The New Agriculture Network's on-line newsletter with seasonal advice for field crop and vegetable growers interested in organic agriculture.

Vol. 1, No. 4 - May 27, 2004

In this issue

	2003 Organic research at Michigan State University/W. K. Kellogg Biological Station
	Finding your right price
	Organic production and human health: Are there higher nutrient levels in organically grown crops?
	Changes in organic standards permit use of antibiotics and hormones Update May 28: Ag Department rescinds changes
	Reports from organic growers: Welcome Iowa. Read Update May 28
	Growing Together, Strengthening the CSA Movement: A conference for community-supported agriculture
	MSU Organic Apple Field Day

Next issue posted June 10. Previous issues can be read through our calendar of issues by clicking on the publication date in the calendar.

2003 Organic research at Michigan State University/W. K. Kellogg Biological Station

At MSU’s W.K. Kellogg Biological Station (MSU/KBS), we have eight OCIA certified organic research acres.  Each year we meet with our organic advisory team to decide what research is needed for organic field crop farmers.  In 2003, the farmers were interested in weed control in corn, soybean and variety testing for clear hilum soybeans, winter wheat and rye.  The data presented here is from only one year.  When doing small plot work, we usually prefer two or even three years of study. Our Michigan farmers want to see results each year, so we publish these data in the MSU On-Farm Field Crops AoE Team Research and Demonstration bulletin.  Last year at MSU/KBS, we had a wet, cool spring followed by a very dry summer.

Project 1 - Research purpose
Compare eight small grain varieties for yield in an organic system.
County: Kalamazoo, Cooperator: KBS
Nearest town:  Kalamazoo
Tillage:  conventional
Previous crop:  soybeans
Planting date:  Fall 2002
Fertilizer:  None, Herbicide:  None
Harvest date:  July 25 & Aug. 6, 2003
Exp. Design:  RCB, 5 reps
Soil type: Kalamazoo Sandy Loam  

Results: There were no significant differences between wheat varieties.  Ryman rye was significantly higher yielding as compared to either Wheeler or Aroostook rye

Results
Corn yield was significantly higher using the rotary hoe method for weed control, as compared to other treatments.  Both flaming and Lely weeder treatments resulted in significantly higher yields as compared to banding vinegar.  The control no weed control resulted in an unharvestable treatment.  All treatments reduced weed populations compared to the control both rotary hoeing and Lely weeder decreased corn population significantly.

Project 3 – Research Purpose
Evaluate four cover crops alone and in combinations overseeded into organic corn at  last cultivation for yield and biomass production
County: Kalamazoo  Cooperator: KBS
Nearest town:  Kalamazoo
Tillage:  conventional
Previous crop:  Wheat with red clover cover
Planting date:  May 28, 2003
Cover crop seeding date:  July 2, 2003
Fertilizer:  None   Herbicide:  None
Harvest date:  Nov. 10, 2003
Biomass sampling date:  Oct. 27, 2003
Exp. Design:  RCB, 4 reps
Soil type: Kalamazoo Sandy Loam
Corn hybrid:  NC+ Organics

 * trts 5,6 & 7 clover includes both red and crimson clover

Results
Oilseed radish seeded alone significantly reduced corn yield as compared to crimson clover, annual ryegrass, medium red clover and the control (no cover crop) (Table 1).  This may be explained by the high biomass produced by oilseed radish as compared to the other cover crops (Table 2).  All cover crop treatments reduced grass weeds as compared to the no cover crop control.  Seeding the four cover crop mixtures before cultivation (treatment 7) increased corn yield as compared to seeding right after cultivation however, the yield difference was not significant.

Project 4 – Research Purpose
Evaluate four weed control strategies for organic soybean production.
County: Kalamazoo. Cooperator: KBS
Nearest town:  Kalamazoo
Tillage:  conventional
Previous crop:  corn
Planting date:  May 29, 2003
Fertilizer: None, Herbicide: None
Harvest date:  Oct. 8, 2003
Exp. Design:  RCB, 4 reps
Soil type: Kalamazoo Sandy Loam
Soybean variety:  Vinton 81

Results
Rotary hoeing resulted in a significantly higher yield as compared to flaming, vinegar or the control.  There was no difference between rotary hoeing and Lely weeder.  Unlike corn rotary hoeing soybeans did not reduce soybean plant population.  The Lely weeder treatment significantly reduced soybean plant populations.  All weed control strategies reduced weed densities as compared to the control.  The vinegar treatment resulted in higher weed densities compared to the other weed control strategies.

Project 5 – Research Purpose
Compare eight clear Hilum soybean varieties for yield in an organic system.
County: Kalamazoo, Cooperator: KBS
Nearest town:  Kalamazoo
Tillage:  conventional
Previous crop:  corn
Planting date:  May 30, 2003
Fertilizer:  None
Weed control:  rotary hoe and cultivation
Harvest date:  Oct. 2, 2003
Exp. Design:  RCB, 5 reps
Soil type: Kalamazoo Sandy Loam

back to top

Finding your right price

Susan Smalley
MSU Sustainable Food and Farming Systems

You may remember the popular 1960s game show, The Price is Right!  Contestants were shown a prize — something like a new car or a living room full of furniture or a vacation package.  They had to guess the price of the prize package.  The winner was the contestant who guessed closest to the real price without going above it. 

That game is a familiar one to many direct marketing farmers who feel they are guessing each time they set prices to sell the products they raise.  The truth is, setting prices is both art and science.  You can approach pricing in many ways and there is no magic formula that will tell you the right price for your products.  If you price too low, you won’t cover your costs.  If you price too high, you will lose customers.  You might think of pricing as the bridge between your marketing strategy and your financial health.  So it’s important for you to spend some time and effort to develop a pricing strategy that works for your operation. 

The most basic element of pricing is to know your costs.  You must know what it costs for you to produce and sell your products to your customers before you can price it to make a profit.  What if you don’t have a detailed cost analysis?  Start keeping good records today and use whatever you have to start.  One good time to work on your cost analysis and marketing strategy is after the growing season and just after you prepare your farm tax return.  Working through Schedule F requires you to review your farm income and expenses.  

Can’t you just phone your local Extension office or look on the Internet to find out your costs of production?  Your Extension agent has access to a range of budgets. Looking at these “average” costs can often be helpful, but using the average or book value does not substitute for knowing your real costs.  Each farm has a unique set of costs that depend on its particular mix of land, labor, machinery, buildings, interest, depreciation, enterprise mix, etc. Determining your costs will improve your ability to:

1.  Control and monitor your farm through accounting.
2.  Identify and analyze problems your farm faces.
3.  Plan for change and growth.
4.  Determine your profitability and pricing strategies. 

Your farming business has several types of costs:

Fixed costs are also known as overhead or ownership costs.  They must be paid whether or not you produce anything.  The so called “DIRTI 5" provide a starting point to calculate fixed costs: depreciation, insurance, repairs, taxes, interest.  You have to decide on a reasonable way to allocate fixed costs across the items you produce. 

Variable costs change depending on what and how much you produce.  They include categories such as seed, fertilizer, machine costs, labor, marketing, etc. 

Total costs are the sum of the fixed and variable costs for your farm business.  To determine total costs for a particular crop or enterprise, you would allocate the appropriate portion of fixed costs and all of the variable costs associated with that enterprise. 

You can then determine average total costs per unit (a pound of apples, a pound of ground chuck, a quart of blueberries, etc.) by dividing the total enterprise cost by the number of units of that enterprise you produced.  The difference between your average total costs and the product price represents your profit or loss on the item. 

Pennsylvania State University provides information on line to help farmers develop and use enterprise budgets at: http://agalternatives.aers.psu.edu/farmmanagement/Farm.html

That is one good starting point. 

Another is the accompanying Starting to Track Your Costs table (view table as pdf file).  No matter what format you use to begin, you will eventually need to adjust the categories to fit how you farm and to emphasize which costs matter the most to you.

Once you calculate your costs, you are in a position to consider your floor and ceiling prices. A floor price is the least amount you can charge for a particular product or service — covering your costs and making a profit.  A ceiling price is the highest price you can charge for a particular product or service.  You might determine the ceiling by the highest price a competitor charges or by what you think the market will bear.  The difference between your floor and ceiling prices provides your pricing range.  Deciding where to price within that range will depend on a combination of your profit and volume goals. 

This article provides a basic introduction to product pricing. Completing one of the tables with your real costs as much as you can is an important first step in calculating costs and then pricing your products. Wouldn’t it be a lot easier just to look at what others are charging and at what kind of customers you have and set a price based on those factors?  Both of these strategies are fine, but only after you know your costs and your profit goal.  Your costs will be different than your neighbor’s costs – at least a little, and maybe a lot. Your profit goal may also be different. And your product will probably be different. 

What about pricing based on your buyers’ income and interests?  That’s another valid point. But again, only after you know your costs.  If your customers won’t pay above your floor price, you can’t stay in business. 

To deepen your understanding of enterprise costs and your ability to set profitable prices, you may wish to enroll in a Tilling the Soil of Opportunity agricultural entrepreneurial short course, offered by MSU Extension and the Small Business and Technology Development Center (or check with your state’s Extension for local options).  

One New York grower offers the following observations on pricing:

* Price is integrally connected to quality and marketing, so:

            * Offer only top quality
            * Accommodate your customers
            * Guarantee your product, and THEN

* Get as high a price as the market will bear!  People are willing to pay for top quality.

            * Don’t be upset if a few people refuse to pay your price.
            * Try not to lower your prices, even when your competitors drop theirs.

* Selling directly to consumers offers farmers opportunities to increase profits by

            * Differentiating your product — consider adding your logo and label.
            * Giving samples so customers can taste your product.
            * Suggesting ways to use your product, recipes, etc., to increase demand.
            * Providing service to increase customer loyalty.
            * Making dynamic displays and using attractive packages.

* Keep detailed records and

            * Calculate your profits per acre (or per row foot) per crop. 
            * Calculate labor as percentage of gross receipts per crop.
            * Estimate your break-even point per unit (quart, pound, etc.) per crop. 

How to avoid dropping prices
If special sales and lower prices are appropriate due to oversupply or promotional activities, it may be a better strategy to retain your base price and then provide your customer extra value instead of just dropping your price.  A Massachusetts farmer provides one example:

When corn is over-supplied and other farmers are down around $2.75/dozen, we keep our base price of 35 cents/ear, six ears for $2.00; a dozen ears for $3.75.  To attract customers, we let them know we’ll provide one “free” ear when they buy six for $2.00, and two “free” ears when they buy twelve for $3.75.  We find more people buying dozens at $3.75 to get 14 ears than we normally do.  We receive 27 cents/ear and keep our base price for future marketing.  Our competition receives 23 cents/ear and will have difficulty raising prices in the future should the supply change.  Of course, quality is critical in this strategy.

Acknowledgment
This article is reprinted from the October 2003 issue of Michigan Organic Connections, the bi-monthly newsletter of the Michigan Organic Food & Farm Alliance.  The October 2003 issue contains additional commentary on organic foods and nutrition, along with other featured articles on organic and local food systems, and can be found at www.moffa.org (under Newsletters). 

back to top

Organic production and human health: Are there higher nutrient levels in organically grown crops?

There continues to be a high level of interest among organic growers and consumers about nutrient levels differences in organic versus non-organically grown crops.  It is a topic for which there is relatively limited data and for which data is relatively expensive to gather.  However, there is a body of information that we can look to and develop a best estimate.  I use “nutrient” in the classical sense of something that we require but don’t synthesize ourselves -- this includes vitamins, required minerals, essential amino acids for building proteins, and essential fatty acids.  I have added phytochemicals to the discussion because, while we don’t have data to suggest that they are “required,” there is certainly a wealth of data indicating that various phytochemicals or plant secondary metabolites are beneficial to human health.  Although there is a great deal of philosophical belief that organically raised crops are healthier for the consumer, the question to ask concerns scientific validation of these perceptions from a nutritional standpoint. 

To date, major differences have not been seen in organically versus non-organically raised crops for vitamins or minerals if everything else is held equal.  A recent review and analysis of 150 studies¹ conducted between 1926 and 1994 found relatively few differences overall.  While there are a number of ways to conduct these studies (for example, going into the market and collecting tomatoes that are labeled organic and those that are not, then sampling them for vitamin C), the best would be side-by-side cultivation of identical varieties in organically and conventionally managed soils.  Studies conducted in this manner tend to show no differences in either mineral or vitamin concentration.  Protein concentration does tend to vary somewhat but is more closely associated with the level of soil N and not the production method per se. 

The one striking exception to this is the level of vitamin C in various fruits and vegetables.  There has been a fairly consistent finding of higher vitamin C levels in organically grown produce.  The question is why?  There are a number of possible reasons that would complicate the adage that organic produce has higher nutrient levels.  First, it has been shown that vitamin C levels decrease with an increase in available soil N at time of planting.²  It is reasonable to suspect that at least some of the organic systems studied had less available soil N than the conventional systems, although this is not known with certainty.  Second, in its role as an antioxidant, levels may be increased in the organic system to “cope” with increasing levels of oxidants.  This, however, illustrates the problem with attempting to quantify nutritional value differences in organic versus conventionally grown crops.  The systems of production are wildly different and we know that there are a number of environmental factors that play roles in modifying nutrient levels.   

There is another, more recent study that provides some fascinating information concerning the levels of plant secondary metabolites or phytochemicals in different cropping systems.³  Mitchell and colleagues looked at total secondary phenolic metabolites (or phenolics) in three crops from a single farm in Oregon—marionberries and corn grown either organically, conventionally or “sustainably” and strawberries grown either conventionally or sustainably.  Phenolics are known to increase in response to insect predation, microorganism pressure (disease), or UV light exposure.  In this case, the definition of “sustainably produced” appears to utilize lower levels of pesticide inputs along with alterations in soil fertility management relative to “conventional produced”.  Samples were analyzed from frozen, freeze-dried and air-dried samples.  In all cases, frozen had the highest levels of phenolics compared to freeze-dried and air-dried.  Other research from this laboratory showed that freezing for six months was no different than fresh samples.  A summary of results for the frozen samples is shown in Table 1.  In all crops, the frozen samples with the lowest levels of total phenolics were conventionally grown crops.  Strawberries were about 19% higher in total phenolics in sustainably versus conventionally grown, while marionberries were 50% higher in organically grown and corn was 57% higher.   

While this data have been criticized by many as the production methods were not rigorously controlled, I think these critiques miss the point.  This information reinforces what production ecologists studying these issues, with no necessary regard for the human health implications, have found repeatedly.  That is, production strategies and environmental conditions affect the production of various plant secondary metabolites.  We have made a connection in health research concerning human intake of these compounds and altered risk of various chronic diseases.  While not extrapolating too far, this information provides insights that extend the general research on environmental effects on plant metabolites to include generic types of production strategies—organic, conventional and “sustainable.”  Given that these are produced in response to environmental “assaults” of various types - for example insect and disease pressure - it is reasonable to conclude that a system in which the plant is encouraged to more reasonably “fend for itself” will lead to higher levels of these compounds. The plant is not producing them for us but we are a beneficiary.

Overall, the literature to date does not really support the claim that organically grown food has inherently higher levels of nutrients than conventionally grown food. There is a modest amount of data that supports a claim for vitamin C, however that is confounded by environmental factors that may, or may not, be at play from farm to farm. However, there is tantalizing evidence that plant secondary metabolites, or phytochemicals to most of us, are affected by production style and that organic production systems may be providing the environment in which plants increase production of these compounds. While the plant is not producing these compounds for our benefit, we benefit nonetheless. 

Acknowledgment
This article appeared in the October 2003 issue of Michigan Organic Connections, the bi-monthly newsletter of the Michigan Organic Food & Farm Alliance.  The October 2003 issue contains additional commentary on organic foods and nutrition, along with other featured articles on organic and local food systems, and can be found at www.moffa.org (under Newsletters). 

References
[1] K. Woese, D. Lange, C. Boess and K. W. Bogl.  A Comparison of Organically and Conventionally Grown FoodsóResults of a Review of the Relevant Literature J Sci Food Agric 74, 281-293 (1997).

[2] K. Brandt and J. P. Mølgaard Organic agriculture: does it enhance or reduce the nutritional value of plant foods? J Sci Food Agric 81: 924-931 (2001).

[3] D. K. Asami, Y.-J. Hong, D. M. Barrett, And A. E. Mitchell Comparison of the Total Phenolic and Ascorbic Acid Content of Freeze-Dried and Air-Dried Marionberry, Strawberry, and Corn Grown Using Conventional, Organic, and Sustainable Agricultural Practices  J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 1237-1241

back to top

Changes in organic standards permit use of antibiotics and hormones

Update May 28: Ag Department rescinds changes

Craig Harris at Michigan State University noted shortly after we published this newsletter, that the USDA has rescinded the changes related to the use of antibiotics and hormones. Read the details as published by the New York Times at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/27organic.html

In explaining the directives, department officials had said they were not creating new rules but establishing the limits of existing regulations. Read the regulations at National Organic Program: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/indexIE.htm

Our previous announcement about permitted use of antibiotics and hormones linked to an article that appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle where it told of the USDA changes in interpretations of the organic label:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/05/22/ORGANIC.TMP&type=printable

back to top

Illinois
Northern Illinois conditions have been extremely wet, receiving 7.3” of rain in the past two weeks. I will plant a 102-day variety of corn (food grade) this year instead of a 106-day corn.  This appears to be a better choice given that no corn will be planted on this farm until June.  With the wet conditions, no fieldwork has been done.  The soil temperature at 8 AM on May 16 (at a depth of 4”) was 48º in a field that will be planted to corn. In the next two weeks, plan to field cultivate, plant and rotary hoe corn and beans.

Central Illinois weather has been hot, windy, with a lot of rain. Typical rain events have been between .5 -1.5 inches. Cultivating all spring and summer crops.  Trying to prep beds for upcoming 2^nd planting of tomatoes, peppers, and squash on June 1.  Frequent rains have impeded all these activities.  We started selling to farmers market and restaurants three weeks ago and harvests are taking place three days per week.  I have harvested the first tomatoes from the greenhouse.  In the next two weeks, I plan to do more cultivation and begin our second planting of tomatoes, peppers and squash.  Also, green onions and sugar snap peas will be harvested next week. 

In Southeast Illinois (Casey, Illinois) periodic rains have resulted in poorer quality alfalfa hay. The rains have not been heavy enough to cause any problems with planting and rotary hoeing. Our current activities include baling hay, plowing down red clover cover crop, disking, planting corn, rotary hoeing corn, and mowing hay. Two weeks from now, we hope to be disking, soil finishing, planting soybeans, mowing and baling hay, hoeing, and cultivating corn.

Some in Illinois are jokingly asking, “Why aren’t we becoming grass farmers instead of trying to deal with the problems associated with growing row crops, such as persistent cold and very wet late spring seasons?”

Indiana
We have been very wet in southeastern Indiana since the beginning of May. We are getting more rain today (May 26) and delays will be longer yet. Total rain in May so far is 3.75". My hay is outgrowing my ability to find dry days to get it put up. I have had about half of my intended cattle show up for custom grazing and that leaves a lot of pastures growing to the point of needing to be baled. Thistles are budding fully now and will be going to bloom by next week. The cattle have been nipping them off and keeping them from going to seed. Hopefully I can get some hay made soon to prevent the few I have left from going to head. I am still looking for an opportunity to try some no-till corn into fresh grazed pasture. I would like to see this work for some acres of warm season grass growth in August.

In west central Indiana the past two weeks’ temperatures have been cooler and we have had rain almost every other day, sometimes two days in a row.  Late afternoon thundershowers have been spotty, but unusually frequent.  Most rainfall events have been less than one inch, so ponding has not been severe.  The early-planted corn is already covering the row middles.  Pastures are luxuriant.

Growers in our area are trying to find windows to get post-emergent herbicide spraying and nitrogen side-dressing completed.  A few still have the last of their soybeans yet to plant. This is a challenging year for those relying on cultivation for weed control.

The forecast has delayed first cutting of alfalfa.  We wonder what effect the rain will have on the amount of disease, particularly head scab, in wheat.  We are also worried about the potential for slugs in fields no-tilled into wheat stubble or small grain cover crops.

Corn stands are good. The onion-leafing due to slow herbicide metabolism is now only a vague memory. Few reports of insect damage.  Pre-side dress nitrogen tests are coming back higher than usual where winter and spring manure applications have been made.  We assume that the dry late winter and early spring resulted in less loss. Although the nitrogen costs are staggering, we are not seeing much reduction in rate, but some are foregoing soil testing services and liming this year and are reducing P and K rates about 25%.

As a rough indicator of growing degree days accumulated, an occasional firefly is seen flitting about and the peony bushes are in full bloom. Since this is the seventeenth year, our woods are now filled with noisy cicadas.

Several of our smaller-scale row-croppers, particularly early retirees from factories and young Amish farmers are trying horticultural crops on non-program acres. Growers I work with in both west central and southeastern Indiana say produce crops are looking good.  Early strawberry crop is heavy and the blackberry crop looks good. A late frost did knock out the peach crop again near the Ohio River. On tomatoes, with all the rainfall and humidity, we are concerned about more Septoria leaf spot and early blight caused by Alternaria, especially in organic production. This spring the number of plastic covered high tunnels used by vegetable growers has increased in the area northwest of Cincinnati.

I recently visited with an organic market gardener located near Danville in west central Indiana who puts considerable effort into saving eggshells, drying them and rolling them into a coarse powder.  This calcium powder is then used as a soil amendment in the bottom of transplant holes and on the surface around transplant stems in place of diatomaceous earth to protect against cutworms. Anyone else have experience with eggshell powder in organic production? What approach is preferred for reducing losses to squash vine borers in cucurbit fields?

Here are some questions we have:

How best to turn under a rye/vetch mix on a sandy loam soil? It was mowed at early bloom. Plans are to make beds and then transplant lettuce by hand. The following suggestions/comments were made during the organizational phone call for this newsletter, but we'd like to hear more:

1. Concern about allelopathy from rye with small-seeded crops.
2. Moldboard plow will get the residue out of the way; if furrow is laid on its side there is less likely to be problem with poor decomposition.
3. If you have a row cleaner, you can get rid of residue.
4. Work it in shallow to leave residue on surface to help minimize evaporation and to control weeds.

What approach is preferred for reducing losses to squash vine borers in cucurbit fields? Some resources through Purdue University include Issue 423 of the Vegetable Crops Hotline at: http://www.entm.purdue.edu/entomology/ext/targets/vegcrop/VCH2003/VCH423.htm. This resource includes a discussion of biology and damage of the squash vine borer, with photos and information on scouting to determine time for most effective in-season control. For control in organic systems, see Purdue Publication ID-316 at:

http://www.agcom.purdue.edu/AgCom/Pubs/ID/ID_316.pdf (8 MB pdf file). This publication suggests delayed planting, crop rotation, trap crops of hubbard squash which will attract the egg-laying adults, and organic insecticides (Bt or neem) at base of plant for several weeks during the egg-laying period.

Iowa
We are in the process of adding Iowa State University and its cooperating growers to the New Agriculture Network. We are pleased to have them join the Network to expand what we can offer to organic agriculture in the Upper Midwest. Paul Mugge filed the first grower report for Iowa. He is located in Northwest Iowa and farms a half section of all certified organic acreage. His operation includes small grains, corn, soybeans, and hogs.

Our farm was very dry until May 16. I had corn sitting in dry dirt. My stand is not very good, and this also produced plants that are pretty variable in height, which will be difficult to cultivate effectively. I have received about 5” of rain since then so I have done almost no rotary hoeing. Hopefully the very cold weather will also have limited the weed growth so all is not lost. I still have a few acres of soybeans to plant, but rotary hoeing will take precedence. Looking ahead two weeks, I hope to rotary hoe, flame cultivate, and probably row-crop cultivate.

I’m interested in hearing more about weed control techniques that people are using, especially for real problem weeds like Canada thistle.

Our second reporter from Iowa is Ron Rosmann who filed this report: First of all I think I should give a brief background and description of our farm.  My wife, Maria and I farm near Harlan, Iowa, which is in the west-central part of the state about 50 miles northeast of Omaha, NE. Our 620-acre farm is completely certified organic and is very diversified. We have been certified for the last ten years but have been farming organically for 21 years. Our farm consists of soybeans for soy milk and soy protein products all for human consumption and also raise seed for NC+ .  We have around 100 acres of soybeans.  We raise both white and yellow corn on about 200 acres. We have 60 acres of barley and are trying field peas with the barley for the first time. The intent of this is to increase the protein in our certified organic swine ration and decrease dependence on organic soy meal. We use all of the split beans from the processing of our soybeans for protein as well, and hope that between the two sources of protein, we will not have to purchase any costly organic soybean meal. We have around 20 acres of oats and ten acres of hulless oats to be used in baby pig rations. 

We have a farrow to finish hog operation and currently have 40 sows farrowing four times a year. The hogs are sold through Organic Valley in LaFarge, Wisconsin and some are sold through our own meat business that my wife primarily runs. We also have a certified organic beef cowherd of 75 Red Angus cows. The calves are all fed out and again are sold either through Organic Valley or through our own private label meat business. We have around 125 acres of pasture and 100 acres of hay and headlands and buffer strips of grass and legumes. The cattle are rotationally grazed and we are experimenting with grass-finishing of our beef with less grain to both lower our costs and increase the beneficial fatty-acids in the meat. 

The spring started out quite wet in late March when we planted our barley and oats. Then it was warm and dry for the whole month of April. We started planting corn on May 1 and were done planting corn by May 7. Emergence was good and all the corn was rotary hoed once by May 20. We started to plant soybeans on May 20. We are primarily ridge-tillers on our row-crops of corn and beans. We do mold-board plow alfalfa fields going to corn.  We had 45 acres of beans planted by May 22, when everything changed with two very strong storms hitting us over a span of three days. Rainfall consisted of six inches in the two storms, which contained some hail and strong winds. The worst was the intensity of the rain over a short period of time. It was raining an inch/30 minutes. The erosion in our area is the worst I think I have ever seen. We are fortunate to have a good deal of grass and hay and small grains on our farm. This helped a great deal. The ridge-till did not fare as well and the plowed fields were the worst. I have never seen such bad erosion even on no-till fields. It points out that there is always room for improvement in soil conservation. I can see the need for more grass waterways and grass ditches, which because of dry weather over the past five years or so, have been neglected and abandoned. Most conventional farmers in our area do not leave a blade of grass growing in a ditch or even a fence line if they even have one.  Some of our soybeans were covered up quite deeply with soil moving back over the row from the pushed out ridge-till trash and soil. I think they will still push through. We have been rotary hoeing as of today to break the crust and help emergence of the beans. Some were washed out or exposed in a few places. I think we will be okay because of heavy planting populations (around 175,000 seeds/acre) and if we get some sunshine and warm weather. That is all for now. 

Michigan
There has been incessant rain since May 1 with only one to two days suitable for fieldwork in the May 1--May 26 period (North Branch, Michigan). Ponding is common even in pattern tiled fields. Winter grains are mostly okay. Cover crops are getting rank. Oat/barley cover crops planted in April are thriving. Fields with well established cover crops, or even cover crops that have had some April tillage are not showing the signs of erosion evident in bare, non-cover cropped fields. Most spring grains are okay, but are yellowing in wetter areas. No row crops (corn/soys/sunflowers) planted yet on organic farms.

Corn acreage may be eliminated or switched to beans.

Unfortunately, current practices include watching water levels go up and down, pumping water out of the basement. It has also been a good time to repair machines and build chicken coops. Under current conditions, it will require AT LEAST one rain-free week with high temperatures and winds to allow any fieldwork. In two weeks, we hope to plant beans and vegetables and also cut hay.

We continue to have questions about soy aphid control and would like an update. I (John Simmons – North Branch, Michigan) had a lengthy discussion with the entomologist representing "PYGANIC". He was not optimistic about economically significant control of soy aphids in organic fields, and said that he would not recommend relying on the "PYGANIC” product for control. He did note that the overwhelming presence of soybeans in the national rotation drastically hastened the devastatingly rapid spread and dominance of the soy aphids.

What are people going to do with corn acres that were washed out due to rain?

back to top

When: November 12-14, 2004
Where: Kettunen Center near Tustin, Michigan (just south of Cadillac)
Contact: CSA-MI, 3480 Potter Rd, Bear Lake, MI 49614. Phone: 231-889-3216 (toll free 877-526-1441). E-mail: csafarm@jackpine.com             www.mlui.org/csaconference

Workshops for experienced and new CSA farmers, CSA wannabes, small farm advocates, community food/health advocates, educators and Extension personnel.

Featured Speakers
John Peterson (Angelic Organics)
Elizabeth Henderson (Sharing the Harvest, a Guide to CSA)
CR Lawn (Fedco Seeds)

In partnership with: W K Kellogg Foundation, CS Mott Group for Sustainable Food Systems, Michigan Farmers Union Foundation, Michigan Land Trustees, Michigan Land Use Institute, Michigan Organic Food and Farm Alliance (MOFFA), Michigan Rural Rehabilitation Corporation, Madison Area CSA Coalition (MACSAC), National Farmers Union, Robyn VanEn Center, The Community Farm Newsletter

Five Springs Farm CSA, http://fivespringsfarm.itgo.com
The Community Farm Newsletter, http://tcf.itgo.com

back to top

Reserve your place today!  Michigan State University invites you to visit its certified organic apple orchard to see the 2500 trees on five acres and discuss some of the lessons researchers have learned over the past five years of orchard establishment and management. The planting includes three apple cultivars with different susceptibility to disease. It is certified organic by the Organic Crop Improvement Association (OCIA). The orchard project is funded primarily by Project GREEEN and a USDA Sustainable Agriculture grant through the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station. More than 40 scientists, staff, extension agents, farmers, advisors and students contribute to the organic orchard project. Results from this work benefit both organic and conventional apple growers.

The field day will feature presentations and discussion on three of the major areas being investigated in research at the orchard:

***  Building soil quality, fertility and biological diversity is essential in organic production systems.  Alfalfa hay mulch, compost and clover are primary orchard nutrient sources.  Routine soil sampling has documented changes in nutrient availability and in quantities of soil bacteria and fungi as the length of time in organic management increases.

***  Research on orchard floor and tree management in the organic orchard has results applicable to all orchards.  Comparing three root stocks and three vegetation management systems (mulch, flaming, Swiss sandwich) shows differences in tree growth and fertility.

***  Disease and insect management concerns in the orchard have focused on apple scab, fire blight, coddling moth and plum curculio.  Management strategies including trapping, attractants, organic approved sprays and plant diversity are being tested in the orchard.

In addition to these three important aspects of organic apple production, research at the organic orchard also deals with orchard management education, certification, marketing and economics.

Plan to arrive at the station no later than 1:00 PM, when wagons will transport field day visitors from the Clarksville station headquarters to the orchard plots.  Separate tours visiting three educational stations in the orchard are planned for first time visitors and return visitors.  Visitors will receive a printed copy of research results.  There is no charge to participate in the field day but advance reservations -- by Monday, June 14 -- are requested to assure adequate transportation and materials.  To reserve your place contact Sandy Allen by telephone (517 355 5191, extension 339) or email (allens@msu.edu).  Let her know who and how many are coming and whether they are first time or return field day participants.

Directions to Clarksville Horticultural Experiment Station (CHES):  Take I-96 to Clarksville exit #59.  Go south 1/2 mile to Portland Road, then west (right) 3/4 mile.  The station is on the north (right) side of the road.  For additional information, telephone CHES at 616 693 2193 or email CHES at stewar28@msu.edu.

back to top