Search

Using Prairie Filter Strips to Protect Wisconsin Water

Submitted by omardkm on Thu, 01/24/2019 - 13:09

WASHINGTON COUNTY, Wis. – Prairies of the past could be a modern conservation tool for Wisconsin farmers. 

Native prairie plants can act as a sponge and slow soil runoff from rain. Research from Iowa State University shows planting dense, diverse and deep-rooted prairie strips next to corn and soybean fields has environmental benefits.  

Sand County Foundation is working with six farmers to demonstrate how prairie strips work on Wisconsin farms of varying soil types, typographies and management styles. 

Filtrating rain, soil sediment and nutrients across a narrow strip of prairie keeps soil on the field and out of waterways. Or as farmer Ross Bishop puts it, “The goal is to stop chocolate milk from leaving the farm.” 

For Bishop, one of two project participants from Washington County, ‘chocolate milk’ is rainwater that washes off his rolling fields located just a half hour’s drive from downtown Milwaukee. The Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District is supportive of preventing sediment and phosphorus in farm runoff from reaching the Milwaukee River and Lake Michigan, in lieu of water treatment plant updates.  

Bishop belongs to a voluntary group of farmers working to improve soil health and water quality in the Cedar Creek watershed. Several similar farmer-led groups have formed in Wisconsin with state funding to prevent and reduce runoff from fields. 

As a long-time advocate of no-till farming practices, Bishop does not plow farmland in order to reduce erosion and improve soil health. He’s also an advocate of technology that precisely determines which portions of a field are prone to erosion and the least productive. 

In some cases, the sites best suited to filter runoff are also the least profitable for growing crops. It’s that trade off that Sand County Foundation hopes will convince other farmers to plant prairie filter strips.   

“The prairie strip concept is designed to integrate the prairie into the farm system in a manner that meets the farm’s operational and environmental goals,” said Greg Olson, Sand County Foundation’s Field Projects Director. 

Iowa State University’s research shows phosphorus and sediment loss can be reduced by 90 percent when just 10 percent of unproductive cropland is converted to stiff-stemmed, deep-rooted grasses and forbs.

In addition to improving water quality, prairie filter strips can work double duty by providing food and habitat for insect pollinators, monarch caterpillars, and other wildlife. This dual benefit is why the Southeast Wisconsin Chapter of Pheasants Forever has provided assistance for prairie plantings at the Washington County farms of Bishop, and Dan Stoffel. 

With technical assistance from Sand County Foundation staff, Stoffel has planted four prairie strips. At 25 feet in width the strips were designed with modern farm machinery in mind. 

“Our goal is to fit this perennial conservation practice conveniently within annual row crop operations,” said Craig Ficenec, Sand County Foundation Program Director. 

“It’ll be interesting to see how it turns out,” said Stoffel, who began his career as a biochemist before farming with his brothers Lee and Tim. 

Stoffel located his prairie strips on a hillside in the Town of Kewaskum, separating a hilltop hay field from soybeans below. He learned there’s an art to mixing prairie seeds. Some contain more pollinator-friendly varieties, and all must reflect the region’s hardiness zone. Adding oats provides fast ground cover to compete against weeds. 

Prairies take time to get established, but over time the native plants crowd out weeds and reseed themselves. It requires mowing in the first couple of years to control weeds, and an occasional controlled burn thereafter. Stoffel said mowing the strips doesn’t take long. His biggest initial concern was the threat of attracting invasive weeds. However, he’s found it easy to walk through the strips and pull any offending weeds by hand. 

Stoffel’s ancestors began farming in Wisconsin in the 1880s. He credits his father with being an agricultural innovator, as an early adopter of no-till practices and having one of Wisconsin’s first dairy milking parlors. With prairie strips, he may find himself on the cusp of a conservation breakthrough. 

Sand County Foundation’s prairie filter strip project is supported by the North Central Region Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education (SARE) program, University of Wisconsin’s Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems, and Valley Stewardship Network. For more, visit: https://sandcountyfoundation.o...

Farm Bill Politics May Prove Devastating to the Environment

Submitted by omardkm on Wed, 02/27/2019 - 14:05

Every five years Congress passes a comprehensive bill that sets food and agriculture policy for the nation. When the current bill expires on September 30, Congress may not be able to get another one passed. Power struggles between the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have put the bill in jeopardy. A big loser could be the environment.

Although the lion’s share of the farm bill goes to farm subsidies and food stamps that are politically popular in the heartland, these bills are also the single, largest source of funding for conservation on private U.S. land. The 2008 bill, which expired in 2012, allocated $24 billion to conservation measures. Last year Congress passed a stopgap bill that did not include any new conservation spending. Unless the conservation provisions are restored, the environmental impact will be dramatic: Little will be grown in the Midwest besides grain crops. Hayfields, grasslands, wetlands and forests will continue to disappear. Air and surface water quality will continue to decline and biodiversity will be lost. Soil degradation will continue at an even faster pace, and dust bowl conditions are likely to return. Farm bill conservation measures mitigate the unintended effects of industrial farming, which in the long term helps farmers themselves and all Americans in general.

Two conservation provisions are especially important to restore: The first is funding for programs such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Environmental Quality Incentives Program and Conservation Reserve Program that encourage landowners to plant perennial vegetation on farmland, which can reduce the environmental impact of farming on surrounding land and its residents as well as on the farms themselves. A portfolio of perennials is available, including native grasses, wildflowers, nonnative grasses, shrubs and trees, all of which perform important ecological functions that crops cannot, such as holding soil in place, removing carbon from the atmosphere, cleaning water, slowing runoff, providing natural pest control and creating habitat for pollinators and wildlife.

A growing body of evidence indicates that just a small amount of perennials can provide substantial benefits. The STRIPS study at Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge, for example, has shown that planting only 10 percent of farm fields with strips of perennial prairie vegetation results in 95 percent less sediment runoff and 90 percent less nitrogen and phosphorus runoff, as well as a 380 percent increase in native plant diversity and a 130 percent increase in native bird abundance. Farm bill conservation dollars can reduce the cost of this practice by 85 percent, making it affordable for farmers and a good public benefit for the taxpayer buck. Without a bill that has conservation provisions, these practices will quickly wither.

The second important provision is conservation compliance. Beginning in 1985 the farm bill required farmers to follow a conservation plan in order to remain eligible for assistance through federal agricultural programs. For example, farmers had to employ approved soil conservation practices on farmland prone to erosion and had to refrain from draining wetlands to plant crops. Most farmers agree that conservation compliance is a reasonable trade for federal assistance. Yet the mandate has never been fully enforced and some factions in the House prefer to eliminate it, which would degrade the land, water and biodiversity we—farmers included—all depend on. The House should follow the Senate’s lead in requiring conservation compliance to receive federal assistance, including crop insurance.

The House seems to be the sticking point. The Senate had passed a farm bill in late 2012 and again on June 10, but in both cases the gridlocked House defeated similar legislation. Failure to pass a new comprehensive bill will most likely kill conservation funding altogether. A new bill for just the conservation measures could be readily defeated. Conservation funds are only about 5 percent of the overall farm bill (the 2008 bill allocated $300 billion but actual expenditures were about $401 billion). They should be reinstated because they play a critical role in safeguarding soil, protecting air and drinking water, and providing habitat for wildlife—including native pollinators—as well as space for outdoor recreation. They also prevent farmers from planting every last acre of the Midwest with crops, at the expense of the environment.

Pages