(Buffers from page 3)
polycultures that reduce erosion to anually tilled, overpro-
duced carbohydrate and protein commodities? Because of
contouring and crop residue management, no-till corn/
soybean rotations may leak less than fall moldboard plow-
ing. However, farm managers cannot hope to hold the soil
and a sustainable future with annually tilled row crops on
highly erodible land, and the population downstream does
not want the pollutants in the runoff.

The Challenge of Commercial Products
from Perennial Buffers

Assuming annual crops will always be required for food,
forage, and industrial feedstocks, a sustainable agriculture
can be achieved by including buffers strategically laced
across the annually tilled landscape. These buffers will
allow the maximum value from the harvested crop and still
maintain ecosystem stability. Strategic buffer strips mean
placing trees and grasses at the following locations:

Riparian Buffers - ranging from two to 35 meters (six to
120 feet) wide planted next to streams to act as the final
sediment, organic pesticide, and fertilizer filter. If 80 percent
of all Iowa streams were buffered with four-row poplar
buffers, it would require an estimated 600,000 acres of land.

Livestock Manure Buffers - ranging from 10 to 60
meters (33 to 200 feet) wide planted downgradient of
confined livestock operations to act as the final manure
filter, odor trap, and shelter windbreak.

Field Terrace Buffers - ranging from one to three meters
(three to 10 feet) wide planted on the field contour instead
of more expensive graded terraces to intercept runoff and to
act as a midfield filter that redistributes and slows eroding
water and shelters downwind crops. A mile-long, two-row
terrace buffer would take 1.2 acres of land.

Water Supply Buffers - surrounding well heads and
infiltration galleries that supply water for communities.

Waste Water Buffers - that provide the final filter for
removing nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) and organic
matter before urban waste water finally enters a stream.

Buffers in the 1995 Farm Bill

The 1995 Farm Bill written by Congress defines regula-
tions effecting agricultural commodity subsidies and markets
for five years. If subsidies given to erosive annually-tilled
crops are removed, and alternative perennial crops can
equally compete for the photosynthetic space, then farmers
can grow a more stable, less polluting agricultural landscape.

Ultimately, buffered agricultural land puts less pollutant
in the water supply, thus reducing the complaints of
downstream consumers now facing stricter federal require-
ments for tap water quality. Ultimately, buffered soils erode
slower off the field. Ultimately, trees and grass can build a
more diverse habitat which strengthens wildlife populations.
Ultimately, a more diverse agricultural harvest leads to more
options for new renewable products, adding value to the
farm, the rural community, the region, the state, and the
nation. New fuels, building materials, industrial raw materi-
als, and recreation opportunities will result; all are essential
for the next conventional agriculture.

Moder farmers want all of these benefits, especially if
they can add wealth to their farm and stability to their
land. It seems almost too simplistic to think that fast
growing perennial tree buffers could be a major factor in
tuming around the fortune's of farming. Exactly right!

The needs and opportunities for agroforestry science
and practice must be summarized NOW in order to be
prepared for the imminent 1995 Farm Bill debate.

Cowboy Trees

CSA Technology Transfer Program Leader

Out on my range in the winter, ole boy

we cowboys get frozen and cold.

The wind tears our clothes, the snow stings our eyes
and the freeze numbs our fingers and toes.

Old slim, my best hand, is thin as a rail

and the cold makes his blackened teeth rattle.
Out on the range with just shortgrass to shield
it’s so bad he gets froze to his saddle.

The snow gets so deep in the corral and the pens
it fills up my boots on my feet.

The hairs on my chest freeze to my shirt

and my ears get as red as a beet.

I used to think cowboys didn’t need trees,

they just took up space from my grass.

But the snow and the wind took their toll on me
I lost beefs, even cowboys in past.

Well that gov’ment man came by one day

and said we could improve our “sitiation.”

We could plant windbreak trees in orderly rows
and take away the cold aggravation.

So I planted those trees hopin’ they’d work
and believe me I sing a new song.

My cattle are fatter, my wife loves me more
I’m healthier, I’m even strong.

The ole’ hoss I ride is really cold backed
when the cold winter winds are a howlin’.
But he settles right down, gives me some slack
‘cause of trees we ride in when we’re cowin’.

So believe me old’ hoss, you’ll never regret
Plantin’ those wind breakin’ trees.

If you live in a land where the wind never quits
you'd better get down on your knees

and thank the good Lord for the gift of the tree.
Just hope that he gave you the smart

to plant ‘em to break the wind and the cold
and you'll finally be doin’ your part!

(2,4-D from page 1)
this entire process. After this system is established, the 2,4-
D degradation gene can be introduced into Siberian elm
relatively easily. It will take a few more years of testing
before they have confirmed 2,4-D resistant Siberian elms.

If Dr. Cheng and his team are successful in developing
such Siberian elms, they will be able to answer several very
important questions. By comparing 2,4-D resistant and
susceptible trees, they can determine how much damage 2,4-
D has actually caused to trees. Also, to what extent. The
final challenge will be to successfully release a genetically
engineered herbicide-resistant tree. Can we utilize these
engineered trees to remediate 2,4-D pollution to air and
underground water?

Source: The Windbreak Demonstrator, NDSU, July-September, 1993

Inside Agroforestry 5


braska

11-Row Living Snowfence to Protect Harrison, Nebraska

es

A living snowfence that stretches 1,700 feet and consists of 2,900 trees and shrubs was established to

protect Harrison, Nebraska from severe Great Plains winters.

Editor's note: The Agroforestry Center is
working with numerous cooperators throughout
the Great Plains to establish demonstrations of
needed agroforestry practices under local
conditions. This article illustrates the value that
the demonstrations will have to the economy,
environment, and people.

Harrison, Nebraska, is a hard-
working ranch community located on
the wind-swept prairies of northern
Sioux County where the summers are
short and the winters are long.
Winters in the Great Plains can be
quite severe and this is especially true
of Harrison, Nebraska’s most north-
western community. Often times,
blizzards out of Wyoming will para-
lyze the community, leaving the town
and its citizens snowbound and
isolated, due to snow-blocked roads.

However, Harrison has begun to
combat it's recurring snow problems.
Part of the answer to this problem lies
in catching and trapping wind-driven
snow before it reaches the community.
To accomplish this, an 11-row wind-
break (“living snowfence”) has been
established to protect the north and
west half of town.

In the spring of 1992, a livestock
fence was constructed to keep cattle
from the adjacent summer grazing
pasture out. About 2,900 trees and
shrubs made up of 20 different species
of conifers, hardwoods, and shrubs
were planted, and water conservation
mulch was laid. Several groups came
together to get the 1,700-foot long
greenbelt project off the ground. They

include the Nebraska Forest Service,
Harrison Community Club, Harrison
Volunteer Fire Department, Sioux
County High School, City of Harrison,
Soil Conservation Service, Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation Service,
Upper Niobrara White Natural Resourc-
es District, Nebraska Department of
Roads, Sioux Cooperative Extension
Service, Pine Ridge Job Corp, landown-
er Duane Pullen, and CSA.

According to Doak Nickerson,
District and Extension Forester for the
Nebraska Panhandle, Harrison is
located in a very hostile environment.
Its high elevation and short grass
prairie landscape, coupled with strong
winds from Wyoming, make the wide

windbreak a necessity. Once the
windbreak has matured, Harrison will
not only be able to function during the
winter months, but residents will see a
reduction in utility bills and energy
consumption as well as lower snow
removal bills.

To date, the windbreak has seen a
90+ percent overall survival rate. This
is due, in part, to all of the precipita-
tion that the Midwest received this
spring and summer. Nickerson added
that everyone in town knows about the
windbreak and is very excited about it.
It has already received an A+ from
most residents and business people. In
fact, the windbreak has received such
high marks so far that the planting
site is already prepared for the next
phase of the project, which will create
an "L"-shaped windbreak around town.

Though the project is long term,
Nickerson hopes to eventually plant a
greenbelt system around the entire
community of Harrison for both added
protection and landscape beautification.
He also plans to use the windbreak for
more than just wind and snow protec-
tion. For example, local schools hope
to get involved by using the belt as an
outdoor classroom and laboratory. It
will also be used for field tours, for
workshops, for media features, and as
an example to surrounding communities
and landowners of the benefits of
windbreaks.

Much of the credit for the success of the
Harrison Green Belt project goes to Doak
Nickerson. He was instrumental in the planning,
coordination, and implementation of the first
Phase and continues to oversee future progress of
Harrison's Greenbelt. Thank you, Doak.

Clear Your Guilty Christmas Memories

If your family was among the 36 million that purchased a real
Christmas tree this past year, you can now clear your conscience because
the tradition is both environmentally correct and even patriotic. According to
the National Christmas Tree Association, 90 percent of all Christmas trees
are grown on some 15,000 plantations, many of which are family opera-
tions. These tree farms are found in all 50 states and employ 100,000
people full or part time. Artificial trees, on the other hand, are manufac-
tured mostly in Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, and are usually made of
non-biodegradable plastics and metals. The association points out that for
each real Christmas tree harvested, two or three seedlings are quickly
planted in its place. Since young trees in their rapid growth years have a
high rate of photosynthesis, just one acre of Christmas trees produces the
daily oxygen requirement for 18 people. With approximately one million
acres dedicated to Christmas tree production in the United States, this
translates to oxygen for 18 million people every day.

Source: Arbor Day, November/December, 1993

4 Inside Agroforestry


Helping Trees Combat 2,4-D

Across the Great Plains, it is not
uncommon to see many deformed trees
with twisted young shoots and thin,
abnormal leaves. These are the typical
symptoms of 2,4-D injury.

Air drift of 2,4-D, commonly used
to control broadleaved weeds in wheat
crops, has caused severe damage to
many trees in windbreaks, shelterbelts,
and home yards. Some of the most
sensitive trees include Siberian and
American elm, boxelder, silver maple,
and green ash. Many other woody
omamentals are susceptible to the
damage as well. 2,4-D may also cause
damage to tree roots and pollute
ground water,

Thousands of trees in the Great
Plains, particularly boxelder and
Siberian elm, have died. The final
cause of death is not certain, but
many scientists believe that 2,4-D is
the primary damaging agent.

The problem with 2,4-D has existed
for decades and has not yet been
solved through traditional research.
Now with biotechnology, it may be
possible to develop trees resistant to
2,4-D. Dr. Zongming Cheng, Assistant
Professor, Department of Horticulture
and Forestry at North Dakota State
University is attempting to solve this
problem by engineering trees with a
2,4-D degradation gene. The gene (a
piece of DNA) originally came from
bacterium in 2,4-D contaminated soils
both in the United States and in
Germany. The bacteria with the gene
produces an enzyme called 2,4-D
monooxygenase, which will break
down the 2,4-D into a non-toxic form.
With sophisticated laboratory tech-
niques, this gene has been isolated
from bacteria and sucessfully trans-
ferred into some plants. It has been
demonstrated that tobacco and cotton

plants containing the gene are resistant

to 2,4-D at a level of 10 times of
that applied as a weed killer, while

normal plants are sensitive to 1/100 of

the commercial level.
Dr. Cheng believes that this genetic

5

roforestry

USDA Forest Service, Lincoln, Nebraska

Winter, 1993

engineering technology in tobacco and
cotton can be applied to trees. When
a tree contains this gene, the tree will
degrade the 2,4-D into a non-toxic
form. Currently, his lab is working on
Siberian elm as a model species with
a 2,4-D degradation gene that he

obtained from Germany.

There are several steps and tests to
develop 2,4-D resistant trees. The lab
is currently developing a transforma-
tion system to genetically engineer
Siberian elm, the most difficult part of
—_—______——- (See 2,4-D on page 5)

Agroforestry and Sustainable
Systems, a symposium designed for
researchers, practitioners, technical
specialists, and educators, will be
held August 7-10, 1994, in Fort
Collins, Colorado. Invited speakers
will focus on how trees, integrated
into sustainable agricultural land-use
systems in the semiar-

id west, will enhance
agricultural produc-
tivity, natural
resource conserva-
tion, and natural
and human
environments.

The sympo-

sium

sponsors

Agroforestry and Sustainable Systems
Symposium -- Call for Poster Papers

invite proposals for volunteer poster
papers that address the general
theme of Agroforestry and Sustain-
able Systems. Proposals must be
submitted for approval by April 15,
1994. A one-page summary of
poster papers, due June 1, 1994,
will be published in the symposium
Proceedings.

To submit an abstract or for
more information on poster papers,
contact: Bruce C. Wight, National
Windbreak Forester, SCS, 100
Centennial Mall North, Room 152,
Lincoln, NE 68508-3866, 402-437-
5355.

For more information on the
symposium, contact Kim Isaacson at
CSA.

’ . ‘ +

@ Message from the Manager...page 2

@ Agroforestry Leaflets and Display Available...page 2

@ Tree Buffers and CRP...page 3

%  11-Row Living Snowfence to protect Harrison, NE...page 4


Message From the Manager

1994 will be a big year for CSA's Technology
Transfer and Applications Program. You will be seeing
and hearing a lot more about agroforestry in the near
future -- thanks to program funding from State & Private
Forestry, hard work from the CSA Technology Transfer
Team led by Program Leader Jerry Bratton, and strong
involvement from many partners and cooperators. New
products include: 1) a portable display and leaflet titled
Agroforestry--Working Trees for Agriculture, which are
available to you (see article below); 2) Agroforestry
Notes, a new application notes series that will debut in
1994; 3) a symposium, Agroforestry and Sustainable
Systems which will be held August 7-10, 1994 (see
article on page 1); 4) a training workshop on Applica-
tions of New Conservation Forestry Technologies will be
held for Region 2 State Forestry agencies and coopera-
tors; 5) Green Side Up, a new training video on
conservation tree planting will be available soon; and 6)
cooperative agroforestry demonstrations that will continue
to be established with additional support from EPA as a
new partner.

In addition to these activities, I would also like to
mention that a new 32-page booklet called Conservation

A column of important events and programs
as reported by CSA Program Manager Bill Rietveld

Getting the Word Out

Trees for Your Farm, Family, and Future is available free
from the National Arbor Day Foundation. The booklet
provides information on 12 conservation forestry practices
and their benefits, and it tells where to go for assistance.
A new set of conservation trees public service announce-
ments by John Denver was also mailed to every radio
station in the United States. This public information and
education program is targeted at increasing landowner
understanding and use of conservation forestry practices
(see article below).

The details on most of these technology transfer and
public information and education activities are provided
elsewhere in this issue of JA. I just wanted to mention
them as examples of how we (the Center, together with
many partners and cooperators) are fulfilling our commit-
ment to effective technology transfer and strong customer
service. Research is important, but it's not enough. Devel-
opment, applications, demonstrations, and technology
transfer to facilitate getting new technologies and informa-
tion into practice are equally important components of the
process. And this is most effectively done through coopera-
tion, partnerships, and strong customer involvement. Let us
know if you have any suggestions for future activities.

display or by itself. It parallels the
display, with added depth in explain-
ing the concept of "working trees for
agriculture", and the practices and
benefits of agroforestry. It is another
excellent tool for natural resource
professionals.

The display and the leaflet were

developed by the Center for Semiarid
Agroforestry and the Northeastern
Area, State and Private Forestry in a
cooperative effort. If you have an
event that you would like to schedule
the display for or want copies of the
leaflet, contact Kim Isaacson at the
Center.

New Booklet Available From Arbor Day Foundation

CSA has an 8-foot by 10-foot
portable display that is available for
your use. It graphically depicts various
agroforestry practices and what the
benefits are. It is attractive, easy to
set up, and a perfect demonstration
tool to aid natural resource profession-
als in informing and educating land-
owners. Great at fairs, meetings, or
the office lobby.

An 8 1/2 by 11 trifold leaflet is

also available, either to accompany the

Conservation Trees for Your
Farm, Family, and Future, a new
32-page booklet explaining the
features and benefits of 12 conser-
vation forestry practices and where
to go for assistance is now avail-
able from the National Arbor Day
Foundation. Public Service an-
nouncements by John Denver have
also been mailed to radio stations
across the Nation.

The booklet along with the
PSA's will help educate and encour-
age all Americans who have a stake
in the land to plant and care for
conservation trees.

If you would a like copy of this
booklet or want more information,
contact The National Arbor Day
Foundation, 100 Arbor Avenue,
Nebraska City, NE 68410, 402-474-
5655.

2 Inside Agroforestry



Tree Buffers--Following the Fall of the Conservation Reserve Program

By Dr. A. Louis Licht, Ph.D., P.E.
Associate Research Scientist, Adjunct Assistant Professor
University of Iowa

Dr. Licht’s research interests include nonpoint pollution control, solid
waste management, and landfill management using plant systems in buffers
and caps. His research has focused on the impacts of riparian tree buffers
to remove fertilizer and sediment from water leaving farmed fields and in
landfill closure and leachate management using planted tree covers.

Dr. Licht is President of Ecolotree, Inc., a company that plants trees for
emvironmental benefits. He also owns a farm that is being planted to
stabilize the soils and maintain clean water using these tree-based tech-

niques.

"The needs and opportunities for
agroforestry science and practice must be
summarized NOW in order to be prepared
for the imminent 1995 Farm Bill debate."

--Dr. Louis A. Licht

The Latest National Academy of Sciences Report

In November, 1993, the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) released a report titled Soil and Water Quality: An
Agenda for Agriculture. The NAS Board on Agriculture,
centered the report around this mission: Humans must
improve the environmental performance of agriculture
but still profitably grow the renewable raw products so
fundamental to prosperity. In pursuit of this theme, the
NAS report lists four objectives that must be simultaneously
and holistically implemented:

1) Conserve and enhance soil quality as a fundamental
first step to environmental improvement;

2) Increase efficiency and minimize use of pesticides and
mineral fertilizers applied to the land;

3) Increase the resistance of farming systems to erosion
and runoff (particularly to the heavy rain or snow melt
events that do the majority of erosion and damage); and

4) Use more field and riparian buffer zones to reduce
delivery of nonpoint pollutants to streams, stabilize stream
banks, and grow wildlife habitat.

The ultimate goal is a win-win situation for farm profit-
ability and stability in agricultural ecosystems.

How will this work be financed? It is recommended that
crop investment be substantially paid for by harvested value
based on commodity markets. Thus the money comes from
the private sector, not government subsidies.

When must this program be implemented? Now! Action
now stems the negative impacts from agricultural nonpoint
pollution, the general malaise in the rural economy (now
based on very few over-produced commodities), and the
eroding land.

The Conservation Reserve Program
Started Land Conversion

The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) provided a
good start in changing agriculture toward the NRC objec-
tives. The 1985 and 1990 Food Security Acts authorized the
CRP. The CRP's listed objectives were to:

1) Reduce soil erosion from highly erodible cropland;

2) Protect long-term agricultural productivity;

3) Reduce sediment deposition in streams, ponds, reser-
voirs, and ditches;

4) Improve runoff water quality by reducing fertilizer
and pesticide use;

5) Develop, diversify, and protect wildlife habitat to
increase populations;

6) Curb production of surplus annually harvested com-
modities; and

7) Provide some needed income support for farmers
caught in a major recession.

Between 1986 and 1992, farmers enrolled 35.4 million
acres of land into CRP 10-year contracts. Farmers converted
these reserved acres from erosive, annually tilled crops to
perennial plants. The normal CRP crop options were
domestic grasses, native prairie plants, wildlife habitat
shrubs, and forest trees. Harvesting of feed, seed, human
food, or wood products were not permitted during the
duration of the 10-year contract.

Farm owners in the upper midwest enrolled 10 million
acres (MN-1,900,000 acres; IA-2,100,000 acres; SD-
2,100,000 acres; WI-700,000 acres; and ND-3,200,000
acres). The annual rental payment from this 10 million
acres amounts to $480,000,000+/-, or an average rent of
$48 per acre per year; Iowa has the highest average of $80
per acre per year.

In 1990, the Soil and Water Conservation Society
surveyed 2,000 CRP contract holders. The average landown-
er was 57 years old, had a high school education, owned
and operated 323 acres, and produced less than 50 percent
of the household income by farming.

Conservation Reserve Program Impacts
Nationally, over 21,000,000 acres are now planted to
domestic grasses, almost 59.3 percent of the total program.

There are 8,000,000 acres of native prairie plant species,
2,000,000 acres of wildlife plantings, and fewer than
700,000 acres of filter strips and windbreaks. A disappoint-
ing 2,500,000 CRP acres were planted with trees, less than
seven percent of the CRP. The USDA offered financial and
technical assistance through the USDA-SCS and State
Natural Resource Agencies for tree planting, including a
five-year CRP contract extention for tree-planted acres. Yet,
many farmers remained unconvinced that trees would offer
sufficient return and flexability when the contract expired.
Unfortunately, the CRP wasn't condusive for a strong
rural farm economy. The value paid to the landowner was
usually 30 to 40 percent of the income produced by the
annual crop. Though this value may have equalled the
profit of farming, it reduced the money that supported the
farm-supported businesses in small towns. CRP supported
few new farmers, or few new rural industries. Arguably,
the CRP supported even more absentee land ownership,
took more land out of harvestable crop production, and did
not provide long-term stability to the erodible landscape.
Once the 10-year CRP contract has expired, farmers can
legally remove any and all of these plantings. A farmer
can benefit by replanting the CRP acreage to com, thereby
adding land to a farm's com base which increases the
farm's value for loan collateral. The grasses can be re-
moved simply by the pass of a plow and herbicide
application before a corn/soybean crop rotation is reestab-
lished. Is it possible for the land to revert from perennial
(See Buffers on page 5)

Inside Agroforestry 3