The Biodiversity Crisis in the Red River Valley
Background and Solutions
Staff Discussion Document -- Not for Publication
Mark Ritchie, President
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy -- August 11, 2000
The Red River Valley on Minnesota and North Dakota is in its seventh year of financial disaster. A combination of extreme weather and devastating diseases has lowered yields by 25% while crop prices have reached historic lows. This three-sided assault -- weather, disease and low prices -- is putting family farmers out of business at record levels. Net farm income levels were down 62% between 1996 and 1997.[1]
The reasons for the weather difficulties are hard to say with 100% certainty, but many scientists believe that human induced climate changes are taking place causing unpredictable and chaotic shifts in temperature and moisture patterns. Long-term we have to do something about climate change, but nothing can be done in the short-term that can help moderate the weather.
The reasons for the low crop prices are multiple and varied. While the issue of how to get farm prices back up to remunerative levels is extremely important, it is not the subject of this paper. Like climate change, there is little that can be done in the short term to address this problem, given the current political climate.
While problems with weather and low prices are central, Red River Valley farmers could solve them tomorrow and still find themselves going out of business due to the most difficult challenge they face, nearly 7 years of seemingly intractable plant diseases. Starting in 1991, wheat scab (fusarium head blight) has devastated crop yields causing $428 million dollars in crop losses from 1991 to 1997.[2] The consensus among scientists, extension agents, farmers, and crop breeders is that this disease is directly related to the lack of crop diversity and plant biodiversity. Only two crops, wheat and barley, make up over 60% of the planted acres.[3] Encouraged by various government programs and university extension programs to abandon other crops, farmers in this region are now at risk of losing their farms and livelihoods as a result of this narrowing of the biodiversity.
This article looks at the current biological diversity and cropping patterns in the Red River Valley and the resulting problems related to diseases. It then considers the three major solutions proffered -- abandonment of farming in the region, a biotechnological "silver bullet", and the conscious re-introduction of diverse cropping systems. The final section of this paper explores a specific approach, often referred to as multifunctional agriculture, as a potential holistic approach to the full-range of problems -- weather, price, and disease -- threatening Red River Valley farmers.
The Crisis in the Valley
The origins of the outbreak of wheat scab in the early 1990s are not clear, but it quickly became a major problem. A number of factors led to ideal conditions for the scab to spread excessive moisture and humidity and poor soil drainage. With the local farming system designed primarily for wheat and barley (along with sugar beets) there were few alternative crops to introduce into the system that could have broken the cycle of this scab disease. As a result, overall production and per acre productivity are down by 25% on average. An emergency Plant Diversity Task Force was created that included over 60 key plant breeders, farm and commodity group leaders, agronomists, and policymakers from all over Minnesota. It’s stated mission is as follows:
"The Plant Diversity Initiative will be a comprehensive statewide effort to identify and develop new or modified plant germplasm for economic and environmental benefits. The effort will be carried out on a region basis, guided by active community input. The effort will focus on developing germplasm that can be utilized in precision landscape management, leading to agriculture, forestry, and natural resource management system that will increase rural economic viability, promote soak and water conservation, enhance quality of the rural environment, and lead to a more diversity, production and aesthetically appealing rural landscape."[4]
In one of their first documents, entitle "Pending Failure of Cropping Systems Based on Economy of Scale, Professor Don Wyse of the University of Minnesota summarize the problem this way.
"Pest of cropping systems are evolving faster than agricultural sciences ability to develop the technology necessary for protection. Currently, cropping systems in Minnesota and the world contain less biological diversity than at any other time in human history. Cropping systems with limited diversity (i.e. chemical, tillage, crop, etc.) enhance the rate of evolution of crop pests to a level they cannot be managed with available technology or with technology that could be developed in the near future. Cropping systems with limited diversity that rely mainly on public supported plant breeding programs, with limited financial resources are at the greatest risk. (spring wheat, winter wheat, barley, and oats). Agro-ecosystems with limited diversity have low economic, environmental and social stability. Crops and crop varieties introduced into agro-ecosystems with low diversity have limited durability in the system. Soon after introduction, the crops will be forced out of the agro-ecosystem because one or more pest problems will develop that cannot be managed. This will cause economic and social instability in the agro-ecosystem."[5]
As these two documents point out, the consensus on the cause being lack of diversity in the cropping system was strongly supported and well articulated. In the minutes of the Plant Diversity Working Group Meeting on January 12, 1998 they described the need to address the problems through a number of initiatives, including the need to "explain how and why we got to the current situation where we have reduced diversity". This Task Force also stated that "our current agricultural cropping systems have less biological diversity than at any time in history. The cause is continued simplification of farming leading to the production of a few crops over large acreages. In is increasingly clear simplified farming is causing crisis in rural Minnesota."[6]
Working Landscapes and Multifunctional Agriculture: Restoring Diversity and Resilience
The intensity of the financial and biodiversity crisis in the Red River Valley has created an urgency to seek out and test potential solutions. Some advocate the abandonment of farming altogether and the gradual de-population of the region as the most viable option, a strategy often referred to as the "buffalo commons".
Others believe that a huge investment in biotechnological research on the specific diseases that are most threatening, might possibly extend the life of the current cropping system another ten to twenty years. For example, in the April 1998 edition of Prairie Grains Journal, in an important article entitled "Biotechnology: The Next Revolution in Agriculture?" explores the idea that "for what and barley, it may be the clinching weapon against scab".[7] The article explores the difficulty in finding a solution through this approach, and predicts that this will not happen in the near-term. This article also covers some of the public and scientific concerns with biotech. Author Tracy Sayler describes U.S. Department of Agriculture what geneticist Bob Busch’s concerns about the growing trend towards secrecy and patenting in this way. "The patenting of genes and transgenics is a real concern, as germplasm exchange and the sharing of result to advance research knowledge is becoming threatened." While there is much controversy over the safety and appropriateness of biotechnological approaches, there is little debate over the significant cost and length of time that this approach will take. It is not considered a viable solution for the current generation of farmers.
Occupying the middle ground between abandoning the region and hoping for a technological fix are those who believe that this region can solve both short-term plant disease problems and find long-term economic solutions by shifting the patterns of farming.
Transforming Farming Systems in the Red River Valley
Many people are actively promoting various individual components of a comprehensive approach. For example, State of Minnesota Agriculture Commissioner Gene Hugoson argues that the only practical solution for getting more crop diversity in the region is Red River Valley is to "bringing livestock back into the area."[8] The Plant Diversity Task Force argued that "A sustainable agriculture is needed for the long-term viability of our society"[9] The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy believes that a comprehensive approach that brings together all of these elements into a overall ecosystem perspective, an approach we often call multifunctional agriculture, is a practical solution able to foster the kinds of economic, ecological and social transformations needed for long-term diversity and resilience.
IATP, in partnership with a wide range of public and private agencies, is developing a comprehensive plan for this kind of biological and economic diversity-based approach. Our work rests on four main principles. First, there must a broadly agreed upon plan. Without a plan and broad endorsement nothing can happen.
Second, the crisis is so great it will take a concentrated effort. All agencies of government, private non-profits, community organizations and institutions, and businesses need to concentrate their resources and make an extraordinary effort in this region. More of the same will not be enough to make a difference.
Third, old ways of thinking and doing will not do. Rules and regulations that have tended to box farmers into a few ways of operating or which restrict the assistance that an agency can provide to a narrow range of options need to be suspended or made flexible.
Fourth, the transformation needs to be based on the principles of economic and ecological modernization. While our knowledge is no where near perfect, we do know a lot about what works and what doesn’t over the long-term. For example, we know that commodity production, meaning large volumes of undifferentiated crops, is clearly the least profitable approach to farming. We also know that adding value through identity preservation, direct marketing, and processing are approaches that can transform some family farms into economically sustainable operations.
Starting from these principles, a five-step approach should be developed:
I believe that over the next ten years, if these measures were adopted, we could achieve significant improvements in net farm income, crop yields, water quality protection, diversification of crops and livestock, soil erosion reduction, and overall biodiversity in the Red River Valley.
1 Koo, Won W.,Richard D. Taylor, Andrew L. Swenson, D.Demcey Johnson, and George K. Flaskenrud. "Shortfalls in 1997 Net Farm Income in North Dakota." Agricultural Economics Report No. 394. Department of Agricultural Economics, North Dakota Sate University. Fargo, North Dakota, May 1998.
2 Johnson, D. Demcey, George K. Flaskerud, Richard D. Taylor, Vidyashankara Satyanarayana. "Economic Impacts of Fusarium Head Blight in Wheat." Agricultural Economics Report No. 396. Department of Agricultural Economic, North Dakota Sate University. Fargo, North Dakota, June 1998.
3 Hunst, Michael and George Howse, Minnesota Agricultural Statistics, 1997. Minnesota Agricultural Statistic Service. St. Paul, Minnesota, July 1997.
4 "Plant Diversity Initiative: Enhancing Economic and Environmental Stability of Rural Landscapes" University of Minnesota, Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture.
5 "Pending Failure of Cropping System Based on Economy of Scale" Dr. Don Wyse, Department of Agronomy and Plant Sciences, University of Minnesota, ST. Paul, Minnesota.
6 Plant Diversity Task Force Report, as cited in Sustainable Agriculture, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Volume 6, Issue 5, May 1998.
7 "Biotechnology: The Next Revolution in Agriculture?" Prairie Grains, Tracy Sayler, April 1998, p.25.
8 "House Panel OKs $8.5 Million in Farm Aid" Minneapolis Star and Tribune, April 6, 1998.
9 Plant Diversity Task Force Report, as cited in Sustainable Agriculture, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Volume 6, Issue 5, May 1998.