Ecology and economics don't necessarily conflict

Written by Dustin Beilke, Photo by Wolfgang Hoffman

Many elected officials, agriculture-industry executives, farmers and scientists have long believed there is a trade off between ecological soundness and financial success when it comes to growing crops. But a UW-Madison project is proving that is not necessarily so.

Eleven years worth of studies and partnerships by the Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trial (WICST) indicate growers do not always need to make a choice between their love of the land and their pocketbook.

Growers do not always need to make a choice between their love of the land and their pocketbook.

"Environmentally friendly farming methods are possible without causing economic disadvantage," says Martha Rosemeyer, a visiting professor helping to run WICST while director and cofounder Josh Posner is out of the country.

WISCT was founded in 1989 by Posner, a UW-Madison professor of agronomy and international agriculture, and John Hall of the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, a nonprofit organization based in East Troy, Wisconsin. WICST blends systems research with farmer guidance to measure the profitability, productivity and environmental impacts of six cropping systems. In one such system, corn is planted continuously in a field over a period of several years. Other fields rotate corn and other crops, and vary levels of inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers.

The trials compare the effects of the different approaches on soil fertility and structure, weed populations, groundwater contamination, and earthworm populations. Researchers also compare the profitability of the systems, without including environmental costs such as groundwater contamination or the potential benefits of organic premiums in their comparisons.

WICST data show conclusively that continuous corn growing is the least ecologically sound approach and provides the lowest return on the money invested. Increasing the complexity of crop rotation decreases reliance on farm chemicals without decreasing the farmer's bottom line. WICST also provides insight on costs and returns to be expected during a transition to a more diversified system that uses fewer chemicals.

"You can use alternatives without losing your shirt, even without organic premiums," Rosemeyer says.

WICST carries out the trials at UW-Madison's Arlington Agricultural Research Station in Columbia County, Lakeland Agricultural complex in Walworth County, and on 43 working farms in Wisconsin and other states.

WICST has a broad team of decision makers who bring a wide variety of interests and experience to the trials. Collaborators include the UW Cooperative Extension Service, the USDA Dairy Forage Research Center, the Walworth County Board of Supervisors, AGSTAT Agricultural and Statistical Counseling, and farmers near the Columbia and Walworth county sites. Support for the study also comes from the W. K. Kellogg Foundation and the USDA Agricultural Research Service.

A "Ten Year Report" of the results of WICST's work is being released this month and may be obtained by contacting Rosemeyer.

For more information, contact
Martha Rosemeyer, phone: 265-9367
Web: www.wisc.edu/cias/research/grainpro.html