automaker. So far, he appears to be trying to do just that. He’s promoting
efficient, clean manufacturing. He hopes to make redesign of Ford’s 80-year-
old Rouge manufacturing plant in Dearborn, Michigan, a shining example.

“We think this is a terrific opportunity to transform the
icon of 20th century manufacturing into a model of 21st century sustainable
manufacturing. The new Ford Rouge Center will be a world-class center of
lean and environmentally sensitive manufacturing.”

Ford also is targeting big polluting sport utility vehicles as part of his
environmental mission. He recently announced plans for the first mass
produced SUV to get 40 miles to the gallon. That was a pleasant surprise to
Dan Becker. Becker is with the Sierra Club. He was impressed when Ford
included in its stockholder report a Sierra Club quote calling the Ford
Expedition a rolling monument to environmental destruction.

“The first step in changing your behavior is recognizing
the problem with the behavior. So that when Ford admitted their SUVs were
unsafe and polluted too much, that was a first step that had to come before
they began to change them.”

Ford has pledged to increase fuel economy in sport utility vehicles by
25% over the next five years. But while Becker heralds that development,
others are more suspicious. Jason Grumet directs a group of northeast state
regulators. He believes the company is merely trying to head off criticism of
SUVs while maintaining their share of the market for the gas-guzzling
vehicles.

“They don’t want SUVs to become the fur coats of the
next decade so they’re trying to take some modest steps within the
boundaries of big internal combustion engines to be able to suggest a
corporate ethos of environmental concern.”

But federal regulators say that Ford’s actions shouldn’t be taken for
granted. The EPA’s Bob Perciasepe says that Ford is headed in the right
direction.

“Every little bit helps. We have to take the first step
toward making the existing cars that we use more fuel efficient, while we’re
investing money in newer technologies that will do even better.”

Others applaud Ford for trying to clean up the SUV market.
Automotive analyst David Cole says that Ford can’t simply turn its back on
the popular vehicles.

“You look at Bill Ford and he is absolutely a sincere
environmentalist. There’s no question about that in my mind and at the same
time he is a sincere business person that recognizes that his company, if it’s
going to be able to do what he wants to do over the long term, has to be very
profitable.”

Cole says those SUV profits could then fund ongoing research into
new environmentally friendly technologies.
But the question remains: will such changes be good for Ford’s bottom
line?

David Andrea, chief economist of CSM Worldwide, thinks Ford can
generate profits. He says the effort to reduce pollution in manufacturing, in
particular, could save money.

“If you view any type of pollution as a waste and waste
as a cost, it’s in perfect alignment with continually improving your cost
structure and your bottom line.”

Andrea says that Wall Street will naturally be keeping tabs on the
company’s stock price. Similarly, EPA and environmentalists plan to keep a
close eye on Bill Ford to make sure he lives up to his fuel economy
promises, in particular. EPA will have the chance to measure Ford’s success
when the company unveils its high mileage Escape, due in 2003. For The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Halpert.