Wheat and wndmills. Credit: Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Wind Energy Program http://www.inl.gov/wind
Today, PLOS ONE has published a paper that I co-wrote with Randa Jabbour and Steve Savage titled “Commercial crop yields reveal strengths and weaknesses for organic agriculture in the United States.” In this paper, we describe our analysis of USDA data to compare organic and conventional crop yield data for 25 different crops. But is this just another organic yield vs conventional comparison for partisans to throw at each other in debates? We hope not. We’d prefer to throw that “debate” out the window – and instead focus on where each form of agriculture is doing best and start a conversation about how we can improve them all by learning from each other. Continue reading “Just another organic yield comparison?”→
Lady beetle, by Scott Bauer. (Wikimedia Commons)
Managing pests is an important part of cultivating plants whether you are tending a small garden in your yard or several fields of crops. Insect predators can make short work of healthy plants, particularly if insect predators are in abundance. The good news is that there are natural ways to combat these pests that growers have been utilizing for many years. Granted, not all solutions are created equal. There are a number of reasons why biological control efforts may fail; including breeding being out of sync or the countermeasure not being strong enough.
The primary points of biological pest control are:
Classic Biological Control
Conservation
Augmentation
Each offers its own pros and cons with success hinging on a large number of factors that is impossible to completely define. Even still, these methods have traditionally been effective for a number of growers and have been used since the dawn of farming. Continue reading “Biological Pest Control Basics”→
An apple orchard in bloom. Credit: Steve Savage
There is an interesting new “GMO” apple nearing approval in the US and in Canada called the “Arctic Apple.” It was developed by a British Columbia, grower-based organization called Okanagan Specialty Fruit. Certain genes in these apples are turned off so that the fruit doesn’t express the enzymes that make the apples turn brown after cutting. You could slice the apples, put them in your lunch or your kid’s lunch, and they would still have full flavor, vitamins, and color when it was time to eat them. I think this is a useful, consumer-oriented trait. Predictably, there are opponents for this sort of scientific innovation.
I’ve written before about this issue before, but in this post I want to specifically address a particular objection to the commercialization of this technology – the concept that the growing of these “GMO” apples could put the local organic apple industry at risk of becoming “genetically contaminated.” I absolutely agree that the organic industry is at risk, but not from the Arctic Apples. They are at risk from this new definition of “contamination” driven by the “defenders” of organic, which would unintentionally classify all organic apples as being particularly “contaminated.”
The “contamination” scenario is based on the potential movement of pollen from flowers of the Arctic Apples to apple flowers in organic orchards. It is useful to consider this from a biological perspective. Continue reading “Will Organic Apples be re-defined as “Contaminated?””→
Last week, Dr. Pam Ronald gave a lecture about genetically engineered crops in Michael Pollan and Raj Patel’s Edible Education 101 class. After the 1-hour lecture, she sat down with Pollan and Patel to debate and discuss the issue. The New Yorker wrote a story about it, and now you can watch the video!
Dr. Ronald surveyed the students in the class during the lecture which had some interesting and dramatic results.
What did you think? Let’s discuss it in the comments.
Napa vineyard image from Almonroth via Wikimedia Commons
The pesticides that farmers use to protect their crops have changed a great deal over the last few decades. While improvement is something we expect from technologies as diverse as pharmaceuticals, electronics or plant breeding, few people are aware of the positive developments in the chemicals used for crop protection. I find that many plant molecular biologists and other defenders of biotechnology have a similarly out-dated view of pesticides.
Dramatic change began with the establishment of the EPA in 1970 which led to the elimination of many problematic, old pesticides. Also, there has been a steady stream of new product introductions with both safety and efficacy advantages.
To document how pesticides have changed, I decided to download historical information for one of my favorite crops – premium wine grapes. California has had mandatory pesticide use-reporting in place since 1990. The resulting data can provide a window on at least 22 years of this evolution. I chose 5 counties that would represent much of the premium acreage in both the North Coast (Napa, Sonoma, Mendocino – 121,700 acres in 2011) and the Central Coast (Monterey, Santa Barbara – 62,288 acres in 2011). Continue reading “An Example of How Much Pesticides Have Changed”→
Last summer, I visited an organic farm in the area. The farmer showed me various parts of his operation, one of which was a field that he had planted to a species of perennial grass that produces an abundance of deep roots. We dug a hole and confirmed it; a dense fibrous root system had formed after two years of growth. The farmer’s goal in planting this grass was to build up the soil before vegetable production. When I talked to the farmer again this fall, he was trying to figure out how best to go from the grass to vegetables. There could be two options for doing this.
The first is to till the grass crop in order to kill it. This would most likely require disking the soil three times or plowing and then disking, to kill the grass and break up the sod that is turned up by the first tillage pass.
The other option would be to spray out the grass crop with an herbicide. One pass through the field and the grass would be killed completely if done right. Continue reading “Hamstrung by Ideology”→
Editor’s note: Rob is great to talk with on Twitter, always opening our minds to new possibilities and challenging all of us (organic, conventional, and otherwise!) to rethink our stances and choose the best information possible. When he tweeted that his organic farm was being inspected, I asked him to share with us what the process was like and what it means for his farm. I’m so glad he did. This is a great glimpse into what USDA organic certification really means. Enjoy! -Anastasia Rob in 2012 working on his farm. Image from the Songberry Farm Facebook page.
Today was our farm’s annual organic inspection. An inspector had called a couple of weeks ago to set up the appointment while she was in the area. I spent a few hours last night trying to make sure that all the necessary files and documents were updated. Having worked as an inspector and having helped dozens of farmers through the certification process, I was pretty confident in my preparations but still a bit anxious. I’d never met this particular inspector before, and although the procedure itself is relatively standardized, each person brings their own perspective and particular focus to the job. For this reason (and others), certification bodies tend to assign different inspectors to each farm over a period of time. This would be the 4th new inspector to visit my farm over the course of the past 10 years – I’ve had the same inspector for the past two years, and once before that, so I’d become accustomed to her style. This is going to shake things up a bit – which is undoubtedly a good thing. Here’s how it went… Continue reading “Annual organic inspection at Songberry Farm”→
Going shopping with questionable grass roots
There are few organizations in the food movement that have as much respect as the Organic Consumer Association (OCA). The group is linked to on the Commondreams.org website under the heading “America’s Progressive Community.” It shares this place with well-known organizations like the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and Amnesty International. Its literature is often referred to on the ongoing debates on biotechnology and organic agriculture. And, Ronnie Cummins—the organization’s founder and executive director—is a frequent lecturer on GMOs, author of the book Genetic Engineered Food: A Self-Defense Guide for Consumers, and has been a contributor to the Huffington Post, Commondreams.org, and Alternet.org.
Despite these accolades and attention, a close examination into the Organic Consumer Association reveals them to be a deeply problematic group. They have—throughout their history—consistently taken fringe and anti-science positions when it comes to public health and the environment, have an unusually close relationship with certain organic food companies, and often engage in false — sometimes outlandish — accusations of their opponents. This type of behavior calls for some skepticism regarding their progressive credentials and activism.
Despite their name, the Organic Consumer Association does not really advocate for organic agriculture. Continue reading “The Organic Consumer Association: Progressive Activists or Organic AstroTurf?”→
Stoking fears to sway your emotions
A report from an activist group called Safe Food Foundation (SFF) came out last fall that caused a minor stir upon it’s first release. They claimed that they had unearthed an issue with GMO wheat being studied by the Australian CSIRO researchers. The wheat under investigation has shown to provide improvements in digestive health in animal studies and could potentially lower the glycemic index of foods. SFF threw a press conference, did a YouTube video, and managed to get some press about it. Here’s a New Zealand newspaper that picked up the claims. But as the story unfolded, it quickly became apparent that their claims were wrong and irresponsible. Continue reading “GMO Wheat and shouting “fire” in a crowded theater”→
Biofortified 
