Conservation Agriculture: “Next Green Revolution”

(ENS)-Intensive land cultivation methods using tractors and plows are a major cause of severe soil loss and land degradation in many developing countries, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said recently. If farmers apply ecologically sound cultivation, that is, if they use low-tillage methods, millions of hectares of agricultural land can be saved from degradation and erosion, the organization said. Particularly in warmer areas, where the topsoil layer is thin, conventional tillage contributes to soil loss. Land degradation also occurs in industrialized countries due to excessive mechanized tillage using powerful heavy machines.

At the opening of the World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, which took place recently in Madrid, an FAO representative said: “The way soils are cultivated today needs to be changed. For agriculture to be sustainable, economically attractive and socially acceptable, it must successfully exploit the productive potential of those crop and animal genetic resources which are best adapted to the local environment. This is achieved by effectively and efficiently using available natural resources without depleting them.”

Applying so-called “Conservation Agriculture” means that farmers drastically reduce tillage and keep a protective soil cover of leaves, stems and stalks from the previous crop. This cover shields the soil surface from heat, wind and rain, keeps the soils cooler and reduces moisture loss by evaporation. Less tillage also means lower fuel and labor costs, and fewer purchases of heavy machinery, the FAO said. Crop rotation over several seasons is essential to minimize the outbreak of pests and diseases, the group cautioned.

Globally, conservation agriculture is now being practiced on about 58 million hectares of land, from the tropics almost to the Arctic Circle. The nations with the most land in ecologically sound cultivation include the US, Brazil, Argentina, Canada and Paraguay. The system has been adapted for grain crops and pulses, and also for sugar cane, vegetables, potatoes, beets, cassava and fruits.

Farmers living in four Asian countries, Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan, are taking up low till agriculture in such numbers that scientists say the impact in the region could be as great as the Green Revolution of the 1970s.

The success of the approach comes at an opportune time, given recent water scarcity across Asia and a three-year drought in Pakistan that threatens the region’s rice and wheat yields. The transformation in farming is largely the result of pioneering agricultural research and promotional work begun in the region by the Mexico based CIMMYT.

Said professor Timothy Reeves, director general of CIMMYT, “To feed soaring populations, farmers must increasingly use more fertilizer, water, and herbicides to get the same or greater crop yields from their land. Low till agriculture enables them to increase their productivity while at the same time decreasing, not increasing, these inputs. This new agricultural revolution in South Asia is poised to be a greener revolution than the one that took place in the 1970s.”

“The message that no tillage reduces input costs, benefits soil quality and reduces erosion and environmental pollution, is beginning to be embraced by farmers worldwide,” the FAO said. For the farmer, conservation farming is attractive because it reduces production costs, time and labor. Soil tillage is the single most energy consuming and air polluting operation among all farming activities. By not tilling the soil, farmers can save between 30 and 40 percent of time, labor and fuel costs compared to conventional cropping.

In many areas it has been observed after some years of conservation farming, natural springs that had disappeared started to flow again, the FAO said. Water filters easily through soils under conservation agriculture, increasing the groundwater level, reducing surface runoff and thus soil erosion.

“Conservation Agriculture reaches yields comparable with modern intensive agriculture but in a sustainable way,” the FAO stressed. “Yields tend to increase over the years with yield variations decreasing.”

Conservation agriculture is not organic farming, but both could be combined, the FAO emphasized. In conservation agriculture, farm chemicals, including fertilizer and herbicides may still be applied, but over the years, the quantities used tend to decline. The FAO has been promoting conservation farming for more than ten years, particularly in Latin America where the practice has become a success story.

More information on the World Congress on Conservation Agriculture is available at: www.ecaf.org/Congress/Latest_news.htm.

US Fails to Cut Pesticide Use on Crops

By Cat Lazaroff

(ENS)-Federal agencies should be doing more to encourage farmers to reduce use of toxic pesticides on US crops and farmland, according to the General Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress. The agency found that despite federal promises to slash agricultural pesticide use, pesticide use has risen over the past eight years.

A GAO report released by Sen. Patrick Leahy concluded that the US Dept. of Agriculture and the US Environmental Protection Agency have done little to act on their 1993 pledge to reduce pesticide use through promotion of integrated pest management (IPM) programs. National pesticide use had risen by almost 40 million pounds since 1992, despite the IPM policy launched in 1993.

IPM combines the use of chemical pesticides with non-chemical pest management practices such as planting pest resistant crops and protecting beneficial insects, with a goal of reducing reliance on chemical pesticides. Farmers, communities, and environmental advocates interested in reducing pesticide use have long championed IPM, which can produce major environmental benefits in particular crops and locations without sacrificing yield quality or quantity or adding costs, the GAO notes.

For example, apple and pear growers in Washington, Oregon and California used IPM to cut use of chemical pesticides by 80 percent.

But the integrated pest management (IPM) program has run into serious management problems, the GAO found. “Federal efforts to support IPM adoption suffer from shortcomings in leadership, coordination, and management. Specifically, USDA has not provided any departmental entity with the authority to lead the IPM initiative,” the report states. “As a result of these deficiencies, federal funds are being spent on IPM without a clear sense of purpose and priorities,” the report concludes.

“Our food supply remains the safest and highest quality on earth, but we continue to overdose our farmland with powerful and toxic pesticides and to underuse the safe and effective alternatives,” said Leahy.