Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T12:28:53.804Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Environmental consequences of modern production agriculture: How can alternative agriculture address these issues and concerns?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Robert I. Papendick ,
Lloyd F. Elliott  and
Robert B. Dahlgren
Robert I. Papendick
Affiliation:
Soil scientists, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pullman, WA 99164-6421.
Lloyd F. Elliott
Affiliation:
Soil scientists, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pullman, WA 99164-6421.
Robert B. Dahlgren
Affiliation:
Wildlife biologist, U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011.
Get access

Abstract

Modern large-scale conventional agriculture with intensive monoculture and row-cropping practices often results in unacceptable soil erosion and runoff and in associated losses of nutrients and pesticides. It also adversely affects wildlife. Sediment from erosion is the greatest pollutant of surface water in the United States and is a major carrier of agrichemicals into the water system. Conservation tillage practices can significantly reduce soil losses in modern production systems, but pollution of surface and groundwaters from runoff and associated potential for increased use of pesticides may still present a hazard. Erosion can be reduced to tolerable levels by the use of crop rotations, meadow crops, and mulch tillage, as commonly used in alternative agriculture. These cultural practices also result in diversity in crop types and in smaller fields, with possible benefit to many wildlife species. Chemical threats to the environment and to wildlife are reduced because synthetic chemicals are used sparingly or not at all.

Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , Winter 1986 , pp. 3 - 10
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Baker, D. B. 1985. Regional water-quality impacts of intensive row-crop agriculture: A Lake Erie Basin case study. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:125–132.Google Scholar
2.Baker, J. L., and Laflen, J. M.. 1983. Water quality consequences of conservation tillage. J. Soil Water Conserv. 38:186–193.Google Scholar
3.Baskett, T. S. 1947. Nesting and production of the ring-necked pheasant in north-central Iowa. Ecol. Monogr. 17:1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Bolton, H. Jr., Elliott, L. F., Papendick, R. I., and Bezdicek, D. F.. 1985. Soil microbial biomass and selected soil enzyme activities: Effect of fertilization and cropping practices. Soil Biol. Biochem. 17:297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Brown, L. R., and Wolf, E. C.. 1984. Soil erosion: Quiet crisis in the world economy. Worldwatch Paper 60. Worldwatch Institute, Washington, D.C.49 pp.Google Scholar
6.Cacek, T. 1984. Organic farming: The other conservation farming system. J. Soil Water Conserv. 39:357–360.Google Scholar
7.CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology). 1985. Agriculture and groundwater quality. CAST Report No. 103, pp. 6, 8, 10, 11, 13. Iowa State University Station, Ames. 66 pp.Google Scholar
8.Chesters, G., and Schierow, L.. 1985. A primer on nonpoint pollution. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:9–13.Google Scholar
9.Clark, E. H. II., 1985. The off-site costs of soil erosion. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:19–22.Google Scholar
10.Cohen, S. V., Creeger, S. M., Carsel, R. F., and Enfield, C. F.. 1984. Potential pesticide contamination of groundwater from agricultural uses. In: Treatment and Disposal of Pesticide Wastes, R. F. Krueger and J. N. Seiber (eds.), pp. 297–325. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser. 259.Google Scholar
11.Crosson, P. R., and Stout, A. T.. 1983. Productivity effects of cropland erosion in the United States. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.103 pp.Google Scholar
12.Dahlgren, R. B. 1967. The pheasant decline. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre. 44 pp.Google Scholar
13.Dahlgren, R. B., Linder, R. L., and Carlson, C. W.. 1972. Polychlorinated biphenyls: Their effects on penned pheasants. Environ. Health Perspect., Exp. Issue No. 1:89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Dahlgren, R. B., Linder, R. L., and Ortman, K. K.. 1970. Dieldrin effects on susceptibility of penned pheasants to hand capture. J. Wildl. Manage. 34:957–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Dickey, E. C., Shelton, D. P., and Peterson, T. R.. 1984. Conservation tillage: Effective, inexpensive erosion control. Farm, Ranch, and Home Quarterly 30:18–20. University of Nebraska, Lincoln.Google Scholar
16.Duda, A. M., and Johnson, R. J.. 1985. Cost-effective targeting of agricultural nonpoint-source pollution controls. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:108–11.Google Scholar
17.Farris, A. L., Klonglan, E. D., and Nomsen, R. C.. 1977. The ring-necked pheasant in Iowa. Iowa Conservation Commission, Des Moines. 147 pp.Google Scholar
18.Fischer, W. A. 1974. Nesting and production of the ring-necked pheasant on the Winnebago Research Area, Iowa. M.S. thesis. Iowa State University Library, Ames. 63 pp.Google Scholar
19.Foster, G. R., Young, R. A., Römkens, M. J. M., and Onstad, C. A.. 1985. Processes of soil erosion by water. In: Soil Erosion and Crop Productivity, Follett, R. F. and Steward, B. A. (eds.), pp. 137–162. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
20.Frye, W. W., Bennett, O. L., and Buntley, G. J.. 1985. Restoration of crop productivity on eroded or degraded soils. In: Soil Erosion and Crop Productivity, Follett, R. F. and Stewart, B. A. (eds.), pp. 335–356. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
21.Gebhardt, M. R., Daniel, T. C., Schweizer, E. E., and Allmaras, R. R.. 1985. Conservation tillage. Science 230:625–630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Hallberg, G. 1984. Agricultural chemicals and groundwater quality in Iowa. Coop. Ext. Serv. Rpt. CE-2081j, Iowa State University, Ames. 6 pp.Google Scholar
23.Hauck, R. D., and Koshino, M.. 1971. Slow-release and amended fertilizers. In: Fertilizer Technology and Use, 2nd ed., Olson, R. A., Army, T. J., Hanway, J. J., and Kilmer, V. J. (eds.). Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
24.Hipschman, D. 1959. A look at the past half century. South Dakota Conserv. Digest. 26(2):20–31, 37.Google Scholar
25.Hoy, M. A., and Herzog, D. C. (eds.). 1985. Biological control in agricultural IPM systems. Academic Press, New York. 589 pp.Google Scholar
26.King, A. D. 1983. Progress in no-till. J. Soil Water Conserv. 38:160–161.Google Scholar
27.Klaas, E. E. 1982. Effects of pesticides on non-target organisms. In: Proceedings of the Midwest Agricultural Interfaces with Fish and Wildlife Resources Workshop, R. B. Dahlgren (compiler), pp. 7–9. Iowa Coop. Wildl. Research Unit, Iowa State University, Ames.Google Scholar
28.Langdale, G. W., Leonard, R. A., and Thomas, A. W.. 1985. Conservation practice effects on phosphorus losses from Southern Piedmont watersheds. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:157–161.Google Scholar
29.Larson, W. E. 1981. Protecting the soil resource base. J. Soil Water Conserv. 36:13–16.Google Scholar
30.Lauckhart, J. B., and McKean, J. W.. 1956. Chinese pheasants in the Northwest. In: Pheasants in North America, Allen, D. L. (ed.), pp. 43–89. American Wildlife Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
31.Linder, R. L., Lyon, D. L., and Agee, C. P.. 1960. An analysis of pheasant nesting in south-central Nebraska. Trans. North Am. Wildl. Conf. 25:214–230.Google Scholar
32.Marshall, Eliot. 1985. The rise and decline of Temik. Science 229:1369–1371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Mohlis, C. K. 1974. Land use and pheasant habitat in north-central Iowa, 1938–1973. M.S. Thesis. Iowa State University Library, Ames. 84 pp.Google Scholar
34.Moldenhauer, W. C., Langdale, G. W., Frye, W., McCool, D. K., Papendick, R. I., Smika, D. E., and Fryrear, D. W.. 1983. Conservation tillage for erosion control. J. Soil Water Conserv. 38:144–151.Google Scholar
35.Myers, C. F., Meek, J., Tuller, S., and Weinberg, A.. 1985. Nonpoint sources of water pollution. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:14–22.Google Scholar
36.Papendick, R. I., and Elliott, L. F.. 1984a. Soil physical factors that affect plant health. In: Challenging Problems in Plant Health, Kommedahl, Thor and Williams, P. H. (eds.), pp. 168–180. The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN.Google Scholar
37.Papendick, R. I., and Elliott, L. F.. 1984b. Tillage and cropping systems for erosion control and efficient nutrient utilization. In: Organic Farming: Current Technology and Its Role in a Sustainable Agriculture, Bezdicek, D. F. and Power, J. F. (eds.), pp. 69–81. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
38.Piest, R. F., Spomer, R. G., and Muhs, P. R.. 1977. A profile of soil movement on a cornfield. In: Soil Erosion: Prediction and Control, pp. 160–166. Spec. Publ. No. 21. Soil Conservation Society of America, Ankeny, IA.Google Scholar
39.Power, J. F. 1983. Research in agricultural ecosystems, North Central United States. In: Nutrient Cycling in Agricultural Ecosystems, Lowrance, R., Todd, R. L., Ausmussen, L., and Leonard, R. (eds.). pp. 121–133. Coll. of Agric. Spec. Publ. 33, University of Georgia, Athens.Google Scholar
40.Randall, G. W. 1984. Factors limiting the efficacy of agricultural chemicals in changing agricultural production systems—Current state of the art. In: Changing Agricultural Production Systems and the Fate of Agricultural Chemicals, Irving, G. W. Jr., (ed.). pp. 76–87. Agricultural Research Institute, Bethesda, MD.Google Scholar
41.Rodgers, R. D., and Wooley, J. B.. 1983. Conservation tillage impacts on wildlife. J. Soil Water Conserv. 38:212–213.Google Scholar
42.Sampson, R. N. 1981. Farmland or wasteland. Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA. 422 pp.Google Scholar
43.Schepers, J. S., and Mielke, L. N.. 1983. Nitrogen fertilization, mineralization, and leaching under irrigation in the Midwest. In: Nutrient Cycling in Agricultural Ecosystems, Lowrance, R., Todd, R., Asmussen, L., and Leonard, R. (eds.). pp. 325–334. Georgia Agric. Exp. Stn. Spec. Publ. 23. University of Georgia, Athens.Google Scholar
44.Schuman, G. E., McCalla, T. M., Saxton, K. E., and Knox, H. T.. 1975. Nitrate movement and its distribution in the soil profile of differentially fertilized corn watersheds. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 39:1192–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45.Stewart, B. A., Woolhiser, D. A., Wischmeier, W. H., Caro, J. H., and Frere, M. H.. 1975. Control of water pollution from cropland, Vol. I. U.S. Department of Agriculture and Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.111 pp.Google Scholar
46.Stewart, B. A., Woolhiser, D. A., Wischmeier, W. H., Caro, J. H., and Frere, M. H.. 1976. Control of water pollution from cropland, Vol. II. U.S. Department of Agriculture and Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.187 pp.Google Scholar
47.Stoltenberg, N. L., and White, J. L.. 1953. Selective losses of plant nutrients by erosion. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 17:406–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48.Taylor, M. W., Wolfe, C. W., and Baxter, W. L.. 1978. Land-use change and ring-necked pheasants in Nebraska. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 6(4):226–230.Google Scholar
49.Trautman, C. G. 1960. Evaluation of pheasant nesting habitat in eastern South Dakota. Trans. North Am. Wildl. Conf. 25:202–213.Google Scholar
50.U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1978. Agricultural statistics. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
51.U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1980. Report and recommendations on organic farming. A special report prepared for the Secretary of Agriculture. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 164 pp.Google Scholar
52.U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1981. Soil, water and related resources in the United States: Status, conditions, and trends: 1980 RCA Appraisal, Part I. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
53.U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1984. Agricultural statistics. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
54.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Quality criteria for water. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
55.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1983. Chesapeake Bay program: Findings and recommendations. Region 3, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
56.Vance, D. R. 1976. Changes in land use and wildlife populations in southeastern Illinois. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 4(1):11–15.Google Scholar
57.Wauchope, R. D. 1978. The pesticide content of surface water draining from agricultural fields-A review. J. Environ. Qual. 7:459–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58.Wischmeier, W. H., and Smith, D. D.. 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses-A guide to conservation planning. U. S. Dept. Agric. Handb. No. 537. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.164 pp.Google Scholar
59.Wooley, J. B. Jr., Best, L. B., and Clark, W. R.. 1985. Impacts of no-till row cropping on upland wildlife. Trans. North Am. Wildl. Natur. Resourc. Conf. 50:157–168.Google Scholar
60.Youngberg, I. G., Parr, J. F., and Papendick, R. I.. 1984. Potential benefits of organic farming practices for wildlife and natural resources. Trans. North Am. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf. 49:141–153.Google Scholar
61.Zaki, M. H., Moran, D., and Harris, D.. 1982. Pesticides in groundwater: The aldicarb story in Suffolk County, New York. Am. J. Public Health 72:1391–1395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar