As mentioned in my post from two days ago, we will be meeting Frederick Kirschenmenn, the star of My Father’s Garden and distinguished fellow at the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University.  And so, we did just that today, joined by Dr. Matt Liebman, Professor of agronomy, and Mark Rasmussen, Director of the Leopold Center.  The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture–named after the conservationist and ecologist, Aldo Leopold–was founded as a result of the 1987 Groundwater Protection Act, which came about after there was public outcry over pollutants in the soil and water that was affecting the health of Iowa residents.  It uses a multi-disciplinary approach to analyze and recommend solutions to water pollution and soil health through four main initiatives: ecology and agricultural systems, marketing and food systems, public policy, and a cross-cutting initiative that connects and coordinates the previous three.

The Leopold Center wants farmers and the public to question the status quo and help shift to agricultural practices that are more sustainable.  According to Kirschenmann, we first saw issues with the socio-economic infrastructure in the Farm Crisis of the early 1980s. As I wrote in yesterday’s post, Lance said that one of the three aspects of sustainability is social.  The powers-that-be of the 1980s were the bankers that had encouraged farmers to buy land and increase the size of their operations.  But when prices dropped and land values fell, the bankers (some of whom were now working for much larger banking operations) reassess the worth of a farmers’ holdings.  Eventually, many farmers went into bankruptcy, but they were doing exactly what the banks told them.  Those that escaped bankruptcy did so by farming commodity crops and tried to expand, lovingly deemed “get big or get out.”  Therefore, the circumstances created a perverse incentive to invest in monocultures and large-scale farming with the heavy use of fertilizers and pesticides.  Because this infrastructure is so ingrained in the politics of many state capitals, the Leopold Center wants to coordinate academic research with public campaigns to pressure politicians and farmers into moving towards more sustainable practices.  Overall, Kirschenmann believes that we should farm like nature and restore the natural health of our soil.  Luckily, we have farmers who are actually aware of the trends and are willing to be educated on the newest practices.

One of these research-driven initiatives is led by Dr., Mark Liebman. While Kirschenmann prescribed a somewhat glum future, Liebman says Iowans have the technological ability and historical precedent to rapidly change their practices.  The real question is: Will we? According to Liebman, there are two main threats to environmental quality: resource depletion and the saturation of the environment with pollutants (soil, nitrates, chemicals, et cetera).  Accordingly, he sees three main strategies in combatting environmental depletion.  The first is to reintegrate crop and livestock agriculture, meaning a move towards the more natural cycle of harvest and feed.  The second to set aside land for conservation, either for habitat protection or soil health.  We should veer away from thinking we need to get a yield out of every square foot of land; some land is just bad for farming.  Finally, use the perennials and other vegetation from the second strategy as animal feed or even energy.  Just because the land is set aside for conservation doesn’t mean all of its use is gone.

Liebman caught a big break when popular New York Times food commentator, Mark Bittman, hailed Liebman’s research on restoring soil health through the use of three- and four-crop rotation, which also increased the crop yield and reduced fertilizer use.  Having read this article before the meeting, we discussed the intersection of media and scientific research.  Liebman believes–and with which I agree–that scientists need media if they want to truly change the world that they live in.  Writing academic articles is simply not enough.  The media is a powerful conduit that can drive the public to also put pressure on their politicians who can then change policy.  The only drawback is that more time must be spent in talking to journalists and the public and making sure that the facts are presented correctly.

Here is a TedX talk that describes Kirschenmann’s beliefs on soil and food.  He also talks some about Liebman’s research.

After lunch, we met with lobbyists from Monsanto at their regional office in Ankeny. Monsanto is a large multinational chemical and biotech company, particularly known for its seeds, biotech traits, and chemicals (especially glyphosate), otherwise known as Round-Up.  We met with Rachel Hurley and Dave Tierney to discuss Monsanto’s place in the agricultural and food sectors and to provide a counterweight to our exposure to many small organic farms.  There are several issues with which Monstanto currently deals.   One issue is, of course, its role in creating GMO products.  I’m in a pretty o.k. place with GMOs.  A vast number of studies endorsed by an equally vast number of organizations (including academic) have shown that GMOs in food are just as safe as non-GMO food.  It often takes over a decade, if not two, for a product to be cleared by the appropriate authorities then released to the world.  However, I believe that a level of constant scrutiny should still be had should some problems crop up in the future.  Another related issue in current politics is mandatory labeling.  Non-GMO activists want mandatory labeling on foods with GMO ingredients so customers can choose their desired food.  However, given the studies that GMOs provide no health risks, Monsanto and other food manufacturers and distributors believe that labeling foods as non-GMO will imply that foods without that label are inferior or harmful.  Nonetheless, the representatives have said that they are supportive of companies that voluntarily want to put a label on their products.

Being a large company, Monsanto suffers from the similar legal and business controversies as other large companies, such as Apple, Comcast, et cetera.  Here, things get a little murky.  The most common accusation against the company is the heavily publicized Monsanto Canada Inc., vs. Schmeiser court case in 2007, in which the farmer claimed that seeds blew over from a Monsanto farm onto his farm.  Therefore, Monsanto sued.  Usually, Monsanto let’s slide “trace amounts present…as a result of inadvertent means” found in a non-Monsanto contracted farm.  Briefly speaking, Schmeiser had over 60% of his crop “infected” with RoundUp-ready plants then saved the seeds from that harvest and planted them (knowing their condition) again on 98% of his land.  The courts believed these sums are far higher than what would be expected form seeds blowing over a road, and I am prone to agree.  Nonetheless, there are many other instances of very aggressive patent enforcement, that all in all does not leave me with a good taste in my mouth.