University Place

Organic Agriculture in Wisconsin

[Tom Zinnen, Outreach Specialist, Biotechnology Center, University of Wisconsin – Madison]

Welcome, everyone, to Wednesday Nite @ the Lab. I’m Tom Zinnen. I work here at the U.W.-Madison Biotechnology Center. I also work for UW-Extension Cooperative Extension, and on behalf of those folks and our other co-organizers, Wisconsin Public Television, the Wisconsin Alumni Association, and the U.W.-Madison Science Alliance, thanks again for coming to Wednesday Nite @ the Lab. We do this every Wednesday night, 50 times a year.

Tonight, it’s my pleasure to introduce to you Erin Silva. She’s an assistant professor in the Department of Plant Pathology and a state specialist with U.W.-Extension Cooperative Extension. She’s going to be talking with us tonight about organic agriculture in Wisconsin, the science and application. Erin was born in Framingham, Massachusetts, and grew up in the Boston area, and then she moved to Wisconsin and went to high school in Hartland, got her undergraduate degree at U.W.- Stevens Point, and then went out to Washington State University in Pullman to get her master’s and PhD in horticulture. She came back to Madison and was at the Center for Integrated Ag Systems for a while, and now she is an assistant professor in the Department of Plant Pathology. So, please join me in welcoming Erin Silva to Wednesday Nite @ the Lab.

[applause]

[Erin Silva, Assistant Professor, Organic Agriculture, University of Wisconsin Extension]

Thank you, Tom. And good evening, everyone. I’m very happy to be here tonight to talk to you about organic agriculture, the focus of my program here at U.W.-Madison. To give a bit of an outline of what I’ll be talking about today, first I’ll talk about the history of organic agriculture in the U.S. –

[slide titled, Outline of Lecture, featuring the bullet points – History of organic agriculture, U.S. organic regulations, Status of organic agriculture in Wisconsin, U.S., and globally, Is organic a good option for Wisconsin farmers, and University of Wisconsin-Madison projects to support organic farming]

– move on to what is the U.S. organic regulation, talk about the status of organic agriculture in Wisconsin, the U.S., and globally, talk about is organic a good option for Wisconsin farmers, and, finally, end with some U.W.-Madison research projects supporting organic agriculture here in the state.

[new slide titled, History of National Organic Program featuring the logo for U.S.D.A organic products and the following timeline – Pre-1970s – most organic produced/consumed locally, 1970s – expansion of market; need for verification, 1970-1980s – creation of third-party certification, late 1980s – many certifiers using different standards, 1990 – Organic Foods Production Act – mandated creation of the N.O.P., and uniform organic standards, April 21,2001 – implementation of regulations begins, Oct. 21,2002 – Complete compliance required]

So, to give a very brief history of organic agriculture here in the U.S. and the National Organic Program, pre-1970s there was organic farming, but most of that organic produce was consumed on-farm or locally. So, those farmers that were not using pesticides, not using synthetic inputs, were not necessarily selling into a broader market. Throughout the 1970s, though, as the U.S. consumer was increasingly involved with environmental movements, increasingly concerned about water quality and soil quality, environment quality more broadly, there was an expansion –

[Erin Silva, on-camera]

– of the organic market. And with the expansion of the market and with the product being removed from the farm on which it was grown, there was a need for verification. The consumer wasn’t necessarily connected to the farmer and wasn’t necessarily first-hand observing the practices that were used on the farm.

So, throughout the 1970s and 1980s there were creations of various third-party certification programs. Some of these certification programs were run by nonprofit agencies, some for-profit agencies, and some state agencies. But each of these different agencies and each of these different certification programs may have had different standards. As a U.S. consumer, during this period, if you were to go to the grocery store, go to the farmers market and buy an organic product, you weren’t necessarily assured as to what the farmer was doing to call that product organic.

So, as we moved into the late 1980s, it was increasingly recognized that there was quite a diversity in these standards and there was a need to get more unification of the standards. There was more market share for organic. Again, still more consumer interest, but since we didn’t have a confidence in the consumer of what they were buying, there was a danger of the organic market being eroded and people taking advantage of the organic label without necessarily using organic practices.

So, in 1990 –

[return to the History of National Organic program slide with the timeline]

– this was the first federal move to a unified standards. And, at this time, what was created as called the Organic Food Production Act, and this act mandated the creation of the N.O.P., the National Organic Program. And this really set the groundwork for a uniform organic standard. From this first creation of the Organic Foods Production Act in 1990, it took a decade of debate to come up with what was agreed upon as an organic standard. And this was quite –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– a contentious time. There was a first iteration of this regulation that was released to the public, released to organic farmers, and within that first regulation there were several controversial issues that got quite a lot of feedback, negative feed, including the fact that G.M.O.s were allowed within this first iteration of the regulation, as well as other controversial techniques that were then removed from the – the regulation. There are thousands and thousands of consumers, American citizens, gave feedback that they did not want these certain aspects included within their organic food.

So, after a decade of debate, a decade of discussion, in 2001, that is when the implementation of what we now know as the U.S. National Organic Standards began. And as of October 21, 2002 –

[return to the History of National Organic Program slide featuring the timeline]

– that was when, when a product was being sold as organic, that farm or that processor needed to be in complete compliance of this now standard federal regulation.

[new slide titled, Certified Organic, with the definition that it indicates that the item has been grown according to strict uniform standards that are verified by independent state or private organizations and includes inspection of farm fields and processing facilities and detailed record keeping as well as a three-year transition period until a regular farm can become an organic farm]

So, when you see something as certified organic, whether it be in the grocery store, whether it be at the farmers market, this indicates that that item has been grown according to strict uniform standards that are verified by independent state or private organizations. There are several states in the U.S., including Iowa and Washington state, that do have more state-run departments of agriculture run certification agencies, but that’s not always the case. Here in Wisconsin, we have 17, at least 17 different independent agencies that are actively certifying organic farms throughout the state.

But the certified organic label does indicate that there was oversight and that were was an inspection and certification process of that product that now has the organic label. This includes inspections of farm fields and processing facilities and detailed record-keeping on part of the farmer. It also ensures that that product has gone through a three-year transition period until it could be sold as organic. So, that farmer, that product, has been produced using organic standards and not allowed to be sold as organic until –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– it reaches the end of that 36-month period.

So, when you see this U.S.D.A. organic label, this green standard organic label, sometimes it’s black and white, most of the time it’s green –

[return to the Certified Organic slide now with the U.S.D.A. Organic certified logo superimposed over the top of the slide]

– it means that that farm has had that oversight, has had that inspection and certification process. It is illegal for someone to have this label, to use the word organic, and not have gone through that inspection and certification process.

This is also the case with imported product coming into the U.S. Imported product coming from Europe, coming from South America, if it’s sold in the U.S. as organic, it has been still grown with those same federal regulations or an equivalent standard. And there is quite a discussion on the international market as to what makes up an equivalent standard. So, when you see this label as a consumer, you can be assured that that farmer, that processor, has been adhering the federal organic regulation.

[slide titled, Definition of Organic (National Organic Program) with the definition of – a production system that is managed to respond to site-specific conditions by integrating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources to promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity. Additionally, it is noted that organic speaks to adherence to a certain set of production practices and does not speak to any other claims]

There is a definition of organic, and I – I do get questions as a state organic specialist, what is organic production? And this is the – the definition that was included in that National Organic Program standard. It is a production system that is managed to respond to site specific conditions by integrating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity.

So, what organic is really speaking to is the adherence to a certain set of production practices. And one thing of note –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– and one thing that comes up in popular press in the media quite often is that organic makes claims, which it really doesn’t, but makes claims that it’s pesticide-free or G.M.O.-free. And the organic regulation really doesn’t make those claims. It doesn’t make a claim that the product is pesticide-free. It doesn’t make a claim that that product is healthier. What it’s claiming is that the farmer or the processor that are producing those products, that is putting those goods on the market, has had to adhere to a very specific set of production or processing practices. And – and it’s not really making a claim on the product itself but the practices that went into producing that product.

So, with the heart –

[slide titled, Ecological-based management system – not just what you dont use, but what you do]

– of organic is that is an ecological based management system, and it’s not just what you don’t use, but it’s what you do. What the farmer does.

Often when a consumer thinks of organic, what they think of is what is known as really our national list. And a national list is a set of products that can or cannot be used in organic There’s a broad overview regulation that basically anything synthetic cannot be used organic, but anything that’s non-synthetic or considered natural can be used in organic.

So, certainly, there are certain pesticides, certain insecticides that organic farmers can use. They’re biological in origin. For instance, they may be extracts of a biological material, something that maybe is produced by a bacteria.

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

But it excludes synthetic chemicals, synthetic pesticide, and it also excludes synthetic fertilizers. But, indeed, organic is a lot more than that because it’s not just what the farmer does or does not use, but it’s what they do. So, some of the things an organic farmer does.

So, an organic farmer must, by the federal regulation, use a diversified cropping system.

[return to the Ecological-based management system slide now with the bullet point of diversified crops – corn, soybean, wheat, oat , alfalfa]

You can’t be an organic farmer and grow corn on corn on corn every year, or even grow corn on soybean. That – that is not allowed in the organic regulation. You must be more diversified by that. You must be having more crops on the field. So, typically, many of our organic farms here in the Upper Midwest use a corn, soybean, a winter wheat, or an alfalfa rotation. So, they often have four or five different crops in the rotation. Those rotations can be three to five years long. And they’re much more diversified than many of the conventional cropping systems common to the Upper Midwest. That, again, is part of the federal regulation. What the organic farmer must do.

[the Ecological-based management system animates on the next bullet point – Soil stewardship – maintaining and improving resources]

Soil stewardship is, again, at the heart of the organic regulation. Maintaining and improving our soil resources. And, really, a certifier looks for the organic farmer continuing to improv their soil resources. Crop rotation does a lot to improve soil resources, but also looking at ensuring that, as an organic farmer, doing what you can to minimize the potential for erosion. Using cover crops to make sure the soil is covered as much during the year as possible, which goes a long way to minimizing and eliminating erosion. Building soil, building carbon in the system –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– building soil organic matter. You must use practices that ensure that the system is – is leading towards reaching those goals.

The animals must have access to pasture, and this has certainly been an area that has been –

[return to the Ecological-based management system slide now with the next bullet point – animals must have access to pasture]

– more controversial in the organic system, in part because the organic regulation allows for site specific management. It doesn’t have –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– a certain set number of days necessarily that an organic grower has to be doing something or a really strict list of practices because an organic farmer in Wisconsin is going to be producing differently than an organic farmer in Texas. You really want to allow that farmer the flexibility to do what’s best for their environment. But animals must have access to pasture, and that varies depending on the system. But certainly, we’ve looked at continuing to strengthen that aspect of the regulation.

One of the aspects of the organic regulation is that it’s not a static regulation. There is a board, the National Organic Standards Board, and that’s a board of appointed individuals from across the U.S. that represent farmers and environmental groups and industry. And they meet twice a year, and they look at aspects of the organic regulation and they look at what needs to be changed depending on science, depending on the state of the industry, depending on what we now know about best management practices, and they continually strive to improve the organic regulation. The organic regulation today is not the same as what it was in 2002.

So, animals’ access to pasture, that’s certainly something that’s going to continue to be evaluated throughout the National Organic Standards Board and National Organic Program and continue to address to make sure that that part of the standard is strong and that, indeed, the animals do have access to pasture, whether it be chickens or pigs or cows.

No antibiotic use on livestock. Certainly, there are other remedies to help with animal health. Homeopathic remedies, vaccines can still be used, but antibiotics cannot be used. If the animal’s life is in danger, the farmer has to use antibiotics if that is absolutely necessary, but then that animal is removed from the herd and cannot be sold as organic, and even milk products cannot be sold as organic. So, the regulation is written to not compromise animal welfare, but instead, again, lead to consumer confidence of what they’re buying in the product.

And again –

[return to the Ecological-based management system slide now with two more bullet points added – no antibiotic use in livestock, and prohibits synthetic inputs]

– talking about the national list, it does indeed prohibit synthetic inputs –

[slide animates on the bullet point – Prohibits the use of G.M.O. crops]

– as well as prohibit the use of G.M.O. crops. So, there is some of what you can’t do, but it’s a lot of what the farmer does do.

[new slide titled, Regulation allows for flexibility, featuring a photo of a farm field and the bullet points that the regulation is – not a cookbook, and management plans reflect unique characteristics of each operation]

As I mentioned, the regulation is really written to allow for flexibility. It’s not a cookbook. It doesn’t say that a farmer must have a corn, soybean, small grain, alfalfa rotation. It allows for flexibility depending on region, depending on farmer resources, depending on what makes sense for that particular environment, and depending on market. So, that allows for the best management practices for a specific area of the country or even globally.

And a farmer’s management plan is then going to reflect the unique aspects of their operation, depending on the needs to the land, the needs of the market, and the resources available.

[new slide titled, Distribution of Organic Farms, featuring a map of the United States with each organic farm indicated by a red dot – the red dots are mostly located in New England, the Upper Midwest and the Pacific coast]

This is a map of the distribution of organic farms across the U.S. You see there are several hot spots in the U.S. Let’s see if I can get my mouse here. There’s a lot of organic farms in the northeast. Certainly New York, Vermont, New Hampshire. We have a lot of organic farms here in the Upper Midwest, certainly in Wisconsin and Minnesota. And then there is a lot of organic farms across the west coast.

It is a lot more challenging to grow organically in the – the southern regions. And certainly, one of the things that we’re lucky to have here with respect to organic management and natural management of insects and diseases is our cold winters, which can break up pest and disease cycles. And certainly, as we look at warming trends throughout the U.S., those are going to challenge organic producers because we’re going to be less confident of those natural ways to inhibit pest and disease cycles. But we do, across the northern tier of the U.S., have quite a few organic farms.

[new slide titled, Wisconsin certified organic farms and processors/handlers, 2013, featuring a map of Wisconsin with the organic farms indicated on the map as black dots and processors/handlers indicated by a black triangle]

And, like I mentioned, a lot of organic farms in Wisconsin. We – we are really a leader in organic agriculture. And those organic farms are really present throughout the state.

Most of our organic farms, a lot of our organic farms are in the driftless region, in Vernon County, Monroe County, Crawford County, in the southwestern corner in our driftless region in the – in Wisconsin. But certainly, have many organic farms in Dane County and even throughout the western part of the state. A growing number, too, in our central sands and the – the northeastern part of Wisconsin as well.

[new slide titled, Wisconsins Organics Top the National Ranks, featuring the bullet points that Wisconsin ranks – #2 in total organic farms, #2 in land transitioning to organic, #1 in number of dairy farms, #1 for total organic bee farms, #2 for total field crop farms, and #4 for total organic vegetable farms]

Like I mentioned, Wisconsin’s organic certainly top the national ranks. Here in Wisconsin, we’re number two for the total number of organic farms, only behind California. California is still quite a bit ahead of us, but we are holding strong as number two, and we really have been for the past decade. Many, many organic farms.

And many farms transitioning to organic. So, not only are we holding stable and growing in the number of organic farms, but really there are indicators that we are going to continue to grow and continue to be a leader.

Number one in organic dairy farms. Wisconsin is the dairy state, and we certainly are the organic dairy state as well.

Number one in total organic beef farms. Number two for total organic field crop farms. So, that’s corn and soybean, our grain farms. And number four for total organic vegetable farms. So, across many commodities Across many different crops –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– and products we really lead the nation and continue to lead the nation. It makes it quite an exciting place to work in organic and also be a consumer of organic.

This chart, it’s a little dated, we don’t have the 2015 data on here yet, but it’s looking at the annual sales of –

[slide titled, Annual Sales of organic products at $36 billion in 2014, with 11% growth from previous year, featuring a bar graph showing U.S. organic food sales with dollar amount in billions on the y-axis and the years 2004 to 2014 on the x-axis. The graph shows continued growth every year from $12 billion in 2004 to $36 billion in 2014]

– organic products, which have now reached over $36 billion in sales. We are continuing to see this double-digit growth. Organic continues to be of consumer interest. More and more people are buying organic.

When we see the number of organic sales, there was a little bit of a plateau here where I think we had single digit growth around 2008, 2009. We really were at the height of the Great Recession. But we’ve really rebounded, and that is really predicted to continue through the next decade and into the 2020s.

[new slide titled, Purchase of organic food – Number of people who buy organic food in the United States from autumn 2010 to spring 2015 in millions, featuring a new bar graph that has number of people in millions on the y-axis and the autumn and spring of years from 2010 to 2015, showing that from 2010 to autumn of 2013 the number of people buying organic was relatively the same and an uptick in the number of people buying organic increasing from spring of 2014 on]

Looking at the number of people that are buying organic. So, it’s not just kind of a core consumer group that’s buying more and more organic. We’re growing in the number of people that are buying organic. Looking over the past five years, number of people in millions. We now have 47 million people in the U.S. that are buying organic. A lot of people are interested in buying some organic products, maybe not all their grocery cart is filled with organic but buy some organic products throughout the course of – of their grocery shopping trips.

[new slide titled, Share of organic food sales in the United States in 2011 and 2014, by product category, featuring another bar graph with type of food on the y-axis and share of organic food sales on the x-axis showing that the three largest types of organic foods being bought are fruits and vegetables, dairy, and beverages]

Where are they buying organic? Fruits and vegetables. We do see many people buying organic fruits and vegetables. And – and when we look at the number of acres across the U.S., that’s where we have the largest growth of – of organic is fruit and vegetables. But certainly, people buy a lot of organic dairy too. A lot of organic milk –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– is purchased, other organic dairy products. Then beverages, packaged and prepared foods, spreads and grains, snack foods, meat, poultry and fish, and then finally condiments. But, really, the core part of organic purchasing is in fruits and vegetables as well as dairy.

And then, again, looking at the world’s largest markets for organic products –

[slide titled, The Worlds Largest Markets for Organic Products, featuring yet another bar graph, this time with countries on the y-axis and the retail sales dollar amounts in billions on the x-axis and showing by a wide margin the United States ($26 billion) leading in organic retail sales, followed by Germany (8b), France (5b), China (3b), Canada (2.5b), the United Kingdom (2.3b), an Italy (2.2b)]

– some of this is due to the size of the country and the number or the population. But organic – the – the U.S., on – on a national scale, buys a lot of organic products. Germany and France, China, Canada, but – but the U.S. truly, as a consumer group, wants organic products on the market.

[new slide titled, Questions Regarding Organic Production, featuring a photo of a farmer plowing his field and the questions – is organic farming productive and profitable? And – does organic provide a higher quality of life for farmers?]

So, questions regarding organic production. Again, as the organic state specialist, I’m often asked about different aspects of organic farming. And two of the questions I’m certainly asked very frequently is organic production farming: Can organic feed the world? is certainly a question that I get quite often, and Is organic profitable? And the other question that I do think is important is maybe less frequently asked, but Does organic provide a higher quality of life for farmers? In the U.S., we tend to be losing farmers. We have an aging –

[Eric Silva, on-cam]

– population of farmers. And, Does organic provide an option for younger farmers or people interested in entering agriculture?

So, I’ll put this in the context of some of the research that we’ve done and are currently doing at the University of Wisconsin-Madison throughout my organic agriculture research program as well as others throughout the college.

[slide titled, University of Wisconsin-Madison Organic Agricultural Research, featuring a photo of students working in the agricultural research farm field]

I mean, I’m certainly not the only person addressing organic agriculture. Many of my colleagues in the College of Agriculture do, which allows us to really look at organic agriculture and research questions using a systems-based approach, integrating plant pathology and entomology and soil science –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– and agriculture economics, which makes it a wonderful place to work in organic agriculture. Not only am I lucky enough to work with, I think, the greatest group of organic farmers in the country, if not the world, but some of the greatest organic colleagues as well.

So, the first set of data that I’m going to talk to you about is from our Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trial.

[slide titled, The Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trial – Arlington WI, featuring an aerial photo of the farmland in Arlington Wisconsin]

And this is located just about 20 miles north here of Madison, Wisconsin, in Arlington, Wisconsin. It’s our flagship research station here in the state. We have about 2,000 acres of field research as well as other animal research done there. And we also have probably around 80 acres or so of organic fields. So, just like an organic farmer, on these organic research fields we have to keep the same records, we have to do the same practices, and we have inspectors, and we go through that same certification process. So, that is really something that was demanded by organic farmers to ensure that the research that we are conducting and the data that we generate is reflective of what’s happening in organic management system.

So, on these Arlington research station fields we have several organic sites, including some trials embedded within the Organic Cropping Systems Trial. It’s a little hard to see here, but you can see these various strips. And these various strips represent different replications of six different cropping systems that are common to the Upper Midwest. So, we have one that’s continuous corn. So, for 25 years of just growing corn on corn on corn on corn. We also have a treatment that is – its a strip till, conservation tillage corn-soybean rotation. We have an organic rotation that has – integrates corn and soybean and winter wheat as well as several different cover crops, including clover. We have a corn-alfalfa rotation that’s managed organically with three years of alfalfa because it has that long perennial phase and has oat as a nurse crop. It has three crops and is long enough to be considered an organic rotation.

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

Also, a conventional dairy similar type of cropping system with corn and alfalfa. And then finally a pasture-based system.

So, after taking 25 years of yield data and input data off of those different research fields using those representative cropping systems, we’re able to make some broader long-term recommendations and observations for organic agriculture here in the state.

So, the first thing I want to point out, and this – this research was really pioneered by the late Dr. Josh Posner, who was a professor in the Department of Agronomy here at U.W.-Madison. A real pioneer in sustainable agriculture and organic research, and he had the, really, the – the forethought of putting in these cropping systems trials in the late 1980s. And they – they are really a treasure that we have here at the University of Wisconsin. And so, after collecting data for about a 20-year period –

[slide titled, Organic Yields at W.I.C.S.T., featuring the bullet points that – 18-20-year means show organic systems yielding well (approximately 90% of conventional systems) , and organic crop trends are positive – yields are increasing with time. The slide also features a table that compares the yield of different types of crops comparing conventional farming to organic farming and showing comparable yields between the two in corn, soybean, wheat and alfalfa]

– what we’re able to demonstrate off of these cropping systems is that organic systems can really yield quite well with grain systems here in the Upper Midwest. They can exceed and – and reach about 90%-95% of conventional systems. So, they’re quite competitive yield-wise with conventional cropping systems. There’s conventional corn you see on the landscape. And similar to those conventional yield trends, the organic grain crop yield trends are quite positive. Yields are increasing with time. So, even on a long-term organic management system, those yields are still increasing. Those yields aren’t going to crash necessarily after 10 years. Those continue to improve as we continue to get better as farm managers, as we get better varieties on the market, and we learn more about how to optimize organic production systems.

So, just some yield data here. Some conventional yields averaged across time and across systems for conventional versus organic. 174 bushel an acre in conventional versus 166 in organic. Soybean 52.5 versus 47.4. Wheat 67.6 versus 55.8. And organic alfalfa actually yielding a little bit more. So, there’s still a – a little bit of a yield drag in organic, but – but the yields are quite competitive with conventional.

[new slide titled, Historic gross margins of grain systems, featuring a bar graph comparing conventional to organic farming on the x-axis for a corn, soybean, wheat rotation and the dollars per acre on the y-axis showing a larger gross margin for organic farming from the period of 1992-2009]

Gross margin of the systems. So, it goes – hearkens to the question, Are organic systems profitable? And with the price that organic farmers are able to get, certainly it tends to be more than conventional cropping systems. Similar to conventional cropping systems, organic prices can – can bounce on the grain market. Milk prices have been a bit more stable, quite a bit more stable over time. Grain prices can still bounce up and down. But overall, organic grain – and I wouldn’t – these – these numbers on the Y axis here can – can vary, but – but the relative magnitude, I think, is – is pretty consistent overall as more profitable for farmers. So, this is the corn-soybean-wheat rotation.

[new slide titled, Historic gross margins of forage systems, with the same bar graph as before with dollars per acre on the y-axis and now comparing conventional to organic forage on the x-axis and again showing organic farming having higher gross margins for forage]

Similar results when we look at those forage rotations. Again, data from the Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems that was really spearheaded by, and data collected by –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– Dr. Josh Posner’s program.

So, this is some data from a -a thesis switching gears a little bit, looking at more quality-of-life type data.

[slide titled, Farm Characteristics of Organic and Conventional Dairies in Wisconsin, featuring a table with various data points in left-hand rows (income over feed costs, number of cows, total land operated, cropland per cow, pasture per cow, amount spent on fertilization, and number of hours worked per cow per year) and then two columns comparing conventional farming to organic farming, showing mostly similar data]

This was some data that was collected off of a – a survey by several different professors and programs and Extension people that were involved in our dairy science program here. So, looking at some survey data from organic and conventional dairy farms throughout the state.

So, this – this graduate student, Marion Dutreuil, she looked at 26 conventional farms, 47 organic farms. Quite an extensive survey. It took a lot of time on – on her part, on the researcher’s part and on the farmer’s part. But, again, backs up the fact that organic can be quite competitive. Overall, the organic farms in the state tend to be smaller. So, it offers- offers an opportunity for our smaller family farms to be competitive. They tend to be smaller in terms of land base. But they tend to be more pasture-based overall. The – the animals rely more on pasture. Pay less on fertilization as they are relying more on cover cropping. Nitrogen fixing legumes that are able to incorporate atmospheric nitrogen into a plant available form. And even with organic production the number of hours worked is – is quite similar to conventional.

But again –

[new slide titled, Quality of Life for Organic Farmers, featuring a new table with various quality of life measures in rows on the left-hand side (stress level, physical demands, family lifestyle, opportunities for children, price received for milk, time off from farm work, and net farm income) and organic and conventional farms in two columns at the top showing a slightly higher quality of life for organic farmers as compared to conventional farmers]

– looking at some of the quality-of-life indicators, again coming from that same graduate student work, Marion Dutreuil, her – her PhD dissertation. Looking at here – the – the scale here is one is dissatisfied and seven is very satisfied. So overall, stress levels, there are more satisfaction in terms of stress levels in organic, more satisfaction in terms of physical demands of work, lifestyle, the family opportunities for children, prices received, time off from work, and net income.

So, looking at these quality-of-life factors, farmers that are switching to organic can be a bit happier, maybe, than their conventional counterparts. It – it allows for a nice lifestyle.

[new slide titled, Improving Soil Stewardship, featuring a close-up shot of crops in a field]

I’ll switch gears again, as I go through some of the different research that we – we’ve been doing here and talk a little bit about some of the research that my program directly is doing. And part of that is really looking at how organic farmers can continue to improve their soil stewardship.

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

Like I mentioned, organic farming at the heart of those organic regulations and what a farmer does do, being a good soil steward, building their soil, protecting their soil, is – is really a key aspect of the organic regulation. And certainly, within my program, we’re looking at continuing to develop best management practices and ways that farmers can be good soil stewards.

So, a big part of what I’ve been doing here at U.W. over the past 10 years is to look at addressing kind of a key issue in organic that has continued to be a challenge for organic farmers, and that’s tillage and cultivation.

[slide titled, Tillage, Cultivation, and Organic Agriculture, with the bullet points that – Weed control remains a primary challenge to organic production, in a 2010 survey from the Minnesota Organic Survey, weed control is the top-listed challenge of organic farmers at 66% which is up from 59% in 2007, and – organic weed management is still heavily reliant on tillage and cultivation]

And often we hear criticisms of organic agriculture. It’s – its the reliance of organic farmers on tillage and cultivation. Organic farmers cannot use herbicides. It’s considered a synthetic input. And whereas there are synthetic – there are biological inputs, there are non-synthetic inputs that allow for disease and insect management, particularly with vegetable crops. So, again, these organic vegetable farmers do spray. So, again, it’s something I often hear in the popular press that organic farmers spray pesticides, and yes, they do. It’s a different type of pesticide. It has a different level of residual. It doesn’t last as long in the environment. So, it certainly is a different type of – of input. But when we look at weed management, there really aren’t any effective organic herbicides.

So, in order to manage weeds, in order to keep weeds down in organic fields, an organic farmer has several different tools. Again, certainly crop rotation and breaking up the way that – or diversifying the way that a crop grows on the field when you’re planting the crop, when a crop develops the highest amount of biomass, can certainly help break up week cycles and prevent one particular weed from building up in the field. So, a crop rotation is certainly used. Cover cropping is certainly used. The cover crops that are intentionally planted to cover the soil surface compete with weeds, they shade out weeds, and they help keep weeds down while still enhancing soil biology and building soil organic matter.

But along with these strategies, the organic farmer also uses tillage and cultivation. So, they do some sort of soil inversion, either primary or secondary tillage, before they actually plant the crop. And then they use cultivation. So, they use various machines, or implements I should say. Whether it be a tine weeder, which is essentially fingers that, tines, that drag over the field and – and disrupt newly growing weeds. Or more aggressive ways such as the rotary hoe or field cultivator that, again, kind of scrapes and scoops weeds and inverts them and – and disrupts their root systems. And – and –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– thats a big way that organic farmers manage weeds.

The – the issue there is several-fold. First of all, as soil stewards, any time that we invert the soil it’s something that we don’t want to see. It leaves that soil open for wind or water erosion. It burns soil organic matter. It’s detrimental to building soil organic matter. And those passes over the field using a tractor, and it’s not necessarily uncommon for a farmer to not only have to do primary and secondary tillage but to have to go over the field three, four, or five times with these various cultivation equipments that uses fossil fuel. And the organic regulation, the organic farmer, more broadly is concerned with different other sustainability metrics, such as fossil fuel consumption. So, it is – is of great concern of the organic industry and organic farmers to look at tools to limit their cultivation needs to manage weeds.

And this is some data from a Minnesota organic survey in 2010, and, indeed, weed management and this reliance on tillage and cultivation is listed as a top challenge for organic farmers. And that’s even increased beyond what it was in 2007 just a couple of years before.

I do also want to mention, as we look at changes in weather patterns, we saw those yields can be quite competitive to conventional. The tillage and cultivation can be quite weather dependent. So, as we get into weather patterns in the spring like we’ve seen over several of the past springs where we have very wet continuous rains, heavy rain events, not only does that possibly increase the potential for erosion but it’s harder to get out in the field and for organic farmers to effectively manage these weeds through cultivation. These weeds have to be managed very, very early, to be managed effectively using these techniques. And if a farmer can’t get out in the field for five, seven, 10 days, that’s when the weeds take over, they compete with the crop, and yields can be quite reduced in organic.

But, like I mentioned, organic weed management unfortunately is still heavily reliant on tillage and cultivation.

So, what my program has been doing in partnership with other programs across the country is to look at implementing and developing this technique called cover crop-based reduced tillage. So, essentially, what we’re doing here is using a killed cover crop to suppress weeds in organic systems. And, really, the theory behind the technique is something that people have been implementing in organic gardening for many, many years. It’s really the same technique as when you’re putting straw mulch on your vegetable gardens. Laying a – a thick layer of straw mulch or newspaper or – or wood shavings. We’re blocking sunlight from reaching the soil surface, and – and by doing that, we’re preventing weed seeds from germinating. And we’re essentially, just like on a – a garden, creating this field of mulch. So going – instead of doing a garden base, doing tens, hundreds of acres this way.

[slide titled, Cover Crop-based Reduced Tillage, featuring a photo of the technique with a layer of mulch on top of a field and including that this technique uses a killed cover crop to suppress weeds]

It also allows the benefit of a cover crop. So, certainly here too, it’s an effort and – and a way to increase soil organic matter, increase cover on the soil from fall through the cash crop growing season the next year. So, there’s multiple, multiple benefits of – of implementing this technique and refining this technique to reduce risk and allow farmers to adopt it across the state.

So here, this is essentially creating that mulch. This – this is a cereal rye field. So, this cereal rye is planted in September. So, we can come in after harvesting corn for silage or coming in after a cereal grain crop. We plant this very, very thickly. So, about three bushel an acre, which, if you’re a farmer, that’s quite heavy for a cover crop. Seed this in September. This grows a few inches before it goes into the winter, and it still remains green. So, if you drive across the state and sometimes, you know, late into the fall or early in the spring when the snow melts, you see green on the field. That very well could either be a winter wheat crop or it could be a cover crop, including cereal rye.

Once the weather starts to warm up, so pretty much around this time of year, early May, that cereal rye cover crop becomes active and starts to grow very, very quickly. So, during the three weeks of May, it maybe grows from, you known, that four inches or so coming out of the winter to about five-and-a-half, six feet tall. So, this is probably about five-and-a-half, six feet tall. Putting on about 10,000 pounds of dry matter biomass per acre.

And then we come down when this starts to flower. So, when it flowers, you see pollen coming off of the crop, we essentially roll that down.

[new slide titled, Roller-Crimper Technology, featuring a photo of a tractor rolling down cereal rye with a roller crimper]

And we roll that down using this implement called a roller crimper. So, it’s this big cylinder that’s mounted on the front of a tractor, and it rolls it down. And right behind the tractor here is our planter.

[slide titled, Soybeans, 3 weeks after planting, featuring a photo of a couple of rows of soybeans in-between some cereal rye that has been rolled down]

So, what it does, essentially, is plant that. His is on 30-inch rows. And you can see that planter drilled that seed right into the ground through that mulch. And just like your garden, you can see that straw mulch on either side suppressing the weeds and those soybeans coming right up through it.

[new slide titled, Organic Soybean Field in July, featuring a photo of the same soybeans in the previous slide now further along in the growing season]

This is that same field in July. So, there was no other weed management done to this field. No herbicides. No cultivation. The farmer, after rolling and crimping and planting, didn’t have to go over this field again. So, no reliance on weather conditions, no reliance on soil conditions. You can see what a nice job that’s doing suppressing the weeds, and those soybeans growing right up through it.

[new slide titled, Organic Crop Breeding, featuring a photo of crops being grown on the research farm]

So, that has really been one of the hallmarks of my research program and working with more and more farmers throughout the state to see how we can adopt this on farms to increase, again, improve the organic production system to benefit that soil stewardship and still allow for any sort of minimization of outside inputs.

Another aspect that not only my program is involved in but really University of Wisconsin-Madison –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– has emerged as a leader is organic crop breeding. So, this is some of the organic land not at our Arlington research station but at our west Madison –

[return to the Organic Crop Breeding slide]

– research station. So, some of you might have driven by this. It’s just on the west side of town, just west of the Beltline, past a Target out there. You can see here, all the urban encroachment around it. So, it’s this little pocket of agriculture research surrounded by urban Madison.

But these are some kale trials we have going on here. It’s on the top of a hill, and if you go by, you’ll probably be able to spot that high tunnel there. But organic crop breeding is certainly something that my program has, again, put significant effort to over the past 10 years as well as others here at the college. And we do now have an organic breeding chair that we really have benefited from the organic industry, specifically Cliff Bar and Organic Valley for investing funds to – to really enhance, continue to enhance our breeding program here in the college.

[new slide titled, Is there a need to breed within organic systems, containing the bullet points that – an organic production system environment is different from a conventional production system, varietal adaptation to the environment is critical to obtaining the best varietal performance, and contemporary varieties bred in and for conventional production systems may be less-than-optimally adapted to organic systems]

So, the question, Is there a need to breed within organic systems? Why don’t we use a seed that’s been produced for conventional cropping systems? Well, as I outlined throughout the organic regulation, really what a farmer must do to become a certified organic farmer, just by nature of those standards, the organic production system is an environment different from a conventional cropping system. It’s a more highly diversified rotation. We’re looking at doing different activities to the soil that would potentially impact soil biological activity. We’re using different fertility inputs, and those different fertility inputs are going to have different nutrient availability throughout the growing season versus synthetic fertilizers.

So, indeed, the organic production system is a unique environment, just like Wisconsin is a unique environment from California or from Georgia. We wouldn’t necessarily use the same cultivars, the same varieties, that a California farmer was going to use. Similarly, an organic farmer wouldn’t necessarily use the same varieties as a conventional farmer because they weren’t really bred for and optimized for that production environment.

And breeders know that varietal adaptation to environment is critical to obtain best varietal performance. And farmers know that as well. They know the importance of selecting the right variety for their farm and for their production system.

And many of the contemporary varieties that are – are currently available to not only our vegetable farmers but also our grain farmers –

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

– have been bred in and bred for conventional production systems. And those are less than optimally adapted to organic cropping systems. And it – it’s very important as a breeder to select within the environment that you are ideally wanting to see that germ plasm grown in. So, looking at developing varieties for organic, it’s really important to be breeding within organic cropping systems.

So, what are some of the differences in traits that may emerge from these different cultivars grown in organic versus conventional environments? Well, there’s certainly different growth habits that might be optimized for organic management.

[slide titled, Differences in Traits for Organic vs. Conventional Environments, featuring the following bullet points growth habits optimized for management weeds, insects, adaptation to fertility inputs, root architecture and functioning symbioses with beneficial microbes, and stand establishment lack of fungicide seed treatments]

I mentioned weeds are a major challenge for organic farmers, quite honestly. And there are different growth habits. Like I mentioned those tools for weed management that aren’t just tillage and cultivation but also crop rotation and cover cropping. Another tool is very competitive early growth. So, crops that are able to establish canopy quickly, shade out weeds, give a broad canopy. Those are optimized for organic production systems. They help with the weed management.

Adaption to fertility inputs. Whereas some of the synthetic inputs, most of the synthetic inputs, are very readily available to the crop, organic inputs, because they tend to be more complex in nature, organic in nature, they – they tend to rely on microbial activity and other processes to allow those nutrients to be available to a crop plant. So, for instance, when you’re applying compost to your garden and you calculate the amount of N that is potentially available in that compost, usually you figure only 50% of that N is available during the cropping system to be available to the plant because it takes that much time for the nitrogen, that N, to become available to the crop during the growing season. So, there’s a different dynamic with respect to nutrient availability and how the crop might access those nutrients throughout the production season.

Root architecture and functioning symbioses with beneficial microbes, and this is really just an enormously exciting area in agriculture, in science, not only the soil microbiome, but microbiomes in general. Similar to how we’re learning about the human gut microbiome impacting aspects of health and well-being that we’re just starting to understand. Similarly in the soil, there’s aspects of the soil microbiome, the soil microbial communities, that we’re just starting to understand how they impact and communicate with plants and stimulate plant defense mechanisms and – and plant growth and development. So, a hugely exciting area that is impacted by the production practices that we’re putting on those crop fields.

And stand establishment. Organic growers cannot use fungicide seed treatments that conventional farmers do. And those fungicide seed treatments allow those seeds to be able to sit in cold, wet soil conditions, similar to what we’re seeing this spring, for quite a longer period of time. Organic seed and organic varieties must be able to naturally withstand those organisms in the soil that might lead to decay of the seed and be able to emerge and germinate quickly as they don’t have the protection of these fungicide seed treatments.

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

My – a graduate student of mine, Alex Lyon, she surveyed the vegetable growers here in the state and looked at crops that those vegetable farmers here in Wisconsin prioritized for organic plant breeding.

[slide titled, Priority Crops for Organic Plant Breeding, featuring a table with rank, crop and frequency across the top of the table with the top five priority crops being, winter squash, tomatoes, potatoes, melons, and peppers]

Winter squash, tomatoes, potatoes, melons, peppers, peas, cucumbers, summer squash, onions, quite an array of crops that our growers here in the state wanted to see additional breeding investments.

[new slide titled, Cumulative ranking of overall traits needed in organic varieties, featuring another table this time with rank, trait, and frequency along the top of the table and the top five traits being – disease tolerance, insect tolerance, yield, germination, and season extension]

And then, looking at what they’re looking for when looking for crops that might be optimized for organic, increased disease tolerance, insect tolerance, yield, germination, like I mentioned, being able to withstand those cold soil temperatures without fungicide or insecticide seed treatments, competition with weeds and season extension. So, a lot of horticultural aspects. And then, finally, some of the aspects that consumers are interested in as well. Flavor and appearance, nutrient use. This is more in terms of crop nutrient use from a fertility standpoint. And then ease of harvest.

[new slide with the logo for the Northern Organic Vegetable Improvement Cooperative or N.O.V.I.C.]

So, there’s a couple different projects nationally that we’re engaged in. N.O.V.I.C., the Northern Organic Vegetable Improvement Cooperative –

[new slide titled, National Partnerships, featuring a map of the United States and the logos for the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the U.S.D.A., Cornell University, Oregon State University, and the Organic Seed Alliance]

– collaboration with breeders from not only University of Wisconsin-Madison but U.S.D.A. and Cornell and Oregon State, a nonprofit, the Organic Seed Alliance.

[new slide titled, New Variety Releases, featuring three photos, one of a researcher standing amidst a corn field, one of three ears of a newly developed variety of corn, and one of three researchers working with the newly developed variety of corn at a table]

And then there’s been some new variety releases. So, one of the releases that has gotten quite a lot of attention from Dr. Bill Tracy’s program is this sweet corn variety “Who Gets Kissed?” And this was bred in partnership with a farmer and Martin Diffley here, in the cornfield. And it’s – its a really great tasting sweet corn that’s open pollinated so you can save the seed, a farmer could save the seed, and also has good cold soil tolerance so it can come up early in the spring, get early on the market when people are just yearning for that local sweet corn and being able to allow for that lack of fungicide seed treatment. So, this is the direct outcome of that project.

[new slide featuring the logo for C.I.O.A – Carrot Improvement for Organic Agriculture group along with the logos for the partners in this group – Purdue University, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the Organic Seed Alliance, Washington State University, the U.S.D.A., the Agriculture Research Service, and the University of California-Riverside]

There’s another project that I’m involved in, Carrot Improvement for Organic Agriculture. Again, a national collaboration with Purdue, Wisconsin, Organic Seed Alliance again, Washington state, U.S.D.A. This is led by Dr. Phil Simon, a carrot breeder with U.S.D.A., and U.C.-Riverside.

[new slide titled, Carrot top height variation, featuring a photo of a carrot field]

So, we talked about weed management and competitiveness against weeds. One of the things that this is looking for in carrots, if anyone has grown carrots, you know how poky those are coming out of the field, coming out of the ground. This is looking at this variation in top height and how this might help with early competition with weeds and being able to shade those weeds. Organic carrots, they’re – theyre really difficult to grow. Quite a challenge. Quite a challenge. So, this is looking at tools through germ plasm, variety selection, variety development to help organic farmers.

Organic carrots are actually quite popular. Looking at – I think they’re, after leafy greens, the – the second – about 14% of the carrots sold in the marketplace are organics. So, quite a popular crop in terms of vegetables.

[new slide titled, Is Organic Healthier, featuring a photo of an organic vegetable stand]

And so, this is not organic research from U.W., but I do just want to address it because this is another question that I get quite a lot. And, again, when we look at the National Organic Standards, the National Organic Standards and the U.S.D.A. National Organic Seal is not making claims that organic is healthier. It’s really, again, it – it – it’s assuring as a consumer that you are buying a product that has been held to very specific production standards –

[Eric Silva, on-cam]

– and has had oversight in terms of that farmer actually implementing the production standards. But certainly, there is this question of, is organic produce healthier? And I just want to highlight a couple studies. This certainly varies. There – there’s a lot of differences that can lead to differences with respect to nutrient content in vegetables. The soil type, the growing conditions, the cultivar. And a lot of these differences that are inherent in the environment or production schemes or genetics of the crop that’s being grown, it – it’s hard to make these judgments with respect to is organic healthier when we look at these large data sets because there’s is so much variation beyond certified organic versus grown conventionally. But these are just a couple studies that I did want to point out.

When we look at why consumers purchase organic, and this certainly is a driver.

[slide titled, Why do consumers purchase organic, featuring a bar graph with percentage of consumers on the y-axis and the reasons for purchasing organic on the x-axis, with the top three reasons for consumers buying organic being – they are healthier, I can avoid pesticides and other toxins, and they are more nutritious]

All these are related to health. The broader judgment, are they healthier? 76% of consumers are buying it because they’re healthier. 53% because they can avoid pesticides and other toxins. 51% because they are more nutritious. There’s certainly also consumers that are looking at those environmental benefits that are really written into the national organic programs. Is organic better for the environment? Other issues with respect to G.M.O.-free. Quite a range, but certainly health is – is one of the primary drivers.

[new slide titled, Pesticide metabolite concentrations in childrens urine, featuring a bar graph with M.D.A. daily concentration on the y-axis and sequential day for conventional diets and organic diets, and showing that there is a much larger presence of pesticide concentrations in children with conventional diets]

So, this is a study that came out of the University of Washington in Seattle. And this – this professor now, I believe he’s at Harvard University. This was published, gosh, almost 10 years ago, but what this did was it looked at a cohort of school children. So, this top line here on the X axis, this is the number of kids that were studied. And this bottom number here is day. So, they looked at – they – they took urine metabolites, and they were specifically looking at metabolites of a – a pesticide, an organophosphate pesticide. So, it’s one class of pesticides. They looked at and – and monitored the urine metabolites for four days, and they had these kids eating basically a conventional diet. And you see here, on days five, after day four, day five through nine, the kids fed an organic diet, just organic produce you purchase out of the grocery store, how that dropped. So, again, its – organic is not saying that’s pesticide-free, but this is certainly some intriguing data to show with this cohort of – of 23 kids, the impact of changing to an organic diet. And then, as those kids were then transitioned at day 10 to a conventional diet – and this a university study – this is all very controlled, and I’m sure they obviously went through the specific approvals, but you can see how that bounced back up there. So, some really intriguing data there.

[new slide titled, Conjugated Lineolic Acids, featuring a photo of a scientist working in a lab and the statement – Conjugated linoleic acids (C.L.A) are a family of at least 28 isomers of linoleic acid found mostly in meat and dairy products derived from ruminants. C.L.A. heath benefits include immune system support, anti-carcinogenesis, anti-atherosclerosis, anti-obesity, anti-diabetes and immunomodulation and is associated with animals fed a forage-based diet]

Just another set of data in terms of conjugated linoleic acid, and this is something that have heard about in milk, and I think I saw a study about this just last week in terms of health benefits of whole full fat milk. But conjugated linoleic acids are a specific family of at least 28 isomers of a linoleic acid that are found mostly in meat and dairy products of – of – derived from ruminants. And these acids, and this is from a review article by Benjamin Spener, they – they have been purported to have a variety of health benefits, including immune system support, anti-carcinogenesis, anti-atherosclerosis, anti-obesity, anti-diabetes, and immunomodulation. And the levels of these acids are associated with animals fed on a forage-based diet.

So, certainly, we have grass-based agriculture that is not necessarily certified organic, but as I mentioned earlier in the – the lecture tonight, pasture and access to pasture is inherent within the organic regulation. So, when you’re buying organic, you can be assured that those animals at some stage of the year, depending on where they are, obviously in Wisconsin we can’t have pasture all year because sometimes there’s snow on the ground, but have been fed a pasture-based diet at some point during the year. And during the grazing system, in terms of dairy cows, at least 30% of their dry matter intake must come from pasture during that pasture season.

[new slide titled, C.L.A. concentrations in milk, featuring a graph with amount of C.L.A. in organic and conventional milk on the y-axis and the months of the year on the x-axis and showing an increased intake of C.L.A.s for organic milk and seasonal upticks and downticks for C.L.A.s in conventional milk but overall less C.L.As for conventional milk]

So, this is from an article by Benbrook et al., in 2013, and this is just one graph from that. That article, which was a meta-analysis looking at data from several different research studies, but the open squares here are organic milk and the – the more solid squares are conventional milk. And you can see, and again this is indicative of milk that’s available during the pasture season, the grazing season, that the levels of C.L.A. in that milk which have been purported to have health benefits are quite a bit higher. Again, this is associated with the forage-based diet, but as a consumer you can be assured with organic products that you are getting product where the animals have had access to pasture and have had a minimum mod of their dry matter intake associated with a pasture-based diet.

So, with that –

[new slide titled, Conclusions, featuring the bullet points – organic farming is an important part of Wisconsins agricultural landscape, the organic market and demand for organic produce continues to grow, organic agriculture allows for a profitable market diversification opportunity, particularly suited for small farmers, and continued research and extension efforts can help support this sector of Wisconsin agriculture]

– just to make a few conclusions, organic farming is certainly an important part of Wisconsin agricultural landscape. The organic market and demand for organic produce continues to grow in not only Wisconsin but across the U.S. and globally. Organic agriculture allows for a profitable market diversification opportunity for farmers and is particularly suited for smaller farmers. And that continued research and extension efforts can help support this sector of Wisconsin agriculture.

[Erin Silva, on-cam]

And, with that, I’d be happy to take any questions.

[applause]