" I heard it through the AgLine"

May 20, 2011

 

 

·        Unmanned drone hunts pests in Oregon fields

·        Study finds limits to local produce consumption

·        Rotten weather clobbers B.C. veggie growers

·        Online tool helps growers choose cover crop

·        Global species loss far less severe than feared

 

 

Unmanned drone hunts pests in Oregon fields

 

(OregonLive.com) BORING -- It's enough to bring out the inner radio-control geek in anyone who sees it. Buzzing like a swarm of bees, a six-rotor helicopter revs to life and vaults straight up, rising quickly above thousands of potted trees at J. Frank Schmidt & Son Nursery.

 

It's only about three feet across and its spindly legs make it look like a flying spider, but this is no toy. Loaded on board is sophisticated GPS technology that sends it to pre-programmed points and maintains a constant altitude of 25 meters, slightly more than 80 feet. Dangling from its abdomen is a digital camera. A swiveling housing keeps the camera level even if the craft pitches in the wind.

 

Pilot Heather Stoven, an Oregon State University research assistant who learned to fly the machine three days ago, flips a switch and takes a series of photographs of the trees below.

 

Now comes the compilation and analysis that's drawn a team of university researchers from Florida, Arkansas and OSU to the nursery, one of the state's largest.

 

The aerial images are downloaded to software that, in its simplest application, identifies and counts the potted trees. Oregon's nurseries raise millions of trees and bushes for landscaping, and inventory control is critical. Counting by hand, however, is labor-intensive and expensive.

 

But the technology blossoms with promise. Equipped with a variety of sensors, the machine potentially can detect disease, look for irrigation or fertilizer problems, gauge plant height and diameter and predict crop yield -- not to mention spot where the field fence needs repair.

 

"An immense number of practical applications," says James Robbins, a University of Arkansas agriculture extension service professor. "It's a low-cost method of crop monitoring."

 

Courtesy of J. Frank Schmidt & Son NurseryA photo taken by the MRRSS aircraft shows researchers on the ground below.

Robbins and other researchers flight-tested the craft Wednesday and Thursday at nurseries in Canby, Yamhill and Boring. Research will continue through the summer, but the early results look good, said Jim Owen an assistant professor at OSU's North Willamette Research and Extension Center.

 

J. Frank Schmidt & Son provided initial grant funding that kick-started the project and brought together a team of collaborative agricultural researchers. Farmers have long known the value of aerial imagery, but photographing fields or orchards from planes was costly and of uneven value. Sam Doane, production horticulturist at J. Frank Schmidt, experimented with mounting cameras on helium balloons, but found them impractical.

 

The breakthrough came when Reza Ehsani, an assistant professor at the University of Florida, suggested modifying a multi-rotor craft available to radio control enthusiasts. The machines are exceptionally quick, nimble and far more stable than fixed-wing model airplanes.

 

It's powered by a lithium ion polymer battery, can stay aloft from nine to 40 minutes and can carry five pounds of camera gear. A basic unit costs from $7,000 to $10,000 -- an expense within reach of many nursery or farm owners. Additional equipment, ranging from simple digital cameras to infrared sensors that can detect nutrient deficiencies, can add hundreds or thousands to the cost.

 

Researchers are leery the public will associate the technology with armed Predator drone aircraft that monitor and attack enemies in Afghanistan. They carefully refer to it by the clunky acronym of MRRSS, or Multi-Rotor Remote Sensing System. Another worry? That paparazzi will use the craft to spy on and photograph celebrities.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Study finds limits to local produce consumption

 

(UC Santa Barbara) – To David Cleveland, a professor of environmental studies at UC Santa Barbara, it seemed as though Santa Barbara County would be a great example of what many are advocating as a solution to the problems of a conventional agrifood network –– a local food system.

 

Santa Barbara County ranks in the top 1 percent of counties in the United States in value of agricultural products, with 80 percent of that value in fruits and vegetables. Farmers here grow some of the best fruits and vegetables in the country, and organic practices, farmers markets and Community Supported Agriculture networks are thriving.

 

Trucking or shipping county produce elsewhere increases the number of food miles, or the farm-to-retail distance. The assumption by advocates is that a local food network would reduce those miles and, therefore, greenhouse gas emissions while improving nutrition.

 

So Cleveland and his students decided to launch a comprehensive study of just how "localized" –– meaning what is produced here is also consumed here –– the agrifood system for fruits and vegetables is in Santa Barbara County, and to try to determine the effects of localization of the food system on greenhouse gas emissions and nutrition. The results of their research, conducted in 2009-10, were recently published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es1040317?journalCode=esthag). The research was supported by funding from Cleveland's award as the first UCSB Sustainability Champion in 2009-10.

 

The researchers found that more than 99 percent of the produce grown in Santa Barbara County is exported, and more than 95 percent of the produce consumed in the county is imported, some of it from as far away as Chile, Argentina and New Zealand. The study also found that, surprisingly, if all produce consumed here was grown in the county, it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions less than 1 percent of total agrifood system emissions, and it would not necessarily affect nutrition.

 

"Most of what's grown here is shipped out," Cleveland said while standing in a tomato field about a mile from the UCSB campus. "And most of what's eaten here is shipped in. That just seems crazy."

 

Corie Radka, second author of the study and a recent UCSB environmental studies and zoology graduate, added: "I think that, for people living in Santa Barbara County, it's a privilege that a lot of Middle America doesn't have. We have so much produce here, so much healthy food here, so you just assume there's localization, which results in better nutrition and decreased environmental impact. If that can't happen here, how can it happen anywhere else?

 

"Other research has shown that direct transport doesn't contribute that much greenhouse gas compared to other parts of the agrifood life cycle," Radka added. "It's called the local food trap. The word ‘local' should mean better nutrition, and a decrease in greenhouse gases, but that's not necessarily so."

 

"Localization per se is not going to change people's access to food," Cleveland said. "So that's why groups like the Food Bank of Santa Barbara County and the Public Health Department provide food assistance and education outreach to try to get people access to food. Just having the local food there isn't going to change people's ability to buy it, or their ability to cook it, or prepare it. Again, it's the food trap. Just replacing imported fruits and vegetables with ones grown in the county, that's not going to do it."

 

Make no mistake, Cleveland and Radka said, localization is important. But their idea of a localized food system doesn't agree with what researchers heard when they interviewed local grocery store managers, who spoke with pride about their "local produce."

 

"I talked to a manager who was very excited about his local fruit, Santa Maria strawberries," Radka said. "But he said he got all of his strawberries from the warehouse. I asked him where the warehouse was, and he said that it's not in the county. Turns out it's in the Bay Area. So strawberries from Santa Maria are transported by truck to a warehouse in the Bay Area and then trucked back here to be sold in stores. To them, that's local. There's a lot of evidence that keeping money from sales of food grown in the county is a boost to the economy but, if that's included in your definition of local, then obviously the definition of local used by some chain grocery stores is not adequate."

 

Going local, according to Cleveland, is just a start. "We have to not let local become the goal," he said. "I think that's the take-home lesson of this study. Local has to be a strategy for getting to the real, bigger goals we have."

 

For example, according to Cleveland, one important aspect that is often overlooked is the extent to which local agriculture is dependent on imported labor. "Localization of the Santa Barbara County agrifood system may be at the price of de-localization of communities in Mexico and Central America," he said.

 

Cleveland, Radka, and other students will be hosting a workshop soon to discuss the potential for localizing the Santa Barbara County agrifood system. "We're talking about localizing as a strategy instead of a goal," Radka said. "Our end goal is to decrease greenhouse gases, increase everyone's access to local produce, improve nutrition and strengthen the local economy –– and make sure that the localizing strategy meets those goals."

 

Other co-authors who participated in the study include current or former UCSB undergraduates Nora Müller, Tyler Watson, Nicole Rekstein, Hannah Wright and Sydney Hollingshead.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Rotten weather clobbers B.C. veggie growers

 

(The Vancouver Sun) – Expect fewer local vegetables in stores and markets this summer as farmers in southwestern B.C. struggle to recover from a cold, wet and dark spring.

 

Early field crops such as peas and beans rotted in the ground before they could germinate while small fruits such as strawberries are weeks behind their normal schedule and fruit development has been retarded, said Richmond farmer Bill Zylmans. A shorter growing season will mean lower yields for farmers, a tough blow after heavy rains in September ended last year's growing season a month early and wiped out potato, carrot and beet crops.

 

"It's been pretty depressing up until today," said Zylmans, who spent a sunny morning Tuesday trying to determine which fields might drain sufficiently to allow planting. "We're three to four weeks behind and these are a crucial three to four weeks."

 

Corn, cabbages, lettuces and potatoes will all be late arriving on store shelves this summer and the shorter growing season means the harvest will be 20 per cent below normal.

 

B.C. farm crops are worth about $1.15 billion annually.

 

"The nugget potatoes would just be arriving in stores about now, that's not going to happen. [Farmers] plant early corn so we see fresh Chilliwack corn in late July, that isn't going to happen," said Zylmans.

 

Farmers in Richmond and Delta will be rushing to get potatoes in the ground during this week's sunny weather, provided the pools of water covering many of their fields recede in time.

 

"We're champing at the bit," said Zylmans. "This is on the heels of a disastrous fall, and we were really hoping nature would deal us a better spring."

 

B.C.'s blueberry crop is about two weeks behind schedule, but the sun has come out just in time for pollination, according to B.C. Blueberry Council executive director Debbie Etsell.

 

"They're going to be a bit late, but the bushes don't appear to be damaged in any way," she said.

 

Greenhouse growers are predicting a 10-to 15-per-cent smaller yield this year due to low light conditions through the spring.

 

"One-per-cent light translates into about one-per-cent production," said Casey Houweling, owner of Houweling's Hot House. "The temperature doesn't affect us that much, but we don't like the dark."

 

Greenhouses in Tsawwassen weren't affected as badly as those further up the Fraser Valley, where the cloud cover in recent weeks has been relentless.

 

Environment Canada senior climatologist David Phillips confirmed that April and May have brought near record-setting dreariness to the West Coast.

 

"For the period beginning April 1 through May 16 we were on track for the coldest average temperatures ever recorded," Phillips said. "Temperatures have been consistently two degrees cooler than normal."

 

Sunny weather predicted for the next week or so will probably prevent a record cold May.

 

Rains have not seriously affected Okanagan fruit growers and the moisture is a welcome surprise for cattle ranchers in the southern Interior, who have suffered through up to five years of drought.

 

Apple and cherry crops were not seriously harmed by erratic weather over the winter, according to BC Fruit Growers Association president Joe Sardinha.

 

The rains that have pelted much of southern B.C. are just now reaching the droughty Peace River and Cariboo, but the typically parched areas around Merritt and Quilchena have seen more rain than usual this spring, said B.C. Cattlemen's Association general manager Kevin Boon.

 

But even with the extra rain, cold weather has put grass growth on cattle range lands at least two weeks behind schedule, he said.

 

Looking forward, farmers and backyard gardeners have some reason for optimism, according to Phillips. The seven-day forecast for the Vancouver area is for sun and near normal temperatures. Computer modelling for the summer is calling for normal temperatures and below average rainfall.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Online tool helps growers choose cover crop

 

(Iowa Farmer) – A new online tool to help farmers decide which cover crops will benefit their row crop rotation is available in Indiana, Michigan and Ohio.

 

Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Ontario, Canada, will be added to the Web-based system.

 

THE TOOL is available at http: //mccc.msu.edu/SelectorTool/2011CCSelectorTool.pdf.

 

Purdue University and the Midwest Cover Crops Council teamed up to release the MCCC Cover Crop Decision Tool, which uses consolidated cover-crop information by state or province to help farmers make cover-crop selections at the county level.

 

Developing information for each state or province were university researchers, Extension educators, Natural Resources Conservation Service personnel, state departments of agriculture personnel, crop advisers, seed suppliers and farmers.

 

Purdue agronomy professors Eileen Kladivko and Keith Johnson contributed to the project.

 

“The MCCC hopes the cover- crop selector tool will encourage the adoption of cover crops by providing the information and decision-making help necessary for farmers to successfully integrate cover crops into their cropping systems,” Kladivko said in a news release.

 

Users of the tool select their state or province and county.

 

They also can give information on their cash crops — including planting and harvest dates; field information, such as the soil drainage class, artificial drainage or flooding; and desired cover- crop benefits.

 

DESIGNED TO be user-friendly, the tool allows users to immediately see how their input changes their cover-crop options. Users can generate an information sheet for a selected cover crop that provides more information and references relevant to application.

 

A Natural Resources Conservation Service Innovation Grant, Michigan State University's Project GREEEN -Generating Research and Extension to meet Economic and Environmental Needs - and the Great Lakes Regional Water Program fund the project.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Global species loss far less severe than feared

 

(AFP) – The pace at which humans are driving animal and plant species toward extinction through habitat destruction is at least twice as slow as previously thought, according to a study released Wednesday.

 

Earth's biodiversity continues to dwindle due to deforestation, climate change, over-exploitation and chemical runoff into rivers and oceans, said the study, published in Nature.

 

"The evidence is in -- humans really are causing extreme extinction rates," said co-author Stephen Hubbell, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of California at Los Angeles.

 

But key measures of species loss in the 2005 UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report are based on "fundamentally flawed" methods that exaggerate the threat of extinction, the researchers said.

 

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) "Red List" of endangered species -- likewise a benchmark for policy makers -- is now also subject to review, they said.

 

"Based on a mathematical proof and empirical data, we show that previous estimates should be divided roughly by 2.5," Hubbell told journalists by phone.

 

"This is welcome news in that we have bought a little time for saving species. But it is unwelcome news because we have to redo a whole lot of research that was done incorrectly."

 

Up to now, scientists have asserted that species are currently dying out at 100 to 1,000 times the so-called "background rate," the average pace of extinctions over the history of life on Earth.

 

UN reports have predicted these rates will accelerate tenfold in the coming centuries.

 

The new study challenges these estimates. "The method has got to be revised. It is not right," said Hubbell.

 

How did science get it wrong for so long?

 

Because it is difficult to directly measure extinction rates, scientists used an indirect approach called a "species-area relationship."

 

This method starts with the number of species found in a given area and then estimates how that number grows as the area expands.

 

To figure out how many species will remain when the amount of land decreases due to habitat loss, researchers simply reversed the calculations.

 

But the study, co-authored by Fangliang He of Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, shows that the area required to remove the entire population is always larger -- usually much larger -- than the area needed to make contact with a species for the first time.

 

"You can't just turn it around to calculate how many species should be left when the area is reduced," said Hubbell.

 

That, however, is precisely what scientists have done for nearly three decades, giving rise to a glaring discrepancy between what models predicted and what was observed on the ground or in the sea.

 

Dire forecasts in the early 1980s said that as many as half of species on Earth would disappear by 2000. "Obviously that didn't happen," Hubbell said.

 

But rather than question the methods, scientists developed a concept called "extinction debt" to explain the gap.

 

Species in decline, according to this logic, are doomed to disappear even if it takes decades or longer for the last individuals to die out.

 

But extinction debt, it turns out, almost certainly does not exist.

 

"It is kind of shocking" that no one spotted the error earlier, said Hubbell. "What this shows is that many scientists can be led away from the right answer by thinking about the problem in the wrong way."

 

Human encroachment is the main driver of species extinction. Only 20 percent of forests are still in a wild state, and nearly 40 percent of the planet's ice-free land is now given over to agriculture.

 

Some three-quarters of all species are thought to live in rain forests, which are disappearing at the rate of about half-a-percent per year.

 

Return to Top

 

 

End Transmission