Santee Sioux Tribe Establish “Outdoor Living Barn”

An “Outdoor Living Barn” is the
solution to the Santee Sioux Tribes’
economic and conservation needs.

Two years ago the Tribe, located in
Knox County, Nebraska, decided to
find a way to get their calves to mar-
ket sooner than the competition,
which would allow them to obtain a
higher price. In order to accomplish
this, the Tribe needs to get their calves
to market in September, rather than
December, which means calving in
late January or early February. The
problem is that during these months
the winter weather still persists and
often times the temperature plumits
below zero. And that, in addition to
the windchill, can kill a newborn calf.

(Sustainable Agriculture from page 1)

In an effort to find a solution, the
idea to establish an “outdoor living
barn” evolved. This past spring, the
Tribe, along with the Nebraska Forest
Service; Bureau of Indian Affairs; and
USDA Forest Service, National
Agroforestry Center, established a six-
row, 7,000 foot (1.3 mile), windbreak
comprised of red cedar, ponderosa
pine, and mixed shrubs. The objective
of the planting is to stop blowing
snow within the windbreak to pro-
vide late winter/early spring protec-
tion for the Santee Sioux’s 500-head
cow/calf operation.

According to Darrell Ausborn,
Forest Manager, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, “the project was driven by a
benefit-cost analysis. The importance

as a group, are trying to look at the
system, and the components of that
system, in an effort to bring about
new inputs and opportunities that
help supply the end result, which is a
focus on profitability, environmental
protection, and people. So, I believe
that agroforestry provides us with the
opportunity to bring new opportuni-
ties to rural America. For example
agroforestry has the potential to bring,
about new products, which in turn
create new job opportunities and
enhance the local economy.

NAC: What is the Minnesota
Institute for Sustainable Agriculture
(MISA) doing on agroforestry?

WYSE: The Institute spent the last
two years trying to bring a group of
people together, from both the
forestry and agricultural fields, to
look at how agroforestry fits into sus-
tainable agriculture. I’ve found, in my
discussions with individuals dealing
in agroforestry, that the focus is still
somewhat narrow. Folks currently
look at agroforestry in much the same
way we look at monoculture corn.
The original idea of agroforestry was
to put trees on the landscape, and not
a lot of thought was put into how that
would fit into the overall develop-
ment of a sustainable system.
Through our discussions, I believe
we're beginning to talk now about

how agroforestry and agriculture can
be combined to provide a landscape
approach to our production system.
And, MISA has played the role of
facilitator in this effort.

NAC: What roles for agroforestry,
within sustainable agricultural land-
use systems, do you see as the most
important?

WYSE: Well, the primary problem
that I see in moving agroforestry into
mainstream agriculture is that most of
the concepts that have been put for-
ward in the past have not been prof-
itable — at least farmers have not
received them as being profitable. In
most cases, agroforestry has been pre-
sented as a way of protecting the
environment. And, most farmers
don’t want to take on that whole
responsibility single-handedly. They
would like to see agroforestry provide
them with new opportunities to solve
social and profitability problems, as
they deal with environmental issues
across the landscape. So, if we're
going to move agroforestry into main-
stream agriculture we need to look at
how we can do this in a profitable
way. If it’s profitable, I think we'll
have more farmers stepping forward
to provide support and moving that
technology into the agricultural sys-
tem, resulting in environmental pro-
tection as well as an added compo-

of planting trees like this identifies the
interface between forestry and agri-
culture. In this case, the ability to get
first-year calves to market in
September versus December means
an expected market advantage of $.15-
per-pound. The Tribe currently has
the potential to market 460 head of
500-pound calves a year. This totals
an economic advantage of $34,500-
per-year!”

The Tribe provided the land and
initiative for the project. They were
responsible for planting the trees and
shrubs and will continue to provide
maintenance. The land adjacent to the
planting is in row-crops now, but will
be converted to pasture this fall.

nent of profitability to agriculture in
general.

NAC: You mentioned landscape-
level managment, what are the bene-
fits of this approach?

WYSE: As we look at social, envi-
ronmental, and profitablity issues, I
think that the new thought process
coming about is that we approach
these from a landscape perspective.
The landscape provides the focus for
our efforts. As we set goals and objec-
tives for a landscape, we move indi-
vidual farmers through individual
farm plans in an effort to meet the
overall landscape objective. In other
words, we need to get farmers within
a region to focus on the broader
issues, which is really what we're
doing when we talk about water qual-
ity within a river basin. Farmers need
to begin thinking about their farm as
part of a larger landscape, in the fact
that what they do on their farm either
contributes to, or minimizes, the
whole problem. Furthermore, the idea
is that by moving perennial plants
onto their cropping system, they are
doing the appropriate thing for over-
all landscape management. I think
that we also need to mention that as
we approach agroforestry and the
develoment of new cropping systems,
we need to think about wildlife.

(See Sustainable Agriculture on page 7)

Inside Agroforestry 5


Spotlight On Success BUTENE)

What's New in Alley Cropping Research? -

Alley cropping seems to fit the niche of combining a
long-term, forestry-oriented, conservation practice that
enhances the environment with a traditional cropping
practice that provides annual income. Various economic
analyses and field trials have been conducted on alley
cropping systems and have shown it to be a technology
that provides returns to both the land and the landowner.

However, Dr. Andrew Gillespie, Associate Professor of
Silviculture, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana,
with the assistance of several Purdue agronomists and
economists, is building on past research results and going
one step further. Previous research mainly focused on crop
yields and economic analysis of the tree/crop system.
Gillespie is attempting to better understand plant competi-
tion at the tree/crop interface. He is taking a close look at
both above-ground and below-ground processes, including
nutrient cycles, photosynthesis, and water-use relations.

Gillespie's research plot includes a 12-block replication
of alternating rows of soybeans and trees, and corn and
trees. Sets of four, six, and 12 rows of crops are within each
alley to assess the differences between resource competi-
tion for light, water, and nutrients. Two species of trees are
used, red oak and black walnut, and two spacings within
tree rows have been tested, four foot and eight foot.
However, the best trees have now been selected and all tree
rows have been thinned to eight foot spacings and pruned
to allow adequate space for farm machinery to maneuver.
The experimental system is 10-years-old and tree heights
are 20 to 25 feet.

Additionally, a
unique research
opportunity sur-
faced for Gillespie
when he met
Hugh Pence, a
Lafayette, Indiana
landowner and
farm manager.
Mr. Pence, already
a pioneer in the
agroforestry arena
and an active
member of the
American Walnut
Council, believes
so much in what
current agro-
forestry research
results are show-
ing that, in 1988,
he established a
well-thought-out

A research assistant takes gas exchange
measurements (photosynthesis, transpira-
tion, etc.) for black wainut trees using an
Infrared gas analyzer.

/ : Bliss

By inserting a small camera down a glass tube (a minirhizotron), a
research assistant analyzes the rooting pattern of trees and corn.

alley cropping system on his own farm. On his own initia-
tive, he planted 44,000 walnut trees spaced 22.5 feet apart
on 124 acres and plants corn each year in the alleys. In the
future he plans to plant soybeans and hay.

Pence’s contribution to Gillespie’s research is important
because he is able to provide actual, on-farm information
for use in economic analysis. With Pence’s cooperation,
cost assumptions can be analyzed and real figures from his
farm are used for alternative projections. Pence’s “working
farm” provides important data like: the time it takes to
prune trees, yields and return on investment, cost for
inputs such as fertilizer and herbicides, and cost of applica-
tion. Furthermore, Pence is “thoroughly convinced that this
system of agriculture has a lot of unrealized potential for
“the heart of the cornbelt” and is more than willing to
assist Purdue University in this research pursuit. Infact,
according to Gillespie, Purdue is probably realizing greater
returns from this cooperative effort than Pence is. The
union of the two is no-doubt a win-win situation.

Gillespie believes that “in a year-or-two, we'll definitely
know the potential of alley cropping systems in the
Midwest and how to modify and optimize them for a vari-
ety of different objectives.” Results from this research pro-
ject will be used to understand interactions between tradi-
tional cropping practices and alley cropping as a system,
under normal crop management. Also, this project will
provide a comparison of low-input techniques and the
impact of soil and water conservation on yields. Hopefully
data on system performance, yields, economies, manage-
ment, and ease of adoption will be achieved as well.

Gillespie’s plans for the future are to extend this inten-
sive biology-economics type of research to other systems
used in the Midwest.

It ts because of the dedication of scientists like Andy and the initiative and
cooperation of landowners like Hugh that needed agroforestry research continues

and that this knowledge can be acquired to make practices like alley cropping
more profitable and successful for landowners. Thank you Andy and Hugh!

4. Inside Agroforestry


(Landowner from page 3)

wildlife, as with everything, there are
positives and negatives. But, I really
enjoy seeing them around and I can’t
see that they’re hurting my bottom
line in terms of dollars. Infact, my son
Kevin is interested in trees too. He has
bought land and is already getting set
up to plant about six field windbreaks
next spring. He likes to hunt so the wild-
life factor is one of his alternate goals.

Through trial and error, I’ve
learned a lot over the years. For
instance, in the mid-60’s, lombardy
poplar trees were the only species I
had planted around our house. They
were 40 foot high and doing well
when in the early 80’s they froze and I
lost them all. I quickly learned to use
a variety of species. Since then, I have
replaced them with black walnut,
American elm, hackberry, and green
ash. Now, I use a variety of species in
most of my plantings. All of my wind-
breaks consist of one, or a combina-
tion, of these species: juniper, red
cedar, ponderosa pine, elm, green ash,
russian olive, honeylocust, hackberry,
and a shrub row of either sandcherry,
lilac, sumac, buffaloberry, chokecher-
ty, or plum (good for the wildlife).

I've visited with many neighbors
and even offered them the use of my
tree planting machine, but haven’t
had a lot of takers. In talking with
them, I believe that part of the prob-
lem with getting them to plant trees is
that most either don’t understand the
whole concept or simply aren’t com-
mitted to it. They’re often times “too
busy,” or say “trees...they take up too
much room,” or that they have “tried
planting trees and most of them died
anyway so I got discouraged.”

Well, I’ve found out that not every
tree will grow every year and then
some years all of them will grow. It’s
a hit-and-miss situation. And then, of
course, there’s the long-term turn-
around. Basically, I believe you're
planting trees for the next generation.
However, I’m already starting to see
benefits of my own labors. And, I
must say, I just enjoy trees!

As I mentioned before, the NRD
really deserves a pat on the back.
They help me with maintenance,
which is so important because tree-

55108

maintenance time is also a busy field
time for farmers and ranchers. They
also help me choose the correct loca-
tion for windbreaks based on prevail-
ing winds, landscape, and soil types,
choose species, and prepare the
ground. The cost-share programs are
an incentive that help encourage
landowners to plant trees. This is
important because it’s such a long
time before you're able to see a pay-
back, especially when compared to
the quick turnaround and payback
you get from practices like terraces
and waterlines. Actually, 1 found out
that a lot of landowners don’t even
realize that these cost-share programs
exist. I don’t believe though that the
government should foot the entire bill
or there would be less enthusiasm on
the part of the landowner, and
enthuiasm is the key ingredient!

Based on my experience, for a
windbreak to function properly, I sug-
gest putting some time and research
into where the windbreak is going to
be located. The landowner really
needs to be involved in this because
special attention needs to be paid to
how the land is laid out. It’s impor-
tant to think about things like direc-
tion of prevailing winds, at all times
of the year, and what the future plans
are for the area. For instance, is there
a field that may have a center pivot
irrigation system installed on it some-
day? And, what will the windbreak be
used for?

Help Save the Butternut

Forest inventory data collected by the USDA Forest Service reveal that
butternut trees have declined up to 84 percent in some parts of the Lake
States over the past 10-15 years. Never very common, this close kin to wal-
nuts is now in serious jeopardy. The culprit is a fungus discovered in 1967
that produces cankers that close off the tree’s food and water supplies. But
officials at the Forest Service’s North Central Experiment Station say there
is still time to fight back. They are conducting a campaign to locate healthy
butternuts growing within 100 feet of infested trees of the same species. In
this way, they hope to find disease-resistant trees they can propagate in the
nursery, assuring healthy butternuts for the future. For information on how
to identify and report a disease-resistant butternut, contact: Forest Disease
Project, USDA Forest Service, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota

Source: Arbor Day, January/February, 1994

One of the biggest mistakes I think
many farmers and ranchers make is
planting around the house first, then
planting field windbreaks. It should
be the other way around or at least
done simultaneously. You need to
establish your “back-up” rows first, so
that snow doesn’t pile up right in the
yard because you only have that one
windbreak around the house.

All-in-all establishing a windbreak
system takes work and committment.
The turn-around time to see the bene-
fits may be slow, but if I can increase
my yields, protect my cattle, and
improve wildlife habitat, time is of the
essence. People knew 100 years ago
that trees were good and paid off,
what's taking us so long to catch on
today...everyone’s got to start some-
where!

Ken and his wife Selma are pictured here
with two of the awards that they have
been presented for their conservation
efforts.

6 Inside Agroforestry


Inside fate

The Role of
Agroforestry in
Sustainable
Agriculture:
An Interview

Dr. Don Wyse is Director of the Minnesota
Institute for Sustainable Agriculture, St. Paul,
Minnesota.

NAC: As a leader in the sustainable
agriculture “movement,” could you
define it for us and comment on
where it is going?

WYSE: There is a lot of debate
about the definition of sustainable
agriculture. Many definitions have
been put forward and the one that’s
caught the attention of our legislators
and universities is the one used in the
1990 Farm Bill. Most of what came out
of it focuses on a systems approach to
agriculture, which takes into consider-
ation the environment, the profitablil-
ity of agriculture, and the human
component. This is somewhat differ-
ent than conventional agriculture,
which focuses mainly on the produc-
tion of products. Only in recent years
have we given more emphasis to the
environment and to the human com-
ponent.

NAC: How does agroforestry fit
into your vision of sustainable agri-
culture?

WYSE: When you look at conven-
tional agriculture today you're basi-
cally talking about commodities. The
Federal program operates on a com-
modity basis. Therefore, we focus our
agriculture on a limited number of
commodities like corn, beef, and poul-
try. We don’t focus on a system. In the
sustainable agriculture movement, we

—— (See Sustainable Agriculture on page 5)

oforest

Rocky Mountain Forest & Range Experiment Station

ry

National Agroforestry Center

Would Leopold Embrace Agroforestry?

by Jerry Bratton
Technology Transfer Program Leader
National Agroforestry Center

a

Aldo Leopold

How is it possible, that in 1948, a
man of vision could have portrayed
so clearly the opportunities and prob-
lems associated with today’s natural
resources? Aldo Leopold was a
“clear” thinker. He was capable of
seeing the trees for the forest, the
grass for the range, the soil for the
farm, and the raindrop for the river.
He had the unique ability to under-
stand the actions and interactions cre-
ated by unstable ecosystems and the

prescriptions needed to make them
stable. Is it possible that he is helping
us shape the decisions we're faced
with today? The answer would have
to be a resounding “yes.” In his book,
A Sand County Almanac, Leopold
makes reference to many of the prob-
lems and opportunities that confront
us today. His words of wisdom are
still viable and give us guidance
toward making reasonable decisions
for managing today’s complicated
environment.

Aldo Leopold didn’t simply
preach why and how to manage,
improve, and care for natural
resources — he practiced what he
preached. He bought a “run-down”
farm and it was there that he put his
theories into practice. When he spoke
or wrote he did so from experience
which lent credibility to his words.
Leopold is probably quoted in the
conservation arena more often than
any other conservationist I can think
of. As far as I can tell, nearly every
major point he made, relative to nat-
ural resource management, is still rel-
evant today.

So, how do you suppose Leopold
would react to combining forestry
technologies with those of agriculture
to create agroforestry? And then com-
bine agroforestry practices with those
of conservation agriculture to create
sustainable agricultural systems? I

Inside| This Issue Leopold on page 7)

Ml Putting the “Agro” in Agroforestry...page 2

Ml A Landowners Perspective...page 3

Ml The Latest in Agroforestry Research...page 4

@ “Outdoor Living Barn” for Tribe...page 5


(Sustainable Agriculture from page 5). ——-———

Individual farmers need to under-
stand that what they do on their farm
contributes to an overall ecosystem
management objective.

NAC: What do you see as the main
barriers and challenges confronting
agroforestry?

WYSE: Well, again it goes back to
some of the things I mentioned earli-
er. I think that for agroforestry to be
mainstreamed into agriculture, the
opportunities presented must be prof-
itable and they must fit into this land-
scape management approach. We
have to figure out how agroforestry
fits into a landscape management
scheme, based on the ecosystem that
we're dealing with. Just stepping for-
ward and saying we’re going to put
trees across the landscape is not the
appropriate approach. We have to fig-
ure out what the impact of moving
forest products into agriculture is
going to have on the environment and
the profitablitly of farmers willing to
move this technology into cropping
systems, and we must also think
about the impact it would have on
communities.

NAC: How do we put the “agro” in
agroforestry, meaning get the agricul-
tural community of interest more
involved?

WYSE: When you look at landscape
management, you automatically bring
foresters and agriculturalists together.
Having them start from the very
beginning together and developing a
plan of action, I think is the way to get
agriculture into forestry, and forestry
into agriculture. Historically we both
did our own thing. I think that it’s
time to really put some teams togeth-
er with equal input. Agroforestry, in
the minds of a lot of people today, is
still very narrow. It’s nothing more
than growing trees on the landscape.
It dosen’t take a very broad systems
approach. Unless we have that joint
discussion, we'll end up with a patch
of corn and a patch of hybrid poplars
and we'll call it agroforestry. I would
argue from a landscape perspective
that we can do better than that.

(Leopold from page 1)

think he would relish the idea. After
all, he planted many trees and shrubs
on his Wisconsin farm in order to
“heal” the mismanagement of previ-
ous owners. He didn’t condemn the
profession or importance of farming,
he knew we must eat. In fact he
wrote; “Scientific agriculture was
actively developed before ecology
was born.” (Pg 260) However, he real-
ized that growing food was no excuse
for destroying our resources and con-
demned the way much of the land
was managed. He disagreed with rea-
soning behind decisions that were
based entirely on short-term produc-
tion economics. He deduced, “As a
land-user thinketh, so is he.” (Pg 263)
In other words if a landowner thinks
short-term he will manage for the
short-term, and that is not always
good for natural resources. Trees
placed in an agricultural ecosystem
are by their very nature long-term
and add stability to a vulnerable envi-
ronment.

Leopold didn’t use the term “sus-
tainable agriculture” but he unknow-
ingly defined it when he discussed
land ethic: “Examine each question in
terms of what is ethically and estheti-
cally (sic) right, as well as what is eco-
nomically expedient.” He went on to
say, “A thing is right when it tends to
preserve the integrity, stability, and
beauty of the biotic community. It is
wrong when it tends otherwise. It of
course goes without saying that eco-
nomic feasibility limits the tether of
what can or cannot be done for land.
It always has and it always will.” (Pg 262)

So what might an agricultural
landscape look like that incorporates
Leopold's land ethic philosophy? It
would need to be diverse, stable,
environmentally sound and prof-
itable. In my “minds eye” I picture a
landscape of multiple farm owner-
ships. Individual farm management
decisions would be made relative to
their effect at the watershed level. To

create economic stability each farm/
ranch would integrate tree /crop/live-
stock farming systems that optimize
products and income. In order to pro-
tect natural resources and provide for
aesthetics, the system would contain
field and landscape buffer zones.
These buffers consisting of trees,
shrubs, and grasses would be incor-
porated to: provide protection from
climatic extremes of temperature,
wind, and water; trap, filter, break
down, and consume sediments and
agricultural excesses; enhance biodi-
versity; protect soil and water;
increase and improve wildlife habitat;
and provide a more pleasant human
environment.

In 1949 Leopold stated; “By and
large, our present problem is one of
attitudes and implements.” (Pg 263)
This remains true today. The attitude
that problems are negligable or that
they're nonexistant abound. Since the
concept of agroforestry (combining
both conservation and production
facets) is relatively new to the U.S. we
lack the awareness, understanding,
acceptance, and support needed to
implement adoption. One of our first
obligations is to convince traditional
agricultural that there really is a need
and that agroforestry can help meet
that need. Only then can we expect
that the public, state and federal gov-
ernment agencies, and land-users will
accept and adopt the wide array of
agroforestry practices needed to help
agriculture become sustainable.

I think if Aldo Leopold were still
alive today he would fully embrace
the concept of agroforestry as a major
tool available to help manage agricul-
tural land. I reason he would agree
that if all natural resource manage-
ment decisions involving agriculture
were made after it has been deter-
mined they were “ethically and
esthetically (sic) right, as well as eco-
nomically expedient” we would already
have sustainable agroecosystems.

“There is much confusion between land and country. Land is the place where corn, gul-
lies, and mortgages grow. Country is the personality of the land, the collective harmony

of its soil, life, and weather.”

——Aldo Leopold

Inside Agroforestry 7


Message From the Manager

Until recently, most of the interest in agroforestry has
come from the forestry community. But, that’s changing.
Last August, in an effort to facilitate more cross-discipli-
nary interest in agroforestry, we sponsored the
Agroforestry and Sustainable Systems Symposium. It was a
good beginning. The Symposium received many favor-
able reviews, including one in the American Society of
Agronomy’s (ASA) Newsletter. However, they felt it
focused more on “forestry” than “agro.” ASA subse-
quently has invited us to jointly sponsor an agroforestry
symposium in conjunction with their annual meetings,
which we are doing in 1996. This time we will get it right.

We are pleased with the interest in agroforestry that
is emerging from the agriculture community, especially
from sustainable agriculture centers at several universi-
ties and private organizations that promote sustainable
agriculture. Our IA interview with Dr. Don Wyse,
Director of the Minnesota Institute for Sustainable
Agriculture, reflects this interest. The common ground is
recognition that agroforestry can help create agricultural
systems that are productive and profitable, environmen-
tally-sound, and provide for people’s needs.

For years we have intentionally separated agriculture
and forestry and thought about them as being mutually
exclusive. After all, people cleared the forest to grow
crops, so why would we want to plant the trees back?

A commentary on the status of agroforestry
as reported by Program Manager, Bill Rietveld

Putting the “Agro” Into Agroforestry

The answer lies in one word — sustainability. Our mod-
ern, highly productive agricultural systems are not sus-
tainable over time. It’s now becoming widely recognized
that we need integrated systems that optimize both eco-
nomic production and environmental protection. And we
need safety nets in the system that serve that vital func-
tion, and pay for themselves in products and services.

The draft Conservation Reserve Program for the 1995
Farm Bill reflects this recognition. There is more empha-
sis than ever on targeting of priority lands and practices.
Tree planting practices — windbreaks, filter strips, living
snowfences, and wildlife habitat — are repeatedly men-
tioned because they provide multiple, long-term benefits.
This is, of course, good for business, but more important-
ly it draws us together. We share a common interest in
optimizing the function and benefits of conservation
practices, properly integrating them with agricultural
practices, and developing an ecological watershed-level
approach. Equally important, we need to learn how to
practice “safe agroforestry,” i.e. to minimize conflicts
with crops or wildlife.

To accomplish this, interagency and interdisciplinary
teamwork are essential. To that end, we hope the interest
in integrated agricultural systems will continue, and that
we will continue to build bridges between the forestry
and agricultural communities.

Agroforestry in Tropical Hawaii and Other Pacific Islands

Most of us don’t think of a tropical
climate, like Hawaii, when we think
about traditional agroforestry. But,
Hawaii, in addition to the other US-
affiliated Pacific Islands (US Flag
areas and Former Trust Territories),
have a long history of indigenous sub-
sistence agroforestry. Some of the
most common agroforestry systems
that Hawaii practices include: shifting
cultivation, multilayer tree gardens,
home gardens, alley cropping, live-
stock-tree systems, and windbreaks.

Though Hawaiians have been
incorporating agrofororestry into
their landscape, they face challenges
that many mainlanders never even

2 Inside Agroforestry

think of. For example, opportunity
costs are high for agroforestry in
Hawaii and the other Pacific Islands,
where land sale and lease prices often
fare higher for tourism development.
And, due to the small size of the
islands and their isolation from major
markets, they are generally classified
as rural economies. This means that
economies are usually small with peo-
ple having modest levels of income.
Therefore, income from agriculture is
insufficient to support investment in
conservation practices.

Despite these, and other chal-
lenges, resource professionals in
Hawaii continue to address their

needs and opportunities. One such
need is education. There is a critical
need to create a new generation of
college-educated island foresters.
Most island forestry programs are
now led by professionals from the
mainland. The Forest Service is cur-
rently trying to provided scholarships
to encourage interested islanders to
return to their home islands.
Ultimately, the most sound develop-
ment in the future will come with
islands depending primarily on their
own people and sustainable manage-

ment of their own resources.
Source: adapted from “Agroforestry in the US-
Affiliated Pacific Islands: Present Status and Future
Potential” by Kathleen S. Friday and Robert W.
Wescom



Agroforestry...A Landowner’s Perspective

by Ken Kudrna
Farmer-Rancher
Hay Springs, Nebraska

I’ve been called Mr. Appleseed a
time-or-two...but, I don’t mind. And, I
certainly don’t regret having the trees
that I’ve planted. You see, lots of peo-
ple would like to have some, or even
just one, of my windbreaks.

Growing up, my dad planted trees
and it was my job to hoe around each
one and haul water to them. Even
though this was a lot of work and I
hated trees at the time, I believe it’s
where my love for trees originated.
However, I must mention that even
though I wouldn’t trade my wind-
breaks for anything, they don’t come
easy.

My wife, Selma, and I now live on
the home place, which we purchased
in 1958. We take care of our place, and
our parents places, the Frank Kudrna
and Lester Lundy places.

We've planted trees every year
since 1958, with the exception of the
three years that I served in the mili-
tary. Each year between 1958 and
1980, we hand-planted and main-
tained anywhere from 300-500 trees
per year. It was a big job, but the part
that I couldn’t believe was that I was
back to hoeing and watering trees —
something I vowed to never do again!

The “big year” came in 1986, the
spring after the Conservation Reserve
Program (CRP) was initiated, when
we planted 15,000 trees. Many thanks
goes to the assistance of the Upper
Niobrara-White Natural Resources
District (NRD) and the Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation
Service (ASCS), and of course, cost-
share monies available through these
agencies. If it weren't for these people
and cost-share dollars, I wouldn’t
have accomplished this. Furthermore,
in 1986 the NRD assisted me with the
research and purchase of my own
machine tree planter. They also
helped tremendously with the ardu-
ous task of maintenance, as well as
helped me set up my spray rig and
calibrate the proper amount of chemi-
cals to apply.

I’m from Hay Springs, Nebraska,
(the northwest part of the state). Our
ranch is 15 miles southwest of town.
And, it’s windy here! Furthermore,
you can drive for miles without see-
ing any trees at all. In fact, I can
almost guarantee you that any tree
that you do see was planted for some
reason or another.

I'ma farmer and rancher. We raise
mostly dryland wheat and alfalfa. If I
take my land out of CRP then I'll go
back to raising oats and barley too. I
also run about a 350-head cow/calf
operation along with about 50-head of
replacement heifers.

Right now, I’ve got approximately
14 five-row windbreaks that stretch
for a total of about 12 miles and I’ve
got about 16 two- and three-row
windbreaks that stretch for about 14
1/2 miles. These field windbreaks are
spaced 1/4 mile apart across my
fields. I’m working on narrowing that
distance to 1/8 mile, so that the entire
area receives adequate protection.
One of the windbreaks is “Z” shaped
and doubles as an outdoor living barn
and calving area. About four of the
field windbreaks are “L” shaped and
can also provide late spring protec-
tion for my cattle. The April and May
storms are the ones that I really worry
about because I've got a lot of young
livestock
around the
place at that
time of the
year. I’ve also
got wildlife
habitat plant-
ings filling in
some of the
corners of
fields, one is
a nine acre
patch and
another is
four acres,
with some bts 38 his

¥

domly throughout my property.

Do the trees help? Yes! We’ve got
some good farmers in the area and
my trees help me keep up with them.
Just one example of how effective my
field windbreaks are is the extra 1/2
to 3/4 ton-per-acre yield of alfalfa that
I'm getting because of the protection
they provide. The alfalfa adjacent to
the trees is twice as tall as compared
to that in the middle of the field. And,
when my cattle are calving near the
“Z” windbreak, I don’t worry about
them because they’re protected from
almost every direction. They love it,
and stay in better shape too! I also
have a fall-calving herd, about 40
miles from home, that I calve out near
a naturally wooded area where cedar
and pine trees are in there so thick it’s
just like a wall. My father-in-law used
to say that those trees are as good as a
barn...and you don’t have to clean it!
This wooded area is located about 40
miles from our home, so you see, I
don’t worry about my cattle when
they’re protected by trees. In 1994]
didn’t have enough hay to feed all
winter, so [had to rent cornstalks to
graze — I found out quickly that you
pay considerably more for fields that
have shelter — needless-to-say, you
get more too! Then there’s the
— (See Landowner on page 6)

cee

other patches Ken pales hay inbetween rows of a cedar field windbreak, maximizing the use

planted ran-

of his land. Here, his son Kevin checks the moisture content of a windrow.

Inside Agroforestry 3