显示标签为“price”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“price”的博文。显示所有博文

2011年4月12日星期二

Seed to Sow price erosion

反序列化操作“Translate”的响应消息的正文时出现错误。读取 XML 数据时,超出最大字符串内容长度配额 (8192)。通过更改在创建 XML 读取器时所使用的 XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas 对象的 MaxStringContentLength 属性,可增加此配额。 第 1 行,位置为 8954。
反序列化操作“Translate”的响应消息的正文时出现错误。读取 XML 数据时,超出最大字符串内容长度配额 (8192)。通过更改在创建 XML 读取器时所使用的 XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas 对象的 MaxStringContentLength 属性,可增加此配额。 第 1 行,位置为 9138。

When prices for corn and soybeans surged last fall, Bill Hammitt, a farmer in the fertile hill country of western Iowa, began to see the bulldozers come out, clearing steep hillsides of trees and pastureland to make way for more acres of the state’s staple crops. Now, as spring planting begins, with the chance of drenching rains, Mr. Hammitt worries that such steep ground is at high risk for soil erosion — a farmland scourge that feels as distant to most Americans as tales of the Dust Bowl and Woody Guthrie ballads.

Long in decline, erosion is once again rearing as a threat because of an aggressive push to plant on more land, changing weather patterns and inadequate enforcement of protections, scientists and environmentalists say.

“There’s a lot of land being converted into row crop in this area that never has been farmed before,” said Mr. Hammitt, 59, explaining that the bulldozed land was too steep and costly to farm to be profitable in years of ordinary prices. “It brings more highly erodible land into production because they’re out to make more money on every acre.”

Now, research by scientists at Iowa State University provides evidence that erosion in some parts of the state is occurring at levels far beyond government estimates. It is being exacerbated, they say, by severe storms, which have occurred more often in recent years, possibly because of broader climate shifts.

“The thing that’s really smacking us now are the high-intensity, high-volume rainstorms that we’re getting,” said Richard M. Cruse, an agronomy professor at Iowa State who directs the Iowa Daily Erosion Project. “In a variety of locations, we’re losing topsoil considerably faster — 10 to as much as 50 times faster — than it’s forming.”

Erosion can do major damage to water quality, silting streams and lakes and dumping fertilizers and pesticides into the water supply. Fertilizer runoff is responsible for a vast “dead zone,” an oxygen-depleted region where little or no sea life can exist, in the Gulf of Mexico. And because it washes away rich topsoil, erosion can threaten crop yields. Significant gains were made in combating erosion in the 1980s and early 1990s, as the federal government began to require that farmers receiving agricultural subsidies carry out individually tailored soil conservation plans.

Those plans often included measures such as terracing steep ground or sowing buffer strips with perennial grasses to stabilize areas prone to erosion, such as the edges of fields near streams or borders between crops.

Many farmers, such as Mr. Hammitt, who is on the board of the Harrison County soil and water conservation district, also do little or no plowing and leave crop residues on harvested fields, techniques that reduce runoff.

But environmentalists claim that enforcement of conservation plans by the United States Department of Agriculture is not as strict as it should be and that the gains in fighting erosion have stalled or are being undercut.

U.S.D.A. data shows that the amount of farmland erosion nationwide from water fell substantially from the early 1980s to the mid-1990s, then largely stagnated.

Enforcement is needed more than ever, environmentalists say, because high crop prices provide a strong incentive for farmers to plant as much ground as possible and to take fewer protective measures like grass buffer strips.

Other factors are also at work. Farmers increasingly rent the land they cultivate, which can mean they are less familiar with areas at risk for erosion or are less invested in caring for the land over the long run. In addition, farmers using modern supersize tractors, built to efficiently cover swaths of land, can find it inconvenient to break up land into smaller sections through buffer areas or terraces. Widely used herbicides can kill the grass in buffer strips, leaving them more vulnerable to erosion. And government biofuels policies that have increased the demand for corn have encouraged farmers to plant more. “You’ve got all these market forces and public policies and biofuel mandates and more severe storms,” said Craig Cox, senior vice president of the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy group that will release a report on erosion Wednesday. “It’s all coming together, and we’re asleep at the switch.”

Mr. Cox said that he flew over parts of Iowa in a helicopter last spring after a severe storm and found that deep gullies had formed in unprotected farmland, becoming conduits for soil runoff. Farmers frequently level off such gullies after harvesting in the fall, he said, and then replant the same low-lying areas year after year, leaving them susceptible to further erosion.

Thomas W. Christensen, an Agriculture Department regional conservationist, disagreed, saying, “Conservation compliance is working,” and adding that improvements to its enforcement program were in the works. Last year, however, the agency reviewed fewer than 1 percent of the tracts nationwide that it considered highly erodible to make sure that farmers were following conservation plans. About 1 percent of those reviewed were found to be in violation. But the new federal budget deal cuts 12 percent from the agency’s conservation spending, which could hamper soil efforts. Agency officials said they were still assessing the impact.

The information from the Iowa Daily Erosion Project paints a grimmer picture than a recent assessment by federal officials. The U.S.D.A’s 2007 National Resources Inventory, released last year, estimated that erosion in Iowa averaged 5.2 tons an acre each year. That was slightly higher than the five tons per acre that the department estimated was a tolerable annual rate of erosion for most Iowa soils, meaning that it allowed a high level of crop productivity to be maintained indefinitely.

Five tons of soil would fill a small dump truck; spread over an acre it would make a layer slightly less than the thickness of a dime, Mr. Cruse said.

While the federal report estimates average rates of erosion for states and regions over a full year, the Erosion Project uses detailed information on rainfall and field conditions to estimate soil loss in 1,581 Iowa townships — nearly all of them — after each storm. Last year, according to Erosion Project data analyzed by the Environmental Working Group, the average estimated rate of erosion exceeded the sustainable level in 133 townships. In 2009, an estimated 641 townships exceeded the sustainable rate, including nearly 400 that had double or more that rate.

The project also provides a picture of the erosion caused by severe storms, like the one that dumped more than seven inches of rain in parts of southwest Iowa in May 2007. In a single day, the figures show, 69 townships had average estimated soil losses of more than 10 tons an acre. Of those, 14 townships were estimated to have an average loss between 20 tons and nearly 40 tons per acre. The 2007 storm was exceptionally damaging, but severe storms are becoming more frequent, according to a state report on climate change submitted in January to the Iowa Legislature and governor.

Despite the concerns, Iowa is not on the brink of becoming a new Dust Bowl. Many farmers use good conservation practices, and the state’s rich topsoil in many areas is deep enough to last decades with moderate amounts of erosion.

But agronomists say that heavy erosion in unprotected areas can significantly diminish crop yields, and, over time, land that is not well cared for can become depleted. That means farmers must use more fertilizer to increase yields.

Erosion also does major harm to water quality.

More than anything else this year, farmers are making decisions based on how they can best take advantage of corn and soybean prices, which have soared in recent months.

Dr. Cruse said that creates a paradox. When crop prices are low and farmers are scraping by, many say they cannot afford to take steps to protect their fields from erosion. Now, he said, they say they still cannot afford it because there is too much profit to be made from farming every bit of land.

The same incentives have landowners clearing steep hillsides or converting pasture to cropland to cultivate or rent out.

“The requests to farm the marginal areas and the pressure on our noncropped areas have really increased with these commodity prices,” said Todd G. Duncan, an Agriculture Department district conservationist in Winneshiek County in northeast Iowa, another area of the state with steep hills. “We have some people that are making bad land-use decisions right now.”


View the original article here

2011年4月9日星期六

After years of price reductions, Texas is trying to find more

AUSTIN, Texas - it is difficult to overstate the fury of budget cuts which reign in the legislators in the capital, where the Republicans who control the legislature and the offices of the State of Minnesota believe voters sent a battleship mandate year last to reduce the size of the Government.

But the Texas Government was already a relatively lean operation after years of conservative fiscal policies. Thus, when the Texas House adopted its draft budget last weekend, the depth of the need for the Republican majority to stick to its promise PAS new taxes cuts became clearer. It was not a pretty picture.

The Bill would slash 23 billion at the current level of the State and federal spending during the next cycle of two years budget - increasing population of 12.3% reduction does not account for the price increase to meet the needs of Texas.

In a party line vote, the House shot dozens of sacred cows. The budget bill makes huge cuts to the education of the public, the homes of nursing and healthcare for the poor. It reduces funding for highways, prisons and state parks. It eliminates the reductions in pre-school, day teacher incentive pay and reduced scholarships for students of the College by two-thirds.

"You reduce bone in the State of Texas," said State representative Sylvester Turner, a Democrat from Houston. "The Republican game is:" we want smaller government, and we will do what was needed by all means necessary, regardless of the cost. "".?”

On Wednesday, the Conservatives and Tea Party supporters held a rally on the steps of the Capitol calling on Parliament to reduce even more deeply in certain programs, while thousands of State workers marching to protest against spending plan House.

What irritates the employees of the State and many liberals in the State is the refusal of Governor Rick Perry and his allies of the House for some of the pain in buffer drawing on more than 6 billion in emergency fundfueled by taxes for oil production. (Last month, the House approved using the Fund $ 3 billion to fill a gap in the current budget for two years).

But the Republican leaders in the House say the State's live with reduced revenues. Increasing taxes would hurt the economy, they say, and soaking in the Rainy Day Fund is unwise, given the prospect of cuts by the Federal Government.

"This is the hand, we have treated," said State representative Larry Taylor of the Houston area, the Chairman of the Republican Party Caucus. "This is how much money we have." We have no choice in Texas. We cannot print money. We cannot go into debt. ?

The depth of the cuts, however, has caused divisions within the party. Some Republicans in the Senate are to follow orders large cuts in money for public education and healthcare for the poor, as a short-sighted. "Children go no further," said State Senator Robert f. Deuell, a Greenville Republican and physician. "If you build a school, or you can build a prison."

The Senate is currently establishing its own draft budget, and Republican leaders say that it will contain approximately $ 10 billion more than the version of the House, especially for the public schools and Medicaid. Republican Senate seek various ways to raise revenue without calling the tax increases, as the acceleration of the collections of the tax and the Elimination of certain exemptions.

In a normal year, the Senate and the House in Texas begin negotiations and split the difference between the proposals. The President of the Chamber, Joe Straus, said in an interview that he saw Bill in house as the beginning of a long negotiation. "We are not blind to the questions that are ignored," he said.

But this year, the two rooms are so far apart, and public opinion here is so hostile to anything that looks like a tax increase, it is not known how the two houses will fill their differences. The House is not likely to accept any increase in income; the Senate is not likely to go hand in hand with deep cuts in education and health care.

Veteran legislators on both sides, said that they suffered from the reaction of the public against federal spending and the deficit in Washington even if the State has little debt. In the Texas House, 31 freshman Republicans are scanned on the tide Tea Party on a platform of small-government, and they are not in the mood to compromise on the tax increase.


View the original article here