It's the nature of news-what's hot today usually disappears tomorrow. Such was the case a year or so ago with the Canadian Field Crop Research Alliance, a coming together of field crop research interests in Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada. The alliance's creation was a banner headline in agriculture, being a creative and potentially ultra-effective approach to new field crop developments.

Then, as many stories do, it left the radar screen.

But its participants didn't. Last week, the Guelph-based Grain Farmers of Ontario put the initiative back in the spotlight when it announced 10 new soybean varieties had been developed through the alliance's efforts.

That's huge. Soybeans are Ontario's biggest field crop. Any gains in this commodity's genetics are significant to the overall agri-food sector. And gains happen through research and breeding.

The varieties have been developed under the broad umbrella of a three-year project called Advanced Canadian Field Crops Through Breeding, funded by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Some of new varieties had already been under development with support from the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA). Now, they're ready to be licensed to seed companies and made available to farmers. In fact, some already are.

Germplasm exchange and knowledge sharing has been integral to the advances in these breeding programs, says Crosby Devitt, manager of market development and research with the Grain Farmers of Ontario. For example, OMAFRA-supported researchers from the University of Guelph main campus and Ridgetown campus, and from federal research stations in Harrow and Ottawa, worked together to see these varieties produced.

Devitt says successfully introducing new soybean varieties is just the first triumph to come out of this project. He says he's looking forward to seeing more results over the next few years in the other five crops the project covers - corn, winter wheat, spring wheat, oats and barley.

The new varieties were developed for a range of environments. They're primarily conventional, and aimed at premium markets, such as non-genetically modified identity preserved, and food grade identity preserved.

But that doesn't mean things have slowed down on the genetically modified front.

At the same time the field crop alliance results were being reported, CropLife Canada, a pro-crop protection organization, released a new report claiming modern crop protection - which includes genetically modified crops - saves Canadian families millions of dollars every year.

The report says crop protection and biotechnology saves up to 70 per cent on any food that requires wheat flour or soy, 53 per cent on vegetables and 39 per cent on fruit.

Crop protection products contribute to a vibrant Canadian economy, it says, offering solutions to some of the world's greatest challenges - climate change, food security and water shortages among them. That's occurring through the development of drought resistant crops, as well as those with special nutritional traits and abilities to create their own defences against insects.

There's no question genetically modified crops have become popular with many Canadian farmers, who planted about 20 million acres of them last year. Still, the challenge remains for the agriculture sector to demonstrate the value of crop protection in any form to the public. The sector must make reports like the ones mentioned here living reports, and get more than a headline of out them. People need to be shown technology's vital role in keeping the world fed, locally, nationally or globally.

Owen Roberts, Guelph Mercury, August 22, 2011 

The avian influenza crisis in British Columbia and foot and mouth disease outbreaks across the world assures that the word biosecurity is well understood by Ontario's livestock and poultry producers. Grain and oilseeds farmers are going to find out what it means for the crops they grow in their fields as well.
 

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is developing a voluntary biosecurity standard for crops grown to feed humans, livestock and industrial purposes. The goal is to help farmers control pests and diseases on their farms.

The standard is being developed by the Grains and Oilseeds Sector Biosecurity Advisory Group with representatives from grower organizations, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Canada Grains Council, the Canadian Grain Commission and provincial agriculture departments.

The crop types covered in the standard will include official and unofficial grains defined under the Canada Grains Act. The official grains include; corn, soybeans, wheat, barley, oats, rye, triticale, canola , pulses, and mixed grains while the unofficial grains include canary seed, spelt, kamut and quinoa.

The Canada Grains Council has a voluntary food safety program called ExcelGrains Canada. Farm input is coming from a committee of farmers appointed by organizations from across the country. Dale Riddell, program manager, says the same committee is contributing to the biosecurity standard.

"Farmers recognize there's a lot of interest in making sure that we are doing a credible job in being safe and prudent in the production of food," Riddell explains.

Farmers were insistent that both the ExcelGrains Canada program and the biosecurity guidelines being developed now by CFIA should be national. They didn't want each province to have its own set of guidelines. They were also insistent that both programs be voluntary.

The term 'farm-level biosecurity' means using a series of management practices to minimize prevent or control the introduction and spread of pests and diseases at the farm level, explains a CFIA press release. The national voluntary standard will give farmers a common approach for controlling major plant pests and diseases, such as bacteria, fungi, insects and weeds.

Riddell says most farmers already take some biosecurity measures in their operations. "It can range from watching the kind of seed that you use to who comes on your farm."

The biosecurity standard being developed is focusing strictly on biosecurity guidelines as a tool for farmers, Riddell says. The on-farm food safety program developed by the Canada Grains Council goes beyond biosecurity.

Kanwal Kochhar, national manager of the CFIA grains and oilseeds section, says the grains and oilseeds standard is being developed as part of the federal government's ongoing efforts to establish on-farm biosecurity standards for the agricultural industry. Animal on-farm biosecurity standards are already being developed with the first one, the national avian on-farm biosecurity standard, being done in 2009.

"A year ago it was identified that some plant standards should be developed," she says. "Two sectors, grains and oilseeds and potato, were identified as top priorities."

When it's completed, Kochhar says the standard will be like a booklet identifying the best management practices farmers can use to keep disease and pest levels to a minimum. There will also be brochures and web content that will help farmers develop their own farm-specific biosecurity plans.

The national standard will complement existing farm-level biosecurity programs and will take about two years to develop. Funding for its development is coming from the Growing Forward Agricultural Policy Framework. A total of $9.364 million was earmarked to be used from 2009 to 2013 to develop national biosecurity standards for eight priority commodities, including beef, dairy, bees, sheep, goats, mink, potato and grains and oilseeds.

Susan Mann, Better Farming, August 23, 2011 

According to the authors of new research released today at the World Water Week in Stockholm, a radical transformation in the way farming and natural systems interact could simultaneously boost food production and protect the environment-two goals that often have been at odds. The authors warn, however, that the world must act quickly if the goal is to save the Earth's main breadbasket areas-where resources are so depleted the situation threatens to decimate global supplies of fresh water and cripple agricultural systems worldwide.

A new analysis resulting from the joined forces of the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) outlines the urgent need to rethink current strategies for intensifying agriculture, given that food production already accounts for 70 to 90 percent of withdrawals from available water resources in some areas. The report, An Ecosystem Services Approach to Water and Food Security, finds that in many breadbaskets, including the plains of northern China, India's Punjab and the Western United States, water limits are close to being "reached or breached." Meanwhile, 1.6 billion people already live under conditions of water scarcity, and the report warns that number could soon grow to 2 billion. The current situation in the Horn of Africa is a timely reminder of just how vulnerable to famine some regions are.

"Agriculture is both a major cause and victim of ecosystem degradation," said Eline Boelee of IWMI, the lead scientific editor of the report. "And it is not clear whether we can continue to increase yields with the present practices. Sustainable intensification of agriculture is a priority for future food security, but we need to take a more holistic 'landscape' approach."

Meanwhile, a separate report by IWMI, Wetlands, Agriculture and Poverty Reduction, warns against seeking to protect wetlands by simply excluding agriculture. It argues that policies focused simply on wetland preservation and ignore the potential of 'wetland agriculture' to increase food production and contribute to reducing poverty.

"Blanket prohibitions against cultivation do not always reduce ecosystem destruction and can make things worse," said Matthew McCartney of IWMI, who co-authored the report. "For example, the grassy 'dambo' wetlands of sub-Saharan Africa often provide vital farmland to the rural poor. Banning farming in these areas, however, has exacerbated rather than reduced ecosystem destruction. It has prompted deforestation upstream and led to a shift from farming to grazing in the wetlands themselves so that, overall, there has been a much greater impact on these natural systems. What is needed is a balance: appropriate farming practices that support sustainable food production and protect ecosystems."

New Alliance Between Agriculture and Environment Groups

The two reports seek a new path toward achieving both food security and environmental health. They focus on radically reorienting practices and policies so that farming occurs in 'agroecosystems' that exist as part of the broader landscape, where they help maintain and supplement clean water, clean air and biodiversity.

"We are seeing a growing trend of alliances between traditionally conservationist groups and those concerned with agriculture," said David Molden, Deputy Director General for Research at IWMI. UNEP is the voice of the environment of the United Nations, and IWMI is part of the world's largest consortium of agricultural researchers, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR).

"For instance," Molden continued, "UNEP has adopted food security as a new strategic concern. And IWMI and its partners in the CGIAR are developing a multi-million dollar research program that will look at water as an integral part of ecosystems to help solve issues of water scarcity, land and environmental degradation. IWMI has also recently become a key partner with the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands on the topic of the relationship between wetlands and agriculture."

"The various political, research and community alliances now emerging are challenging the notion that we have to choose between food security and ecosystem health by making it clear that you can't have one without the other," he added.

Examples of Successful Integration in the Field

UNEP and IWMI and collaborators have identified multiple opportunities to use trees on dryland farms that will intensify the amount of food produced per hectare of land area while helping to improve the surrounding ecosystem. They note that by integrating trees and hedgerows, farmers can prevent runoff and soil erosion and retain more water for nourishing their crops.

Another example of innovative thinking include better water and soil management in rainfed systems in sub-Saharan Africa, which have demonstrated the ability to reverse land degradation while at the same time increasing crop yields by twofold or threefold.

Overall, the authors say it's time for decision-makers at the international, national and local level to embrace an agroecosystem approach to food production. These changes could include providing more farmers with incentives to adopt improved practices through 'payments for environmental services (PES)'.

One example being explored by the CGIAR's Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) is the potential for benefit sharing in river basin areas of Peru, Ecuador and Colombia. Upstream users value the water for irrigation and ecotourism and also have a spiritual affiliation with the ecosystem. The hydropower companies need a steady stream to support electrification of the growing urban population downstream. Large-scale farms and agro-industry also need increasing supplies of water.

"More and more agriculture needs to be brought into the 'green economy'," said Alain Vidal of the CPWF. "We need to value farming practices that protect our precious water resources in the same way we are beginning to value forest management that helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions, especially because those natural resources support the livelihoods of the most vulnerable."

In the report, An Ecosystem Services Approach to Water and Food Security, experts from UNEP, IWMI and 19 other organizations acknowledge that one major impediment to adopting a more sustainable approach to food production is that it requires a new level of cooperation and coordination among officials and organizations involved in agriculture, environmental issues, water management, forestry, fisheries and wildlife management-individuals and groups who routinely operate in separated, disconnected worlds.

"It is essential that in the future we do things differently. There is a need for a seminal shift in the way modern societies view water and ecosystems and the way we, people, interact with them," said David Molden. "Managing water for food and ecosystems will bring great benefits, but there is no escaping the urgency of this situation. We are heading for disaster if we don't change our practices from business as usual."

The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) is a nonprofit, scientific research organization focusing on the sustainable use of land and water resources in agriculture, to benefit poor people in developing countries. IWMI's mission is "to improve the management of land and water resources for food, livelihoods and the environment." IWMI has its headquarters in Colombo, Sri Lanka, and regional offices across Asia and Africa. The Institute works in partnership with developing countries, international and national research institutes, universities and other organizations to develop tools and technologies that contribute to poverty reduction as well as food and livelihood security (www.iwmi.org).

The CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) was launched in 2002 as a reform initiative of the CGIAR. The CPWF aims to increase the resilience of social and ecological systems through better water management for food production (crops, fisheries and livestock). The CPWF does this through an innovative research and development approach that brings together a broad range of scientists, development specialists, policymakers and communities to address the challenges of food security, poverty and water scarcity. The CPWF is currently working in six river basins globally: Andes, Ganges, Limpopo, Mekong, Nile and Volta (www.waterandfood.org).

CGIAR Press Release, August 21, 2011

A study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) documents the success of a Wildlife Conservation Society program that uses an innovative business model to improve rural livelihoods while restoring local wildlife populations.

Known as COMACO (Community Markets for Conservation), the program began in Zambia in 2003 and has resulted in wildlife populations stabilizing and rebounding in areas once ravaged by poaching. In addition, local people -- including some of the world's poorest farmers -- are now benefitting from higher crop yields and improved livelihoods.

The study appears in the August 23rd edition of PNAS. Authors include Dale Lewis, Mwangala Mukamba of the Wildlife Conservation Society; Makondo Kabila; Samuel Bell, Kim Bothi, Lydia Gatere, Carmen Moraru, Johannes Lehman, James, Lassoie, David Wolfe, David Lee, Louise Buck, and Alexander Travis of Cornell University; John Fay of the University of Cape Town; and Edwin Matokwaani and Matthews Mushimbalume of the Zambian Wildlife Authority.

The COMACO program teaches rural villagers -- including former poachers -- sustainable agriculture methods that improve crop yields while reducing deforestation. COMACO then helps them earn more by adding value to crops, such as selling peanut butter instead of peanuts. Importantly, the program provides access to national and international commodity and retail markets. COMACO links membership in the cooperative business with wildlife conservation by having new participants turn in their guns and snares and by monitoring of the sustainable practices.

"COMACO represents a pragmatic solution to several related problems that plague rural Africa: poverty, deforestation, and loss of wildlife," said the study's lead author and COMACO founder Dale Lewis of the Wildlife Conservation Society. "This study documents COMACO's initial successes and outlines some of the challenges that lie ahead to ensure the program's long-term success."

Since 2003, the program has trained more than 40,000 farmers. More than 61,000 wire snares and 1,467 guns have been voluntarily turned in by participants. The program has expanded from two locations in the Luangwa Valley to a growing network of sites surrounding national parks, providing a buffer of reduced poaching and snare use.

As part of the study, aerial surveys show that wildlife including zebra, wildebeest, eland and other species have stabilized or are increasing following steady declines in the 1980s and 1990s from rampant poaching.

"COMACO shows how conservation can and should work," said John Robinson, WCS Executive Vice President for Conservation and Science. "Conservation cannot function without the buy-in of local people, and this is a shining example of how that goal can be achieved with impressive results for both people and wildlife."

In addition to environmental benefits, the study showed that COMACO farmers, particularly women, had higher crop yields than their non-COMACO peers. In response, many non-COMACO farmers are now adopting sustainable farming methods, learning from their COMACO-trained neighbors. Consequently, soil quality has improved with higher soil carbon on sustainable farms than on conventional farms.

As a business, COMACO is diversifying its products and markets. An important example is production of high-energy protein supplements sold to Catholic Relief Services and the World Food Programme for feeding orphans, HIV patients and refugees.

These efforts have allowed COMACO to move consistently toward an economic break-even point.

"They are trying to do something that very few wildlife and social interventions have ever dreamed of, which is to become self-sufficient," said co-author Alexander Travis of Cornell University's Baker Institute for Animal Health.

Funding for COMACO has been provided by the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Mulago Foundation, Jasmine Foundation, Lundin for Africa, CARE International, General Mills, William Lloyd, and Harvey and Heidi Bookman. Research funding was provided by USAID and the Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Wildlife Conservation Society, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Wildlife Conservation Society (2011, August 22). Food security helps wildlife. ScienceDaily. Retrieved August 23, 2011, from sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2011/08/110822154756.htm