All Things Organic - Farms of the future need to be ecologically thrifty

By Ian Cushon
February 27, 2003

In the 1970s, rising grain prices encouraged mixed farmers to convert livestock pasture to annual cropping. In the post-Crow era, grain production became less economically viable as production inputs and transportation costs increased while grain prices stagnated. Low margins pushed many farms to become bigger to capture gains from economies of scale.

Recently, many farms returned to livestock production, converting cropland back to forage and grass production. As well, there have been large investments in intensive livestock production to take advantage of low-cost feed grain. Prairie governments offer a variety of programs and subsidies to further attract intensive hog production. The expansion of Alberta's large cattle feeding and slaughter industry was largely a response to government-subsidized feed grain. The cattle industry moved west as formerly mixed farms on the eastern Prairies specialized more in grain. At one time almost all prairie farms were mixed farms. While there are still mixed farms on the eastern Prairies, there are fewer cattle finishing and slaughter facilities.

Intensive livestock and grain industries are economically viable because of low-cost feed grain and energy. As non-renewable energy prices increase, prairie agriculture will no doubt be transformed. Alternative energy sources and technology such as genetic modification may send us down unpredictable paths. I think many prairie farms of the future will be based more on the principles of organic farming and have many similarities to the mixed farms of the previous generation. This is not to suggest that they will only be small certified organic farms adhering to strict rules and limited to only using natural products. But the advantages of combining livestock and crop production make mixed farming more energy and resource efficient.

North American agriculture has been fossil energy-intensive for only a few generations. We pour non-renewable energy into crop production in the form of fertilizers, chemical and mechanical inputs. Farms of the future will likely be based more on renewable energy, such as methane, bio-diesel, ethanol and nitrogen fixation. When fossil energy becomes scarce and nitrogen fertilizers become too expensive, farmers will be forced to replace nitrogen fertilizers with nitrogen-fixing crops. Farms of the future will also be based more on knowledge-based management systems that rely on natural processes.

Today's livestock system uses artificial fertilizers to grow high yielding animal feeds. Rotational grazing increases productivity by taking advantage of the natural cycling of nutrients between plants and animals. Farmers can then rotate crops after the cattle and gain from fewer weeds, improved soil quality and better soil fertility. Some economists suggest that the market will regulate resource allocation and technology will solve all our problems. But economicsdoes not adequately measure indirect costs such as environmental damage.

Technology can certainly help us, but it has to be appropriate technology that does minimal harm, is a good use of limited resources and is sustainable. Regardless of how technologically advanced we think we are, we cannot escape the reality that life on Earth is a complex web of biological interaction and many of the earth's resources are limited. If natural systems stop functioning, and for a dramatic obvious example let's say it stops raining in Ethiopia or Alberta because of climate change, then food production stops. While Albertans can afford to import food, the Ethiopians cannot.

It is ironic that many farmers who are completely dependent upon nature and functioning natural systems are often critical of the concerns of environmentalists. While farmers have every right to be concerned about the impact of environmental policies on their ability to make a living, it would seem that in the long run, ignoring environmental issues could be bad forbusiness.

In The Future of Life, Harvard biologist Edward Wilson writes about the loss of biodiversity and how humans use the world's natural resources at an ever-growing rate. According to Wilson, the planet will run out of resources to feed, clothe and house a growing population. In a dramatic demonstration, Wilson writes about the ecological footprint humans leave on the Earth. This is a method by which scientists calculate how much of the Earth's resources are used to support a human life based on the amount of land and resources that are required to support all aspects of what that person needs. In the United States, it's estimated one person uses 24 acres of land to provide their needs and wants. On average in the developing world, humans use 2.5 acres of land to support themselves - one tenth of the U.S. Wilson says that for the Earth's six billion people to live at the same living standard and resource use rate as the U.S., we would need four more planets like Earth. So suggestions of using the developed industrial world as the model for developing the underdeveloped world seem impossible.

This inequity in sharing the world's resources also causes many conflicts. As dire as his prediction sounds, Wilson is optimistic and says that there are ways that we can change and that we need to begin now to plan and implement a new world based on conservation, efficient resource use and technological innovation.There will be no other way if we are to survive on this planet.

Ian Cushon
Moose Creek Organic Farm Inc.
P.O. Box 85
Oxbow, Saskatchewan
Canada, S0C 2B0

Tel. 306-483-5034
FAX 306-483-2799
Cell 306-483-8257
E-mail: coldridge@sasktel.net