Toward Sustainable Agricultural Systems in the 21st Century (2010)

The committee that authored the report Alternative Agriculture (NRC, 1989) commissioned case studies of 14 farms to illustrate the wide range of alternative farming systems that were operating in the United States in the 1980s. Those case studies provided important details about the complexity of individual farming practices and the diversity of approaches used to improve the sustainability of farming systems. The committee for this report commissioned two sets of case studies. Initially, the committee followed up with the operators or owners of the 14 case-study farms featured in Alternative Agriculture to see whether their approaches to farming have changed over time and how their approaches have affected the viability of their farms.

In addition to following up with those case-study farms, the committee selected nine new farms to serve as informative case studies for this report. The purpose of the new case studies was to illustrate the diverse production and management practices used to improve sustainability across different farm commodity types, to highlight how innovative producers address common challenges associated with moving toward greater sustainability, and to better understand the role of larger social, economic, and institutional contexts in the emergence and development of these farms. The assumption is that successful farmers, operating in real-world environments, are a key source of knowledge for innovative agricultural production systems design and management. The case-study farms were chosen to provide insight into how different segments of U.S. agriculture are implementing sustainability concepts in the 21st century. Each farm is located within biogeophysical, economic, and sociopolitical realms with scales varying from family to farm, local landscape, local community, regional, and global. Their stories are necessarily complex, and their success at improving different measures of sustainability illustrates the balancing of various goals and objectives faced by most real-world farmers. In most cases, their farming systems build on positive synergies and interactions among different aspects of the social and natural elements of their farms, which are manifested at various scales (for example, households, farms, watersheds, and niche markets). Those interactions are dynamic and are expected

to change in response to or anticipation of opportunities and constraints. Many of the key technologies and interaction processes for sustainability have been well studied by scientists, and are summarized in the main body of this report. But the current state of farming systems science is far from adequate to effectively model, in a holistic way, the complexities of interaction illustrated by the case-study farms.

The report Alternative Agriculture (NRC, 1989) used 11 case studies that included 14 farms to provide in-depth examples of the wide range of “alternative” agricultural farming systems discussed in the report. The case studies were conducted in 1986 and included 5 integrated crop and livestock farms¹, 7 fruit and vegetable farms², 1 beef cattle ranch³, and 1 rice farm⁴. The current committee attempted to contact these farms to find out how they have performed since 1986. This type of longitudinal study is a valuable way to identify the factors that influence long-term successes and challenges, and to highlight the organizational and management strategies associated with a farm’s long-term viability.

The committee was able to obtain current information and contacted the persons who owned or operated the farms for 10 out of the original 14 farms (Table 7-1). The committee was unable to confirm the operating status of 4 of the farms because it could not locate or reach the current owners, operators, or other people interviewed in 1986. Of the 10 farms contacted, 2 were no longer in business. One farm (Stephen Pavich and Sons) reported that they had ceased operation in 2001 as a result of several unfortunate events, including three insurance claims during the time that the farm was expanding. Although the case-study farm business no longer exists, Stephen Pavich Sr.’s children remain involved in agriculture as farmers or agricultural consultants. Another original case-study farmer (Ted Winsberg of Green Cay Produce) has retired, although other people are farming some of the land he used to farm.

Although Rex Spray of Spray Brothers’ Farm and Mel Coleman were interested in providing an update of their farms, they were unable to participate in in-depth interviews because of time constraints. Both farms were still in operation in 2008. Spray Brothers’ Farm was using mostly the same management practices and crop rotations reported in Alternative Agriculture. Rex said that the economic viability of the farm has not changed, but he indicated that weeds and changes in weather patterns were two of his biggest concerns.

When the committee reached Mel Coleman of Coleman Natural Foods (known as Coleman Natural Beef in NRC, 1989) in late 2007, he said that the family’s cattle ranch had reduced the size of its herd considerably since 1989 because of drought. Coleman Natural Foods, however, was in a better financial position in 2007 than in the 1980s because of expanded product lines and a premium for its certified-organic and naturally raised livestock

and products. The beef division of Coleman Natural Foods was sold to Meyer Natural Angus (another firm) in June 2008.

The committee obtained information on Kutztown Farm from Jeff Moyer of Rodale Institute. However, that case-study farm is not included because NRC could not reach the owner of the family farm to obtain informed consent for using it as a case study.

The committee commissioned consultant Susan Smalley (Michigan State University) to conduct follow-up interviews on 8 of the 14 farms featured in Alternative Agriculture (NRC, 1989) using a protocol designed by the committee (see Appendix D for protocol). The follow-up interviews included the 2 farms no longer in business and 5 farms still in operation—Mormon Trail Farm (known as BreDahl Farm in NRC, 1989), Brookview Farm (known as Sabot Hill Farm in NRC, 1989), Thompson Farm, Ferrari Farm, and Lundberg Family Farms.

The follow-up interviews include examples of farms that used conventional and organic practices. Although organic farming has become much more common since the mid-1980s, two of the farms (Mormon Trail Farm and Thompson Farm) suggested that conversion did not seem suitable for their situation. The three originally organic farms (Brookview Farm, Ferrari Farm, and the Lundberg Family Farms), however, have increased the proportion of or shifted completely to organic production. Nonetheless, all of the 1989 case-study farms still in operation appear to exhibit qualities that are associated with movement toward greater sustainability (for example, robustness, resistance, and resilience). In the follow-up interviews, many farmers emphasized the importance of maintaining or building up their natural resource base and maximizing the use of internal resources as key parts of their farming strategies. Those farming philosophies are consistent with the committee’s discussion on environmental sustainability and the importance of a closed nutrient cycle (Chapter 3).

Almost all the five restudied farms are using farming practices and management strategies similar to those described in the 1989 report. That observation reinforces that farming systems can maintain or improve natural resource quality and maintain economic sustainability over time. The crop farms emphasize the importance of careful soil management and use crop rotations and cover crops to reduce erosion and manage fertility. Crop diversity has also remained a key feature of these farms, some of which have increased crop diversity (for example, the Lundberg Family Farms). The farms with livestock each continue to pursue management practices that do not use hormones or antibiotics.

Despite strong continuity in their core farming practices, most of the 1989 case-study farms have adjusted and adapted their mix of crops and livestock, their scale of operations, and their marketing strategies in response to changes in environmental conditions, their family situations, customers’ preferences, and market opportunities. Their ability to make changes in operations to adapt to new contexts reflects a form of resilience that was discussed in Chapter 2.

Most of the 1989 case-study farms participate in nontraditional commodity and direct-sales markets to some extent (for example, Ferrari Farm sells a small proportion of its fruit at a farmers’ market and Brookview Farm sells most of its products via direct sales). They produce some, if not all, their products for value-trait markets—for example, organic crops and organic or naturally raised livestock.

Each of the five farms continues to rely heavily on family members for labor and management of farming operations. The Lundberg Family Farms also hires a number of

nonfamily workers, through the use of “good” labor practices discussed in Chapter 4, and recently was named California Workplace of the Year by the Employer Resource Institute and the top Small Workplace by a nonprofit group, Winning Workplaces™

Although all the 1989 case-study farms still in operation reported to be robust and successful, a few of the farms highlighted threats to their long-term viability. Those threats include high land-rental costs and rising land values associated with development pressure. Operators of two case-study farms in California (Bryce Lundberg and Wayne Ferrari) mentioned availability of water for farming as one of their concerns. Other challenges mentioned include spread of new weed species.

Mormon Trail Farm (known as the BreDahl Farm in NRC, 1989) is located about 60 miles southwest of Des Moines, directly on the historic pioneer route that runs through southern Iowa. The home place, now owned by Clark BreDahl and his wife, Linda, has been in the BreDahl family since 1927. In 1974, Clark began operating the farm where he and three other siblings grew up. In the 1980s, he and Linda cash rented the farm from his mother. Since their interview for the original Alternative Agriculture study, they have been able to purchase the 160-acre home place along with an additional quarter section a few miles away. Although the farm consists of 320 acres, it is smaller than the Adair County average of 407 acres, according to the 2007 Census of Agriculture. The farming operation is similar in many ways to what it was 20 years ago, although several components have changed as conditions have dictated.

The BreDahls’ farming philosophy has not changed over the years. They try to operate the farm using internal resources to the largest extent possible. Farm inputs are evaluated on the basis of how they will affect net income rather than gross production. Sometimes, maximum yields and maximum profits move in a direct correlation, but frequently they do not. The BreDahls stress that concerns for family and the environment often rank equally with economics when final decisions are made. Two examples illustrate this philosophy.

First, the BreDahls emerged from the farm crisis of the mid-1980s in stable financial condition. They could have attempted to expand the farm’s land base more rapidly, but chose instead to pursue additional careers for which both had college training and previous job experience. It also fit with Clark’s idea of diversifying the family’s income as much as possible. Shortly after the original study, Linda quit her full-time teaching job to be a stay-at-home mother and farming partner while the children were young. After a 12-year hiatus, she returned to the classroom and, at that time, Clark also accepted a part-time job in the communications field. Thus, one of the biggest challenges with the farming operation in the years since has been tailoring the enterprise mix to fit the available labor supply.

Second, the BreDahls have countered state and national trends by steadily decreasing the amount of row crops grown on their farm, moving instead to more grass and livestock—a combination they feel is better suited to their highly erodible soils and the environment. They have also found success with several smaller niche enterprises that, cumulatively, have made a significant contribution to the farm’s income.

The overall mix of crops and livestock on the BreDahl farm has shifted steadily toward livestock over the past 20 years. In 2008, the BreDahls produced only 25 acres of field corn

and 45 acres of soybean (the first they had grown in five years) on their 300-plus acres. Typically 40–50 acres of oats and alfalfa are grown, while the acreage of mixed grass-legume pasture has increased significantly. Intensive row-crop production is confined to the best upland soils (Sharpsburg, Macksburg, and Winterset) and river bottoms (mostly Colo-Ely) with high corn suitability ratings and little slope. On rotated acres, corn, soybean, oats, alfalfa or clover, and occasionally turnips or rye are grown. A small apple orchard and planting of fall-bearing raspberries are microenterprises.

Although crop rotations and manure applications remain essentially unchanged at the farm, planting practices have shifted heavily towards no-till. For the most part, contact herbicides are used that leave little or no long-term residue. In some cases, resistant corn varieties are used to eliminate insecticide applications. In rare instances where second-year corn has been grown, hybrids with genetic resistance to rootworms have performed as well or better than first-year corn. A heavy emphasis on grass, no-till planting practices, and row crops grown on only the best land have helped cut soil losses from the farm to near zero, a fact affirmed by soil tests for organic matter that show a steady rise.

Long-term yield trends on both the home farm where Clark’s father was an early adopter of soil conservation practices more than 60 years ago and the neighboring farm which they purchased have been rising steadily, and year-to-year variations have become smaller. Soils in the area of southwest Iowa where Clark farms tend to have wet, clay out-croppings on hillsides that were once relatively unproductive. Combine yield monitors in recent years, however, have verified little or no difference in yields for many of these spots. Clark attributes the positive changes to better soil aeration resulting from installation of field drainage tile, manure applications to improve soil fertility, no-till planting practices that enhance soil structure, and the regular inclusion of deep-rooted legumes to penetrate any remaining hardpan soils. Crop varieties have also improved.

Livestock numbers (and species) on the BreDahl Farm have also undergone changes. In the 1980s, the BreDahls had two flocks of sheep—one a flock of 40 registered Rambouillet ewes and another of approximately 150 commercial crossbred ewes bred annually to produce market lambs. They also maintained a small sow herd in a farrow-to-finish swine operation, and sometimes purchased lightweight beef calves that were fed to market on homegrown grains.

Two successful livestock enterprises that emerged on the BreDahl farm during the 1990s were the custom finishing of feeder lambs for other owners and the addition of broiler chickens sold direct from the farm to customers. Lambs were brought in from ranches in western range states, finished on grain, and marketed to Midwestern packing plants. The BreDahls were paid a monthly fee for the animals’ care, plus the feed they ate. The arrangement worked well because it gave western ranchers a new marketing option for their lambs while adding a predictable source of income for the BreDahls’ labor and a portion of their grain.

Broiler chickens emerged as an enterprise almost by accident. A few chickens raised strictly for family use while Linda was pregnant with their second child mushroomed by word of mouth into a business that eventually attracted customers from as far away as Des Moines and Omaha. An additional benefit was that chicken customers visiting the farm frequently asked about other meats, leading to the direct sale of beef, lamb, and, initially, pork. Broiler chickens were a labor-intensive project, but worked well for their young family. For 17 years, the BreDahls grew, processed, and direct-marketed up to 1,200 broilers

per summer season with the help of their daughters. As their last daughter leaves home, Clark and Linda are in the process of phasing back broiler production, but direct sales of beef and lamb remain strong. Pork is no longer included in the direct-sale mix as outdated facilities, poor prices, and competing outlets for their labor led the BreDahls to exit pork production in the late 1990s.

Part of the product appeal of the BreDahls’ poultry, beef, and lamb was that they were marketed as produced “naturally” without any introduced hormones or antibiotics. While the BreDahls experimented briefly with organic production, they learned that most of their meat customers were more interested in natural husbandry practices than organic certification. This was especially true as those customers discovered that organically produced meats came at a significantly higher price due to higher production costs.

Although direct sales represent only a small part of total beef and lamb production (about 10 percent), they have been an important source of additional revenue to the farm. Because the BreDahls have the ability to set their own prices on direct-sale items and those prices remain relatively stable, they provide critical income support, especially in years when commodity prices are low.

In 2008, the BreDahls still ran about 55 commercial crossbred ewes along with a small flock of registered Finnsheep. Lack of competitive markets for their commercially grown lambs has limited growth of that enterprise. Partially offsetting that obstacle, however, are lambing percentages well above industry averages with the inclusion of the prolific Finnsheep in their crossbreeding mix.

A big gain in livestock numbers has been growth of a commercial cow herd. In 2008, the herd numbered approximately 80 cows, with ownership of all calves retained through slaughter. Growth of the herd, started in 1988, was “haphazard” until Clark began identifying all newborn calves with ear tags and keeping detailed records on their growth characteristics and carcass merit. He also began purchasing bulls based on their expected progeny differences (EPDs). EPDs use measured data to scientifically rate an animal’s ability to pass along key genetic traits to its offspring. Some of the traits evaluated include birth, weaning and yearling weights, calving ease, and factors related to carcass quality. The combination of using performance-tested bulls, maintaining detailed cow herd records, and basing cull decisions on hard data has led to steady gains in productivity. Feedlot and carcass data gathered on all slaughter cattle have charted similar improvements in rate of gain, percentage of carcasses grading choice or prime, and number of animals qualifying for the Certified Angus Beef^® designation. Participation in a producer-verified program (PVP) that documents the origin, age, and history of each animal nets the BreDahls an additional premium for their commodity cattle that end up in lucrative foreign markets.

As pasture acres have increased, so has the intensity of production. The BreDahls use a system of planned grazing that limits the amount of time animals spend in each pasture. By grazing quickly, removing the animals, and giving the forage more time to rest and regrow, stands are improved and production increased. Electric fence, centralized watering sites, and careful attention to maintaining mixed stands of grasses and legumes have been key tools to making the system work.

Another change related to the livestock business has evolved out of necessity. In recent years, the farm has gone to composting nearly all the dead animals. They started by composting waste parts from broiler chickens that were processed on the farm. The practice worked so well that when commercial rendering companies quit accepting sheep and drastically increased their fees for removing cattle, the BreDahls began composting those species as well. Using mainly cornstalks, straw, and other bedding materials as their carbon source, they have found the practice to be clean, odor-free, and much less expen-

sive than commercial disposal. The process also results in valuable recycled nutrients to return to their fields as fertilizer. All of these efforts represent examples of using internal resources—time and knowledge—to add value to the farm’s production.

Clark has been involved with several farm organizations—Farm Bureau, Practical Farmers of Iowa, and numerous sheep and cattle groups, and he has served on the steering committees of two university research farms in his area. He likes attending field days and open houses to observe first-hand how practices work, often recalling his father ’s advice: “You won’t live long enough to make all the mistakes yourself, so do your best to learn from others.”

He has seen what he considers a positive shift in attitude in recent years by some of the larger farm organizations and the Iowa Department of Agriculture to provide more support for small, beginning, and niche farming operations. Overall, he thinks that type of assistance is more readily available today than it was 15 or 20 years ago. Countering that, in his opinion, are traditional farm commodity programs that reduce risk for established farmers, but make it harder for beginning farmers to compete.

As in the 1980s, the BreDahls today use government programs selectively. Twenty years ago, Clark felt that most family farms would be better off without commodity support programs. He also concluded that those programs encouraged many farmers to convert non-program acres to subsidized crops such as corn and soybean at the expense of livestock. History since has tended to confirm that theory as pasture, forage, and small grain acres have declined dramatically in Iowa over the past two decades along with the number of farms raising livestock.

Today, most federal and state programs require farmers to follow rigid guidelines or use specific practices in order to qualify for payments. Yet, Clark is not convinced that government agencies know better than individual farmers what is best for their land, their farming operations, or their communities. One size does not fit all, he maintains, and feels it is critical that farmers choose wisely the technologies and funding sources they will accept, even if it sometimes affects revenue.

The BreDahls have used funding available through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to assist with some of their pasture renovation, but have largely self-financed farm improvements through private lenders. They began their shift to managed grazing in the late 1970s, long before most current government grazing incentive programs existed. Since then, they have invested heavily, at their own expense, in electric fencing, watering equipment, and solar-powered energizers that allow them to pasture more animals per acre in an environmentally sound manner.

Clark believes farm commodity programs have encouraged many producers to substitute the external resources of technology and capital for the internal resources of labor and management. As production has shifted heavily to corn, soybean, and other program crops, farms have lost diversity, become more open to risk, and, ironically, more reliant on future government support. He also feels the security afforded by commodity programs has dampened farmers’ interest in trying new alternative approaches.

The BreDahls’ attitude of using internal resources to the fullest ultimately led them to experiment with organic production in the mid-1990s. They were considering organics at the time of their original interview for Alternative Agriculture in the late 1980s. They began the transition process on cropland in 1995 and maintained all of their home farm in a certified-organic regimen for 10 years. Although both Clark and Linda embraced the idea of eliminating synthetic fertilizers and pesticides from their operation, the results of their experiment did not meet expectations. Clark’s biggest concern was soil loss from the tillage associated with organic production. “I knew that erosion on our farm previously had been extremely low and tillage just seemed like a giant step backwards,” Clark said. “Besides that, soil tests showed organic matter starting to decline in some of the fields receiving multiple tillage passes.”

Other shortcomings with organic production included marketing contracts that were sometimes deceptive, price premiums that were less than expected, burdensome paperwork, and, in the case of direct-sale meats, customers reluctant to pay the added costs. While organics aligned well with their philosophical beliefs, bottom-line costs and returns did not point to long-term sustainability.

In recent years, Iowa has become a national leader in the production of biofuels, and this new industry has had a positive effect on the BreDahls’ farming operation. While providing an additional cash market for excess grain, the industry has also helped them lower feed costs for their cattle and sheep. They use both wet and dry forms of corn gluten and distillers grains to stretch summer pastures, extend the fall grazing season, and utilize low-quality crop residues for feed that otherwise would have little value. Ethanol co-products have especially improved the efficiency of their pasture and forage-based diets because, with starch removed, those feeds do not upset the balance of roughage-digesting microbes populating the rumen. The BreDahls have relied heavily on research done at Iowa State University to help them turn this new energy source into an asset for food production as well.

The BreDahl Farm’s management strategy of internalizing operating costs and minimizing purchased inputs while maintaining soil quality and animal health is a key factor of the farm’s success. Their experience shows it is not necessary to farm thousands of acres or rely heavily on government safety nets to be profitable. An active management style, committed family involvement, and diverse mix of enterprises have helped the BreDahls make a comfortable living while improving soil health and contributing to their community. Clark’s outlook on farming remains positive. He still very much enjoys the challenges associated with production agriculture and looks forward to implementing more new ideas as he “retires” to full-time farming again in the near future. Although they recognize change as a certainty, Clark and Linda believe the farm has potential to provide both an adequate living and satisfying life style to another generation of the family. Talks are currently under way, but no specific plans have been made.

Ferrari Farms, Inc. is a family-owned and family-operated farm located in California’s San Joaquin Valley. The farm specializes in certified-organic fruits and nuts. George Ferrari and his son Wayne established the farm in 1963. It is currently operated by Wayne, his wife Irene, and their sons Jeff and Greg. Wayne and Irene have started to make the transition of ownership to their sons. Ferrari Farms, Inc., includes 450 acres of farmed land, 340 of which the Ferraris own and 110 of which are leased. Wayne and Irene have built the farm to provide opportunities for their sons to participate and have continued to expand.

When Wayne Ferrari was attending a cherry growers’ meeting, he concluded that he needed to figure out a different way to farm. The customers at a farmers’ market were asking for organic produce, and he determined that organic production would not require a lot of changes to the practices and approaches he already used on his farm. Wayne has continued to fine-tune his organic production system. As stated on the farm’s website (www.ferrarifarms.com), the Ferraris “hope to not only provide you with the most naturally wholesome and delicious fruits and nuts around, but also to help restore the land to its natural balance” by using organic methods.

Ferrari Farms currently produces 20 acres of cherries, 20 acres of plums, 100 acres of peaches and nectarines, 20 acres of apples, and 190 acres of walnuts (including some leased land). Transition to organic takes about three years and all newly acquired production acreage becomes certified organic after three years, except for walnuts. The new acreages for walnut are grown using conventional production for the first three years. Building a walnut orchard requires substantial investment in the trees. The Ferraris use conventional fertilizers to obtain high yields for the first three years so that those acreages are economically viable. The orchard then undergoes transition to organic production during the fourth to sixth year and becomes certified organic thereafter.

Pest management practices on Ferrari Farms have expanded from using biocontrol initially to now including more dependable organic pest control methods and products that were developed in recent years. A wider variety of commercial products is now available for use in organic systems and provide the Ferraris with more options. They use bat houses, owl houses, and selected plantings to attract natural predators. They planted sunflowers to attract beneficial insects to counter peach borers and peach aphids. Greg’s expertise in

disease and insect management is a valuable asset, and the Ferraris find scouting for pests a valuable practice. Selecting the most effective and efficient practices is critical because the production costs of the crops are so high that they cannot afford to miss a crop. In addition, they find value in crop insurance, especially for cherries, to protect their investments.

Purple vetch is used as a cover crop, and composted steer manure is incorporated to help build the soil organic matter. Local regulations mandate that orchard waste be shredded and not burned. When Ferrari Farms renovates orchards, they pull trees, grind them, and put the material back on the land. Walnut shells are also returned to the land. That approach of fertility management has costs and benefits; spreading compost uses fossil fuels and creates dust, but those additions help to build soil organic matter.

Both sons have joined Wayne in the farming operation. Greg, the older son, who had always been interested in the farm, earned a bachelor ’s degree in plant science from Fresno State University and a master ’s degree with a double major in integrated pest management and in horticulture and agronomy from University of California, Davis. He handles pruning, picking, and spraying. Jeff, the younger son, had not originally planned to be involved in agriculture. He studied finance at Santa Clara University and earned a law degree at University of California, Davis. He now handles packing and sales. Irene is the book keeper and Wayne fills in any jobs that need help and works on big projects.

Ferrari Farms employs a labor force of 25–30 workers on a year-round or nearly year-round basis. It is important to the Ferraris that they employ these workers without exposing them to potentially harmful chemicals. Winter pruning and walnut cracking balances the growing season field work. They have not experienced problems in finding labor.

Specialized machinery and equipment is essential to the Ferrari operation. Harvesting machinery is used just three weeks each year. During that time, machinery use is intense. They built a cracking plant to add value to their walnuts and installed forced-air coolers to upgrade postharvest handling. Hydrocooling was the previously used method, and if brown rot mold spores were present, the problem could spread and spoil everything in the cooler. Now they pack the products and cool with forced air. Excellent field management is important to getting fruit in and cooled right away. Precise temperature control is essential.

The purchase of a $240,000 laser infrared walnut shell sorter encouraged the Ferraris to reduce fruit production and expand walnut production to maximize the use of the equipment purchased. The sorter ensures that no metals are inadvertently mixed with the walnuts. Investments in larger and more effective equipment and machinery are an important part of the Ferraris’ efforts to stay competitive in their market.

Ferrari Farms has been selling its produce at the original San Francisco farmers’ market for the past 37 years. Its goal is to provide consumers a tasty product at a reasonable price. The farmers’ market is a good venue because it is not a high-end market, and consumers

there are willing to purchase small or blemished fruits. Currently, a workman goes to the San Francisco market, and Jeff goes to the weekend market in Sacramento. The percentage of their products sold through farmers’ markets is lower now than previously, but the markets still provide an outlet for their products and important source of income.

The farm sells wholesale through Veritable Vegetable, a company that focuses on its relationships with the farmers from whom it buys. It also sells to Whole Foods and Wild Oats, and used to sell to Albert’s until it was bought out. Wholesalers are bigger and fewer today, with only about 18–20 wholesalers that might be interested in Ferrari Farms products. Much of the Ferraris’ products go to Los Angeles where they are consolidated with other goods and shipped across the country. A small proportion of their products are shipped into Canada. The National Organic Program has added credibility to organic goods, especially for exporting. Within the United States, any organic certification is acceptable.

Wayne considers farming magazines an important source of ideas and information. He used to attend and speak at the Asilomar Eco-Farm Conference. However, he felt it had too much “story telling and sugar coating,” with too little honest discussion of problems, so he stopped attending. He characterizes himself as an independent thinker who reads to gain valuable information and proceeds in his own way.

The University of California, Davis, is now doing quite a bit of organic work. Ferrari Farms hosted some on-farm trials with them several years ago. Wayne noted that extension farm advisors influence the farmers with whom they interact. If the extension agents are pro-organic, farmers begin shifting to organic; if not, farmers do not change. Presently, most of the Ferraris’ neighbors still farm conventionally.

The Ferraris manage the farm in a way not to threaten the natural resources. Wayne has observed that the soil organic matter is building up slowly.

Ferrari Farms, Inc. is not in any subsidy programs, and it generates enough income to provide for three families. The knowledge and expertise of Greg and Jeff contribute to the success of the farm.

Ferrari Farms, Inc. has increased from 223 acres of farmed land in the 1980s to 450 acres in 2009. Because of increasing production expenses, Wayne feels that the farm has to increase total sales by increasing acreage and improving yield to earn enough income to support three families.

When Wayne first started using organic practices, the risk was high. There were few shipping channels, and the Ferraris had to grow many different types of produce to entice truckers to ship their products. Up until the late 1990s, the Ferraris grew walnuts, fruits, and vegetables (corn, tomatoes, cauliflower, broccoli, onions, red onions, and garlic). The diversity became unfeasible because of the increasing competition in the organic market. The bigger organic farms were getting better at what they did, but it was difficult for the Ferraris to improve their knowledge on the yields of all the different crops they raised to compete with the large growers. Moreover, the small acreage allocated for each crop made it difficult to use machinery that would improve efficiency. About nine years prior to the

2009 interview, Ferrari Farms dropped vegetables from its production and specialized in fruits and nuts. That way, it could also get larger accounts.

Another apparent change in the Ferrari operation over the past 20 years has been its vertical integration. Machinery investments have allowed it to add value to the crops it grows and have forced it to focus its efforts.

The local farming support network has started to change, with the agriculture commissioner becoming more supportive of organic farming. Agribusiness and service providers are also incorporating some alternative approaches.

Although the farm has an adequate water supply, the water table is dropping and is now at 135–140 feet. Where the farm is located, there are no places to put a small dam to collect rainwater. The Ferraris are learning to grow crops with less water by using drip irrigation. In their organic system, however, it is not feasible to control the weeds that grow around the irrigation emitters with limited flaming options.

Managing finances on Ferrari Farms is a challenge. They have to spend money to make money. Land rental requires upfront investment, which causes financial strain. Input costs for Ferrari Farms are about $3,500/day, with $1.3 million or more in annual expenses. Wayne feels caught in a cost/price squeeze, even with organic prices. He has observed the organic premium greatly decreasing as time passes.

The fuel needed to operate critical machinery also presents a challenge. There is some evidence of fuel additives contaminating area ground water, and the cost of diesel fuel was close to an all-time high at the time of the interview.

Wayne Ferrari sometimes finds it a challenge to stay motivated after 63 years of farming. He sees that Ferrari Farms needs to be big enough to stay competitive, but not become too leveraged. Farming is hard work, six days a week, year-round. Today’s farms have become so big that farmers cannot do all the work themselves and pay as they go. He and his wife are happy that their sons are involved in the farm. It has been expensive to expand, but they are finding ways to make it work.

Jeff and Greg Ferrari are farming because they enjoy the way of life. As Wayne said, it is not about the money but about being happy and gaining satisfaction from the work. They are willing to make a decent living in a way that they can feel good about how they manage the land.

Wayne believes that many farmers are choosing organic or sustainable farming nowadays for the wrong reasons (for example, because loss of pesticides and new government rules are driving them out of conventional farming). He urges efforts to raise awareness of such benefits of organic and sustainable farming to farmers as increased profits and better personal and family health. Wayne came from a conventional farming background, and he sees the good and the bad in both approaches. For him, the middle of the road is a good place to be.

Brookview Farm (known as Sabot Hill Farm in NRC, 1989) is located in Manakin-Sabot, northwest of Richmond, Virginia. Sandy and Rossie Fisher own and manage the farm, which has been developed to balance nature with profitable livestock production. It is a destination for people interested in good, healthful food. The Fishers own 480 acres and rent about 500 additional acres from their neighbors at Sabot Hill.

Brookview Farm’s mission is “to sustainably produce the highest quality food and farm products, in a manner that preserves and enhances our community and natural resource.” Sandy Fisher ’s farming philosophy was shaped in part following his Peace Corps experience in Colombia. He worked for nine years growing grass-fed beef. Years later, he drew on that experience when he shifted the Brookview Farm beef operation to become grass-based. Rossie Fisher ’s background in conservation and gardening has also helped to shape the farm.

The Fishers began shifting to organic practices in the early 1990s and have been certified organic for about 12 years. Certification has forced them to improve their record keeping, a practice that has validated their farming decisions. They enjoy having organic inspectors visit their farm. The inspectors appreciate the balance achieved by the Fishers among the beef, the chickens, and nature.

When the Fishers first took over management of Sabot Hill Farm in the late 1970s, the farm was planted with nearly 300 acres of corn and 200 acres of soybean. The soils on the farm were poor, and Sandy had to fertilize heavily. He also spent a lot of money on herbicides to control weeds. Realizing that heavy use of fertilizers and chemicals was not sustainable, he sought alternatives. In the 1980s, he reduced the corn and soybean acreage to 175 and 150 acres, respectively. The reduced acreage of corn and soybean decreased agrichemical expenses from $20,000 to $6,000. They focused on getting as much feed value as possible from pasture for the cattle and selling the hay crops to the farm’s neighbors.

The Fishers bought Brookview Farm in 1982. They grow hay for cattle on that farm, but not crops. They added chickens and a compost operation to diversify the farm. Both enterprises have contributed to soil fertility, added income and profit, and complemented the beef enterprise.

The Fishers never tilled intensively even when they were growing corn and soybean. Feeding and finishing cattle entirely on grass has meant that they no longer needed to grow corn and they can concentrate on growing excellent pastures. The number of pastures has

increased from 12 to 20, with over a dozen different grasses grown. They occasionally use reel irrigation and gravity.

The Fishers are not in favor of chemicals to control weeds even though the chemicals have become safer over time. Although weeds can still sometimes provide a challenge, Sandy’s view is that they have become “good with weeds” and have learned to appreciate that weeds with roots of four to five feet can provide benefits by bringing minerals to the soil surface. As in the 1980s, Johnsongrass is part of the forage mix they use to feed cattle.

As mentioned earlier, the Fishers started making compost, which has allowed them to avoid purchasing fertilizer for the past 12–13 years. Their fertilizer bill before the compost operation started was as much as $280/ton, and it would be even higher now. The compost operation uses municipal yard waste from nearby Henrico County and the University of Richmond. Those entities haul leaves to the farm and pay the Fishers to accept the leaves. Leaves are then mixed with livestock manure and composted in about five acres of piles. The Fishers are restricted to that area for composting because they are careful not to place piles in the direct sight of their neighbors. They used to produce enough compost for their pastures and sold the excess. As of 2009, they sold the compost turner and only make enough compost for their pastures.

Brookview Farm markets primarily certified-organic beef and free-range eggs. The Fishers currently raise about 140 beef brood cows and 140 calves (fewer compared to 200 brood cows and 300 calves in 1989) in its cow-calf operation. They developed the herd following a philosophy similar to the Beefmaster philosophy (on genetics and the six essentials of cattle raising). That is, they develop cattle that can take care of themselves on the land, leading to economic production in their farm environment. Selection and culling decisions are based on six characteristics that affect the carcass—weight, conformation, milking ability, fertility, hardiness, and disposition. Factors such as horns, hide, or color are not considered. Sandy considers his cattle “home brewed” and observes that they have adapted to the land and live well with nature in their environment. The Fishers grow and finish their beef on grass. They haul their animals to a processor in Fauquier County.

The farm’s eight chicken tractors (also known as mobile shelters) with 400 chickens played multiple roles on the farm. They added to soil fertility and they complemented the cattle by scouring and sanitizing fields. Chickens ate the worms that would otherwise require a de-wormer for the cattle because they are not allowed by organic standards. The Fishers purchased organic materials to feed the chickens and they mixed the feed at their own farm. The Fishers sold the chicken tractors to their neighbor in April 2009.

The farm stays ahead of environmental regulations. The Fishers have filled ditches, grown grass, and stopped erosion. They have participated in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) offered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural

Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). CREP provided a 50 percent cost share that allowed the Fishers to plant 23 acres of oaks and native bushes and to install about four miles of fencing along their creek. Both the farm and the stream have benefited from the tree planting as it reduces sediment runoff into the James River, and the cattle love the shade. They have let fence rows grow for wildlife habitat.

When the farm first shifted to grass-finished beef, Sandy says they were finishing beautiful animals, but they had no customers and could not sell the meat. Finally, about five to eight years ago, people became interested in healthful eating. Now the Fishers’ products are riding a wave of popularity. Sandy describes three distinct segments of the farm’s customers. About one-third are highly educated, first-generation Americans who value good food. Some in this group make food purchases as large as $500. Another one-third are people who have come to the area from further north. The final one-third are former vegetarians who are very particular about the meat that they eat because they are allergic to additives.

Many customers are interested in how the beef are raised. The Fishers try to treat their animals very well. They have had no problems to date with animal welfare groups, and their goal is to meet any future public scrutiny through positive practices. Sandy is currently writing a recipe book for grass-fed beef, which needs to be treated more like venison than like industrial beef for the best culinary results.

Sandy acknowledges that he has become more interested in education and selling than in farming. Direct marketing has been a financial success for the farm, with sales increasing to the point that farm production cannot keep pace. All the farm’s products are marketed directly through different channels, including a local cooperative, a local restaurant, and schools. The Fishers are in the process of selling through a restaurant cooperative in northern Virginia and hope to work more with schools to provide local food choices on their lunch menus. The Fishers also uses web marketing. About 1,100 customers subscribe to a weekly electronic newsletter and 80 to 90 families visit their farm store (opened in the late 1990s) each Saturday from 9 AM to 1 PM. On Saturdays, Sandy is on hand at the farm, providing recipes for grass-fed beef and explaining how the farm works to the customers. The farm’s website (www.brookviewfarm.com) provides information about the farm and its products, with a focus on healthful eating and organic certification.

The Fishers sold all their chickens in March 2009. Prior to the sale, the farm’s chickens were a marketing tool for the Fishers and a teaching tool for customers, especially the children. With about 200 low nests on the farm, children who visited the farm could lift the nest lids to look for the free-range eggs from chickens raised on organic pastures. They learned how valuable the chickens are for eggs and to the cattle-rearing while their parents bought beef, eggs, vegetables, t-shirts, and caps at the farm store. The store also stocks products from other area farms and food businesses.

A dozen or more school groups visit the farm each year, and a local school is interested in buying beef from Brookview Farm. As the farm has gained local visibility, high school and college youth have become interested in volunteer and paid employment. The Fishers have worked with about 40 youth apprentices to date. They find the youth involvement both beneficial and challenging, as most apprentices have little idea what farm work is really like. The Fishers are involved in educational work because they would like to spread the message of promoting sustainability in agriculture and good stewardship of the land.

The Fishers have found little support for their ideas and their farming operation from local agribusiness, service providers, other farmers or farmer groups, university scientists, or extension. Sandy observes that Virginia has perhaps 300 organic farmers, but no strong organic growers’ association. He feels that the university close to his farm has been slow to develop expertise in organic and other new farming approaches, and it is difficult to find assistance in an area that has interested few faculty members. Some faculty and staff, especially at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) and at the local extension agency, have expressed interest in learning from Sandy.

Sandy observed that the local community has increasing interest in organic, grass-based, and natural farm production. The consumers are increasingly concerned with eating healthful foods, and Brookview Farm is seen as a leader. Fifteen years ago he could not find another farm around him trying out new ideas, but today 300 farms across Virginia are adopting approaches that improve sustainability and learning from one another. Sandy believes that his neighbors are beginning to understand the positive implication of the trucks carrying leaves to his farm. They provide a reminder that the farm uses leaves and manure, not synthetic chemicals, and that his decision to use manure and compost benefits the entire neighborhood. One nearby farm has approached the Fishers about buying organic hay. In early 2008, Sandy was invited to speak at a marketing conference at Virginia Tech. He typically speaks to half a dozen farm groups each year. He has helped to start other small markets and served as inspiration and a model for at least 15 markets.

With little local support, the Fishers have turned to the Internet, conferences, and reading to learn and share information. They attend three to four conferences each year and attend the Weston Price conferences regularly. Sandy is an avid reader of about 30 publications each month. His reading ranges from conventional farming publications to the Stockman and Weston Price publications.

American Farmland Trust has also been extremely important to the farm. The Fishers placed the entire farm into a conservation easement to reduce development pressure for themselves and their children. They hoped to set an example for other farmers, but to date they have seen few following them. The Fishers have testified in Washington, D.C., on behalf of American Farmland Trust and its programs. The Brookview Farm can continue to operate without the threat of conversion for development.

Sandy and Rossie are active in their community. They founded the Center for Rural Culture, a nonprofit organization to promote sustainability in agriculture in Piedmont, Virginia. Sandy has been a member of the Monacan Soil and Water Conservation District for the last 20 years, and he is currently serving as an associate director.

As discussed in Alternative Agriculture, the Fishers have reduced erosion on their farm substantially since they bought it. Soil organic matter in the red clay soil increased from 2.2 percent to 4.5 percent from 1980 to 1998. They have observed improved water quality as a result of their use of gravity irrigation, planting shrubs and trees, and installing fence along the creek. They have also observed an increase in the number and diversity of wildlife, including quails, deer, raccoons, coyotes, and mountain lions on their farm and the surrounding areas. Because they cease to grow corn and soybean, water use on the farm has decreased, and they do not pump ground water for irrigation.

Brookview Farm was selected among 75 farms as the winner of the 2007 Stewards of the Land by American Farmland Trust. The award “recognizes the American farmer or farm family who best demonstrates leadership in protecting farmland and caring for the environment.”

The farming operation is financially sound and supports Sandy and Rossie’s family. On-farm market sales have been increasing in the last two years and so have the number of visitors to their farm each week. They attribute the farm’s financial success to direct marketing and organic certification.

As mentioned earlier, the Fishers bought Brookview Farm in 1982. The land that they managed under the name Sabot Hill Farm was sold. What is known as Sabot Hill Farm today is a rural residential development.

Sandy describes one of the key changes in the operation of the farm as all-around modernization. The farm has seen considerable updating and construction. A 28-panel solar system on the barn generates 4600 watts and is linked to the grid. The Fishers also have installed a solar water pump and constructed a USDA-approved commercial kitchen to prepare barbecue, stews, and other value-added products. They have also been able to purchase new tractors and bailers to maintain efficient farming operations.

Other key changes, many made in the early 1990s, included adding pasture-based chickens and the compost operation, shifting the beef cattle entirely to grass, obtaining organic certification, and starting electronic marketing and a farm store. Each of those changes has allowed the farm to become more integrated and to create a system with fewer needs for outside inputs and fewer leaks. Some of the farmland was sold to create James River Wetland Mitigation Bank.

Although things are going well at Brookview Farm, many challenges remain. It is difficult for an independent mid-scale farm to compete with large-scale corporate organic farms, and Sandy anticipates that in the near future more organic beef on the market will compete with his product than at present. With area residential land values as high as $22,000/acre, farmers depend on instruments such as conservation easements to continue farming.

Sandy Fisher sees a very positive outlook for sustainable and organic systems. He believes that global corporate seed companies will eventually succumb to the growing resistance to their control of the market. Sandy feels that operations like his show how farming can be both enjoyable and successful. Sandy and Rossie Fisher ’s son and daughter are becoming somewhat more involved in the farming operation. Sandy believes that the farm can go on indefinitely. He hopes that his grandchildren will realize “what a rarity the farm is.” Among the factors that he thinks will influence long-term viability are fuel prices, their conservation easement, the neighbors’ interest, and their location near dense population. He sees that people come to the farm not only to buy food, but also to learn. He believes that the most important factors are to keep Brookview a working farm in balance with nature. When reflecting on the farm, he concluded, “I’m really happy with where we are.”

Lundberg Family Farms is located in Butte County in northern California. Albert and Frances Lundberg started the farm in 1937. They passed the farm onto their four sons, Eldon, Wendell, Harlan, and Homer. Although the four men are actively involved in the farm, the third-generation Lundbergs now run most of it. When the interview was conducted in 2008, Grant Lundberg was the chief executive officer and Jessica Lundberg was the chair of the board of directors. Lundberg Family Farms specializes in rice products that they grow, mill, process, and pack. It has expanded from a 3,100-acre farm in 1989 to an operation that includes 14,000 acres of farmed land, but the actual area farmed varies from year to year. The Lundbergs farm 5,000 of the 14,000 acres. The other 9,000 acres are contracted to 35–40 growers. Of the 5,000 acres they farm, 3,000 acres are managed organically and 2,000 acres are what the Lundbergs refer to as eco-farmed. Of the 9,000 acres managed by contracted growers, 7,000 acres are managed organically. More people are involved now in the operation with varying commitment to labor than before. Four farms are operated by the Lundberg family under the names WEHAH-Lundberg, Organic Rice Partners (which is run by a subset of the family), B&E Lundberg, and Lundberg, Lundberg, and Schultz.

Albert and Frances Lundberg left Nebraska in the 1930s after they saw the devastation of the Dust Bowl caused by poor soil management and poor farming techniques. Their philosophy of farming was to care for the soil by rotating crops and resting the land. Lundberg Family Farms have maintained the same family values in their business throughout the years and three generations of farming, despite two economic downturns. The operation is run with a tight business standard for efficiency and productivity. The owners are committed to maintaining a strong brand reputation for quality, environmental stewardship, and farm worker welfare.

Farming and food processing used to run seamlessly as one operation, but they were separated into two organizations since 1989. The farming business is called WEHAH-Lundberg, Inc. and overseen by a four-member board of directors. The food processing farm is called Lundberg Family Farms and is overseen by an eight-member board of directors. The two operations collectively are better known to the public as Lundberg Family Farms, and this case study uses that name throughout to refer to the farming operation.

The Lundbergs pioneered organic rice farming in America. Lundberg Family Farms grow mostly the same mix of crops as they did in 1989—rice, vetch, oats, clover, and some

beans (for example, fava beans). They use a two-year rotation that alternates rice with purple vetch and fallow. They, however, have increased the number of varieties of rice they grow from 6 in 1989 to 16 varieties plus wild rice. Wild rice, which grows aggressively like a weed, is an integral part of the crop rotation. The Lundbergs also grow rice that is not organically certified, but it is grown with farming practices and approaches that aim to minimize the environmental impact of agriculture and to maintain the balances of nature.

As in the 1980s, the Lundbergs’ weed and pest management strategy involves first drowning the grasses with water and then drying the field. The continuous flooding to a depth of 8–12 inches for 21 to 28 days after planting the rice helps to control watergrass (Echinochloa phyllopogon and E. oryzoides). The watergrass drowns while the strong rice survives. After the watergrass drowns, the soil is allowed to dry to control for water weeds (for example, bulrush, small-flower umbrella plant, and duck salad heteranthera limosa). When the rice becomes fully established, the field is flooded until harvest. In a field with deep spots, the grass will grow and the weed population will stay in the field for years. Such fields are laser-leveled and alternately flushed and shallow-tilled to control weeds. The purple vetch in the rotation is used as a green manure or mulch. The mulch was thought to inhibit weed seed germination. As in the 1980s, diseases have not been a severe problem in the Lundbergs’ rice fields because they emphasize the maintenance of soil health using such strategies as crop rotations and rolling the rice straw down to expedite the decomposition of the straw and sclerotia.⁵

In the 1970s and 1980s, the Lundbergs only had one crop of rice each year. Insects would infest the organic rice stored in bins because their eggs attached to the harvested rice. The Lundbergs had to sell the rice before the weather got warm and the insects hatched. Since then, they have had breakthroughs in postharvest storage, such as food grade carbon dioxide (CO₂) with sealed bins. The bins were painted white to keep the temperature inside the bin 10–15ºC cooler and the rice fresher. They also purchased chillers from Sweden to keep the core of the bins cool and fresh, and they installed fans with temperature and moisture sensors in the silo. Fans are turned on automatically if needed to keep the rice fresh. When the bins and buildings are empty, the Lundbergs use heaters to raise temperature to 140ºF to kill insects without chemicals.

As discussed earlier, purple vetch is used as green manure at the Lundberg Family Farms. Until the 1980s, the Lundbergs applied chicken manure to what was called “the experimental field,” which was the field they used to develop methods for rice production without chemical pesticides and fertilizers. In the late 1980s, the Lundbergs tried to provide their own fertilizer in an attempt to close the nutrient cycle. They grew two to three years of cover crops for every year of organic rice, but they still struggled with maintaining soil fertility. Since then, they found that chicken litter works well in their systems and have been using a combination of chicken litter, organic feather meal, or pelletized fertilizers that are purchased off farm.

The farms have been investing in alternative energy and obtain 380–385 KW from alternative sources, including two solar arrays. The farms use about 1.2 MW of electricity. The Lundbergs support the development and use of green energy and purchased wind energy credits even though the cost per unit energy is higher than fossil energy. The farms, however, still uses diesel-fueled combines and other equipment. Bryce Lundberg explained that some old equipment is just as energy efficient and incurs little soil compaction. The Lundbergs evaluate the efficiency of their equipment periodically and assess how they could reduce the farms’ carbon footprint. They are concerned that nonpoint source emissions are not well modeled and would like to know how they could manage those sources of emissions better. They would like to have tools for evaluating the carbon footprint of their farms.

The Lundbergs have been keenly aware of the wildlife in fields and are concerned about the animals’ well-being. They noticed that the cover crops attract ducks to nest in spring. They have been providing “egg aid” whereby they collect thousands of duck eggs, incubate and hatch them, and release the ducklings. They only clear half of the ditches at a time on the farm and leave the other half as undisturbed habitats for snakes. They have placed owl and bat boxes to provide habitats. They have been putting in ponds and planting trees in targeted areas in recognition of their ecological and aesthetic values. The Lundbergs aim to enhance the environmental value without compromising production.

Farm labor at the Lundberg Family Farms has been fairly consistent. The Lundbergs employed 6.5 full-time equivalent people year-round in the 1980s. Today, they hire 10 laborers. Because the farms’ labor need is consistent throughout the year, they are able to offer job security. The good employees tend to stay with the Lundberg Family Farms because the farms offer a benefits package and a profit-sharing plan. The labor practices of the Lundberg Family Farms have earned them the honor of being named California Workplace of the Year by the Employer Resource Institute and the Top Small Workplace by Winning Workplaces™ (a nonpofit group) and by The Wall Street Journal.

In the 1960s, Eldon, Wendell, Harlan, and Homer Lundberg started the Lundberg Family Farms^® brand to provide consumers with the choice of purchasing rice that was not grown with conventional methods. They market their products under the “organic” and “eco-farmed” labels. The eco-farmed products are not certified organic, but they are produced with management practices that aim to improve agricultural sustainability.

In the 1980s and early 1990s, organic business seemed to flatten. At that time, the Lundbergs were uncertain how much organic rice they could sell or how much land they should transition to organic production. Although the eco-farmed business has flattened, the organic market has been growing, as indicated by customers’ purchases. Having the California Certified Organic Farmers’ seal on their products helps to promote sales.

The Lundberg Family Farms have mostly U.S. and Canadian customers; therefore international trade does not affect them much. The West Coast and northeastern United States are large markets for them. As energy costs increase, they might consider selling a larger proportion to nearby markets (for example, San Francisco and Sacramento, which are 150 miles and 100 miles away from the farm, respectively).

Lundberg Family Farms benefits from interactions with its group of contract farmers. The group meets 3–4 times each year to discuss production challenges, many of which are resolved as a result of the grower-to-grower interaction. Before the group was formed, some organic farmers felt isolated and did not know where to seek help.

University extension has helped the Lundbergs better understand the composition of their soil. The Lundbergs use many of the rice varieties developed in the Rice Experimental Station. The emphasis of the university’s weed control division is not organic weed control and, hence, not as helpful to the Lundbergs. Faculty at the University of California, Davis, has helped the Lundbergs with fertility management so that the Lundbergs can time the application of pelletized organic fertilizer better.

The Ecological Farming Association provides inspiration to the Lundberg Family Farms. It holds a conference in January each year and provides opportunities for likeminded farmers and researchers to exchange ideas. In the Lundbergs’ opinion, Acres USA also holds good conferences and provides useful information.

The Lundbergs do not find local agribusiness as helpful as the other groups mentioned above because the local agribusinesses tend to encourage the use of herbicides to control weeds and are less likely to provide much help to organic farmers. However, a growing number of companies market organic products.

Yields per acre at the Lundberg Family Farms have increased. The Lundbergs have maintained the high quality of their soil despite farming more intensively. The organic production was low in the 1980s, and revenue from the sale of products grown on their “experimental fields” was well below expenses. In the 1980s, the yield from organic rice production was much lower compared to conventional production. Organic-rice production has to produce at least half the yield of conventional production to be economically viable. From experimentation and experience, the Lundbergs found that some varieties grown organically produce yields closer to conventional production than others. For example, vigorous varieties yield 9,000 lbs/acre with conventional production, and the Lundbergs might get 5,000–6,000 lbs/acre with organic production. With less vigorous varieties, such as California basmati rice, organic production might produce one-third to one-half the yield of conventional production. Basmati rice, however, has a much higher product value than short grain rice, and the Lundbergs have managed to increase their yields over time. Since the 1980s, their organic rice has been sold at a premium and is profitable. The Lundbergs were putting 200 acres of land in transition to organic in 2008. Their knowledge and experience in organic farming and the improved predictability of the organic market give the Lundbergs the confidence to shift a significant portion of land to organic management. The Lundbergs, however, have not put all land in organic production because they try to respond to customers’ needs and some customers would like the nonorganic option.

Lundberg Family Farms participated in traditional commodity programs. Those programs pushed farmers to set aside acreage and were complementary to the Lundbergs’ approaches as they put land into fallow anyway. Only 60 percent of the family’s land, however, is recognized by those programs. The Conservation Security Program recognizes much of their organic production systems as sustainable production systems. Other programs are not as financially helpful to the Lundberg Family Farms for different reasons. First, the Lundbergs’ production baseline is low. Second, they did not benefit from the burning cessation program, which offered a credit for cessation of residue burning, because they had always rolled down the rice straw instead of burning it.

The organizational structure of the farming and food processing operations changed, but the Lundberg family still runs them both. The Lundberg Family Farms has a much larger proportion of land under organic production for two reasons. First, there have been some important breakthroughs in weed management for organic farming. In 1989, organic rice farming was significantly riskier than conventional rice farming. Although still riskier compared to conventional rice farming, growing organic rice now has more predictable results. Scientific research has increased the options for managing weeds in organic systems, and the Lundbergs’ experience has improved their understanding of how those options work. Likewise, the options for managing soil fertility organically have increased. Second, the organic market has expanded substantially since 1989. Nowadays, customers who prefer natural and organic foods can purchase them in many locations. The market expansion also contributed to driving the increase in scientific research and tools developed for organic farming discussed above.

The Lundbergs have found that their neighbors have become more receptive to the idea of organic farming. In the 1980s, the Lundbergs had to build a mill for their organic rice because not many organic mills were readily accessible. That caused some friction with their neighbors, who viewed the Lundbergs’ trial with organic production as a likely failure. Nowadays, neighboring farmers are more understanding and accepting of the diversity of the agricultural market. The Lundbergs were not trying to take sales from their neighbors by marketing a different product. In fact, more of their neighbors are moving toward organic production.

The price of land has increased substantially. Land costs about $5,000–$6,000 per acre, which could pose a challenge for new farmers. Land rental cost has increased, but not as much as land acquisition cost. The Lundberg Family Farms expanded by contracting more growers rather than purchasing more properties. The third-generation Lundbergs are concerned that passing the farm onto the next generation (which has more members) will dilute the resources. The farm was started by their grandparents, who passed it onto their four sons. The third generation includes 11 members, 7 of whom work daily on the farm. The fourth generation includes 20 members aged 12 months to 20 years and is expanding. The high costs for land acquisition could be a barrier to expanding the size of the farms. Yet, a full-time farmer needs at least 250 acres of land to be economically viable.

The Lundbergs have not observed much difference in weather patterns over time, but they consider water availability a looming challenge. Water is available in northern California, but needed in southern California. The Sacramento delta, which features many

unique plants and wildlife, lies in between. Moving water from north to south across the delta will be challenging.

With regard to crop production, the Lundberg Family Farms recognizes customers’ preferences for natural products and is concerned about the potential contamination of genetically modified organisms⁶ (GMOs) in their fields from neighboring farms. The Lundbergs hope that the government regulates the use of GMOs and better protects organic farmers. The Lundbergs are also concerned about the potential spread of new weed species (for example, blueflower duck salad) in the future that cannot be controlled by current organic practices. Although herbicides can eliminate the weed, organic growers cannot use herbicides, and they need researchers to develop a solution quickly to control its spread. The Lundbergs believe that solutions to the challenges of organic farming result mostly from on-farm research.

Lundberg Family Farms has been farming with practices and approaches that care for the soil, water, air, and wildlife for more than 70 years. The Lundbergs plan to continue the tradition and hope that the farm will be passed onto the fourth and fifth generations. They have a program designed to let family members experience different jobs on the farm. The smooth transition in the past depended largely on good planning and the absence of financial stress at the time of transition.

They feel that the future of organic agriculture is bright, because an increasing number of consumers are looking for high-quality foods that support their principles of protecting the environment. People realize that their values and concerns can be expressed through food choices. The Lundberg Family Farms not only have a larger consumer base than they did 20 years ago, but also they know their consumers’ preferences better. They have their own brand, which sells at a premium. They plan to continue to expand the variety of rice products, with a continued focus on rice. They would like to communicate to their consumers that when they purchase the Lundberg brand, instead of a store brand of organic products, they are contributing to improving environmental and social sustainability (for example, fair labor treatment).

Pavich Family Farms operated in the Harquahala Valley, Maricopa County, Arizona, and in Delano, Kern County, and Tulare County, California. Stephen Pavich, Sr., and his sons, Stephen Pavich, Jr., and Tom Pavich, operated the farm. At the time of the 1989 interview, Pavich Family Farms was in a growing phase following the 1986 and 1987 Alar (daminozide)⁷ scare, which brought organic farming into the public’s view and helped to drive its growth for many years. Pavich Family Farms took advantage of changing consumer desires and increased its sales in the organic market from 20 percent to 50 percent of their table grape crop. Pavich Family Farms ceased operation in 2001 because of several unfortunate conditions.

The Pavich family wanted to ensure that their produce was nutritionally superior. They conducted nutritional studies on their produce and believed that they were higher in quality of appearance and flavor than nonorganic produce. They worked on organic legislation with California and with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The Pavich family felt they had to stay 10–15 years ahead of the universities or they would be behind in the market. The Paviches experienced frustration in their interactions with local universities. Stephen Pavich, Jr., recalls being treated as though the family had no science behind its practices and found that the faculty were interested only in their own narrow disciplines (for example, insecticides or soil chemistry). In contrast, Pavich Family Farms took a holistic approach to organic farming and looked at the interactions of all of the farming systems. In his opinion, the universities’ research did not adequately involve applied science or address agricultural applications.

Pavich Family Farms expanded its farmed acreage in Arizona and California to 4,700 acres, up from the original 1,432 acres when the Paviches were interviewed in 1989. In the 1980s, they mostly grew and sold table grapes. The farms expanded their portfolio and marketed 65 crops, including imported grapes and berries from Chile, bananas and pineapples from Costa Rica, bell peppers from Mexico, and grapes from South Africa. The farms were

selling about 1 million packages of vegetables each year under the Pavich Family Farms Organic label.

The Paviches began producing raisins from some of their grape crop in 1991 to further diversify their offerings. They also began to work with other growers in California and Arizona and were the biggest organic table grape growers in the country. By 1998, they were producing 2.5 million boxes of table grapes per year. They rapidly became the fifth largest raisin producer in the United States and coined the term “jumbo raisin.”

The Paviches recognized the organic market as a growing market and wanted their farm to provide quality organic produce to consumers. They were the first producers to sell organic produce to Wal-Mart and Raleys supermarkets. Eventually, they were selling produce to 19 of the top 20 supermarket chains in the United States.

In 1997 and 1998, El Niño presented a major challenge. Due to unpredictable and unprecedented rainfall, the farm experienced massive crop losses in the form of damage from flooding and intensive rain, as well as rot and plant diseases caused by the excessive moisture. During the time leading up to El Niño, Pavich Family Farms had been expanding at a rate of about 10–20 percent per year. Its debt-to-equity ratio was marginal. With little competition in the organic market, Pavich Family Farms expanded rapidly to meet the demand. Stephen Pavich, Jr., stated that the family would not take such chances in today’s market because there is more competition in the organic market compared to 10 years ago.

In his view, the farms could have financially withstood the crop losses if they were the only challenge the farm faced at the time. However, Pavich Family Farms was involved in three insurance claims. One claim was to recoup losses after a grower sprayed herbicide on its organic vineyard in Arizona. Another one was for flood loss. The third claim was for a malfunctioning box in cold storage that caused a large harvest of grapes to rot.

The substantial financial losses, the slow court process (which took seven years), and the expense of hiring lawyers created a “perfect storm” that was the beginning of the end for Pavich Family Farms. These chance events occurred at a time when the business was experiencing rapid growth and stretched financially. A significant upfront investment was required to initiate international expansion, and the business plan projected that the venture would break even after two years. The Paviches were importing 100,000 boxes of produce per year to start, and Stephen said they would have been importing more than 1 million boxes per year had the farm stayed in operation. The growers with which Pavich Family Farms had contracted returned to conventional growing practices.

The financial losses due to weather and the court costs were too much for the farm business. The bank owned everything at the farms by the time the family received its insurance money. In 2001, the farms were foreclosed upon, and the Paviches soon filed for bankruptcy. The Paviches could not find willing buyers to help save their farms; the losses had been too great for a company of their size. Stephen Pavich, Jr., remarked that similar farms (with different crops) that did not experience losses of this nature have been growing and have become multi-thousand acre organic farms.

The farmland was auctioned off by the bank. The acreage in California is all being farmed organically, largely producing grapes and blueberries by five different organic producers. An organic vegetable grower bought the 1,300 acres in Arizona. The remain-

ing acreage was purchased by a melon grower; half of his production is organic, the other half is marketed as conventional produce but its production incorporates many organic practices.

In addition, 160 acres of family land remains in California and is operated as an organic vineyard by Frances Mary Pavich, Stephen Pavich, Sr.’s daughter, under the name FMP Vineyards. She also produces 1 million pounds of organic raisins each year and markets them under the label Franny’s Organic. Tom Pavich, who has an M.B.A., continues to farm organic raisins at the San Joaquin Valley farm for his sister. His farming practices include foliar sprays, cover crops, composting, and incorporating humic acid. It is an intense operation, albeit much smaller than what the Pavich family used to farm. In total, nearly all the 4,700 acres are still in agriculture (with different owners) and nearly all are being farmed organically.

Steven Pavich, Jr., who has a B.S. in viticulture, has become an agricultural consultant and represents a major organic agricultural fertilizer input company, Global Organics. He works mostly with large companies who supply food to grocery chains. He also works with nonorganic farms that want to grow high-quality produce with greater yields. He has found that if organic practices can do that, farmers will use them (or a combination of organic and conventional practices). He is very supportive of small-scale and family farms, but focuses his effort where he believes he will have the greatest impact—large organic producers that sell their produce in chain stores and farm in a manner that benefits the environment and worker safety.

Richard and Sharon Thompson’s farm in Boone County, Iowa, is a 300-acre diverse crop and livestock farm. They started farming in 1958, and after 10 years of conventional operations they began experimenting with alternative approaches to growing crops and livestock.

As in the 1980s, the working philosophy of the Thompson Farm is to limit or find substitutes for off-farm inputs whenever possible to reduce costs and promote the health of livestock and people. The Thompsons take a “middle-of-the-road” approach to farming and continue to perfect a system that works well for them. They do not farm with conventional approaches because they found these approaches were not effective or profitable for their size of operation. They decided not to have the farm certified as organic because they wanted the freedom to experiment—sometimes with materials or approaches that are not permitted by the National Organic Program. Also, the Thompsons believe that they cannot totally protect their farm from the effects of neighbors who use synthetic chemicals around them.

Current crops on the Thompson Farm include 100 acres of corn, 50 acres of soybean, 50 acres of oats, 50 acres of hay, and 55 acres of pasture. The five-year crop rotation of corn, soybean, corn, oats, and hay, and the ridge-till system, have remained fairly consistent over the past 20 years, with small adjustments to fine-tune the system. The Thompsons plant rye cover crops in the fall to reduce erosion, help manage weeds, and reduce nitrogen loss. They use livestock manure plus bio-solids from the nearby city of Boone, which allows them to eliminate purchased fertilizer.

Although they do not use Roundup-Ready^® corn seeds, they suspect that they have some Roundup-Ready corn in their field as a result of cross-pollination from neighboring fields. Typically, volunteer corn in rotation crops, which follow corn, is killed when Dick spot-sprays Roundup, but the corn did not die after a Roundup application in 2008.

The Thompsons use an integrated pest management approach and try to minimize their use of herbicides and pesticides. As mentioned, the crop rotations help control weeds. Additional weed control is achieved using a rotary hoe and cultivation and without use of broadcast herbicides. The Thompsons’ use of cover crops, hoes, and cultivators is detailed

in “Steel in the Field”: A Farmer ’s Guide to Weed Management Tools.⁸ They occasionally spray pesticides to control aphids

Current livestock enterprises are 50 beef cattle and 90 sows raised for the “natural” meat market, without hormones or antibiotics. The beef cows are fed on pasture using a rotational grazing system and with farm-raised hay. The farm-raised feed is a mix of ground ear corn and oats to provide roughage for the cattle. A bunker, built during the 1980s, stores manure.

The Thompsons converted 30 hog farrowing houses to A-frame, winterized structures. The hogs are farmers’ breed, which are not lean but flavorful. The breeding animals are selected for meatiness with some fat for flavor. The hogs are fed the farm-raised ground ear corn, shelled corn, and oats, which provides more fiber and less protein than conventional feed. The ration works well even for young pigs.

Dick believes that a scale is a critical tool for success. Any farmer who wants to track the impact of farming experiments needs to weigh harvested grain, compare treatments, and keep records. The value of a scale becomes clear when one envisions a farmer conducting one experiment with six replications and two comparisons. To measure the yield from that one trial, the farmer would need to drive to the elevator 12 times to weigh the results. Dick believes that if USDA really wanted to encourage farmer research, it would subsidize purchases of farm scales. A platform scale that weighs one axle at a time works fine to weigh crops, animals, and manure.

The Thompson Farm is completely operated with family labor—Dick and Sharon plus their son Rex and his family. The Rodale Institute and Wallace Institute supported an extra hired person to fill in while Dick and Sharon traveled around the country to share their farming approaches and experience with others.

Hogs from the Thompson Farm are sold as “natural” through Niman Ranch, which provides a price floor. The Thompsons used to sell their “natural” beef cattle—both black and red—individually, but have discontinued that. They purchased an additional livestock trailer that allows them to divide the livestock that they take to market, selling heifers and steers separately and dividing by grades.

One of the Thompsons’ legacies was to begin the Practical Farmers of Iowa (PFI). Dick Thompson found it “a godsend” to spend time with other people interested in and trying to

make sense of agriculture. Inspired by a similar organization elsewhere, he and a few likeminded people started an organization with farmers who are trying similar farming approaches across Iowa so that they can compare experiences. Early PFI board meetings were filled with discussion about farming problems and practices. For example, someone may have asked how farmers could control Canada thistles, and another farmer may have suggested spring plowing. As PFI encouraged more replicated trials, the results were printed and shared. PFI encourages its members to adapt, not adopt. It emphasizes cooperation among members and encourages them to develop solutions together.

The Thompsons get along well with Iowa State University and its Extension Service. Like PFI, the Thompsons’ philosophy on research and extension is “to adapt, but not adopt, ideas.” They believe that agricultural knowledge and practice can be greatly advanced if researchers work closely with operating farms and curious farmers, who could try out ideas as they and other PFI members have done. The Thompsons also maintain positive relationships with their neighbors and community despite their different farming approach. They, however, do not receive much help from their large (3,000–4,000 acre) neighboring farms.

Dick, a pioneer among “limited input” farmers, has always promoted farmer-led on-farm research. A compilation of Thompson Farm research is available online on PFI’s website (www.practicalfarmers.org). In one year, the report was downloaded 25,000 times. Dick continues to conduct trials and comparisons on the farm and “tinker” with his production system because he gains satisfaction from small successes and enjoys problem-solving. The inspiration for some of Dick’s innovative ideas came from his mentor, Dr. Warren Sahs, formerly at the University of Nebraska.

Organic matter and soil loss on the Thompson Farm have been measured by the National Tilth Lab, which found that the Thompsons have 6 percent organic matter compared to 2.9 percent on the next farm. The Thompson’s soil loss was just 4 tons/acre compared to 11 tons/acre next door. Earthworms average 19,000/acre in Boone County, but 1,269,000 earthworms/acre were found on the Thompson farm. The positive effects of the increased organic matter, low soil erosion, and high earthworm populations complement each other and provide positive feedback.

The Thompsons’ farming system benefits the environment. Of the 300 acres of their land, 135 acres are in grass to protect water quality. Farm windbreaks and an ear corn crib provide habitat for wildlife. Fall manure application has improved air quality. The rotations include pasture, but after about six years in pasture, Dick finds that the soils harden. He plants alfalfa at that time because its roots penetrate deeply and provide opportunities for water to percolate through the soil.

Early in their farming lives, the Thompsons tried ridge tilling, using compost on the ridges and broadcasting rye cover. Hauling manure in the spring proved to be difficult and impractical. They only had a yield of 45 bushels of corn per acre, substantially below the county average at the time. They discontinued that practice and started to apply manure in the fall, plant hay, and then plow under. Initial corn yields were still only 45 bushels of corn per acre. Yields started to increase around 1979. By 2003 and 2005, they achieved yields of 231 and 210 bushels/acre, respectively, which were 39 and 38 bushels over the county average in those years. Records from 1988 to 2006 reveal that the Thompsons on average maintained a net income of $119 per acre for crops, mostly from increased crop and residue income. From 2002 to 2006, net income for crops averaged $172 per acre, an amount that does not include any government payments or premiums. Those numbers do not include profit or loss from livestock.

The Thompsons do not participate in any federal farm programs. They say that the programs for conserving natural resources lack flexibility to accommodate their approach to farming. Dick plows once every five years because he observes that no-till, over time, reduces water infiltration on his soil even though it reduces erosion. If the programs were more flexible, the Thompsons say they would like to participate. They do not participate in commodity programs.

Dick believes that the farm provides comfortable support for his family. Their yields and net income have improved since 1989. They attribute the success of the farm to good record keeping and constant trial and error. He and Sharon have always been careful not to spend too much money. He credits one of his neighbors as his “frugality mentor.” They were also careful not to borrow too much money and to pay off debts as quickly as they could. Dick believes his ability and willingness to fix things (for example, electrical, machinery, or plumbing problems) around the farm, as well as their minimal off-farm purchases, contribute to controlling expenses on the farm. He explained that the rule at the Thompson Farm is “try to fix it ourselves first,” because a trip to the dealer for a repair is usually 40 or 50 miles and, hence, costs time and money. They also built diversity into the farm to improve the buffer against potential loss or reduction of some crops.

The acreage of the Thompson Farm has remained steady. Richard and Sharon Thompson’s farm has stayed on the trajectory that they had established when interviewed for the 1989 assessment. They try to minimize chemical input and continue to fine tune the practices and approaches used on their farm. When the Alternative Agriculture report was published, the Thompsons were heavily involved with on-farm research, much of it focused on finding and correcting approaches that did not work.

Changing weather patterns are among the challenges that the Thompsons face on their farm. They use a flail machine (rotary scythe) to mow and process hay and to dry it faster between rain events. The wetter weather, plus a neighbor ’s shift to no-till, has worsened water runoff from a neighbor ’s farm onto the Thompsons’ farm and created worsening gullies.

The cost of farming inputs has increased sharply. The Thompsons feel that the increased costs of equipment parts affect them the most. Because they have worked to create a largely closed loop system that allows them to avoid purchasing fertilizers and pesticides, the price increase of those inputs have not affected them much.

The rising land cost is a barrier to expanding the farm. Dick purchased land for $440 to $600 sometime ago. At the time of the interview, the land for sale around his farm cost about $6,000/acre.

Another challenge that the Thompsons are working to master is cattle size. Dick uses his animal science educational background to find the best size and mix of breeds—Holsteins, long horns, Herefords. Their goal is to balance an animal’s sale price with the cost to keep and feed the animal.

The family has established a trust to ensure the farm’s 300 acres will remain intact for at least the next two generations. The Thompsons’ family includes four children. One son

and his family (including a grandson) are involved in farm work and are deepening that involvement. At least two Thompson generations beyond Dick and Sharon will operate the farm.

Dick Thompson feels that conventional agriculture has become less sustainable now than it was 10 years ago. Organic is an alternative, but it might not be suitable for all farms. He believes that the key to improving the sustainability of farming and farming communities lies in farmers’ environmental stewardship and their taking responsibility to figure what works and what does not through trials and record keeping.

Green Cay Farm, in Palm Beach County, Florida, was established in 1957 as a 350-acre family vegetable-growing operation by Ted and Trudy Winsberg (as it was at the time of the 1989 report). As land use shifted in Palm Beach County from agriculture to residential and Ted prepared to retire, they sold much of the land. The remaining land was not large enough for commercial farming. Ted and Trudy began renting out plots to several growers to earn income. Their daughter and son-in-law run a small native tree operation on 20 acres. Another producer grows herbs on 10 acres. Charlie and Nancy Roe, of Farming Systems Research, Inc., rent 10 acres and sell mostly to local residents, restaurants, and resorts through subscription to their Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) program. Nancy Roe first began working with Green Cay Farm during her Ph.D. research at the University of Florida when the Winsbergs wanted to investigate alternatives for plastic mulch. The Winsbergs approached Nancy and her husband, Charlie, after her dissertation was complete, about starting a small farming operation. Nancy and Charlie returned to Green Cay Farm and started Green Cay Produce.

Ted Winsberg worked to improve the sustainability of his farm. He was a leader in and supported research and extension programs among South Florida vegetable growers. When a new technology was on the horizon, his peers often said, “Let Ted try it first to see how it works.” The Winsbergs supported Nancy and Charlie selling locally as Green Cay Produce because they believe “people are far too removed from their food supply; they should know who grows their food and how it is grown.” They also feel that customers are willing to pay a fair price for fresh, healthful, and tasteful vegetables. Since the transition, they have found that many people in the community agree with those principles and are willing to support Green Cay Produce.

Green Cay Farm changed from a commercial peppers and cucumber farm to become a diverse vegetable farm that grows more than 40 crops plus herbs year round (via the multiple growers using land from Green Cay Farm). Cover crops are planted in the summer, and drip irrigation is used. Green Cay Produce is not certified organic because it would not be profitable in its location. However, many methods and materials are used that are recommended for organic production.

Unlike other local growers, Green Cay Produce is selective about pesticide use. The Roes only spray pesticides when they observe a problem. They use mostly organic pesticides. They purchased beneficial insects for pest control at one time, but found that encouraging the natural populations of beneficial insects provided more effective pest control than introduced insects.

The Roes use compost made from horse manure and bedding, which they obtain at no cost from nearby farms where many horses over-winter. The cover crops are tilled in the soil to provide nutrients. They also add potassium and nitrogen through the drip system and use a phosphorus starter solution when they first plant or transplant a crop.

Before transitioning to becoming a small farm, Green Cay Farm sold most of its produce through conventional marketing channels and shipped to East Coast markets. In contrast, Nancy and Charlie operate their CSA on 10 acres they rent from Ted and Trudy. The CSA, which began operating in 2000 with a 26-week season, now has 400 members plus restaurant sales and operates for 34 weeks each year, from October through May. In both the CSA and restaurant markets, demand far exceeds the supply. It is the only CSA in the area, but several new ones will be starting soon.

The CSA operation includes the original vegetable packing house. The Winsbergs provide the land and equipment for the CSA at no cost to ensure that it can generate adequate income. Prices were raised by 10 percent in 2008. Some members thought the prices were high, but most proved to be loyal customers and stayed as members despite price increase and even when hurricanes wiped out crops. Of greatest importance to CSA members is that the produce is local and fresh. Only a few have left because they preferred certified-organic produce.

Labor for area commercial farms is from Central America or Mexico, contracted for the harvest. The Winsbergs’ labor was initially from Puerto Rico, then Haiti. Ted once employed 70 people, 60 of them Haitians and mostly women, who did the field harvesting. Most lived on the farm or were assisted by the Winsbergs to buy houses. Most of the crew retired in 2000, and their children did not farm. Nancy and Charlie, plus five full-time and two part-time semi-retired employees, handle the CSA production. They also have seven part-time drivers and one part-time office staff person. Nancy views the current labor as “ridiculously stable” and would like to pay them more. The crew is aging, with only one person under 40 years old. One big challenge is how to find work and funds to keep the crew working through summer months when crop output is small.

The farm has cooperated with university and industry researchers to develop innovative, environmentally friendly systems for many years. Currently, it has contracts to per-

form research through Farming Systems Research, Incorporated. The Roes work with seed companies to grow out seed varieties and with universities to conduct on-farm research. They have participated in research about the effects of compost on postharvest quality, tropical cover crops or cover crops as alternatives to fumigation, and measuring yields of squash blossom production. They have a new project with USDA Fort Pierce to examine the ability of organic hay mulches to control nutsedge.

Both Ted Winsberg and Nancy Roe regard themselves as products of land-grant universities. Ted earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in soil science from Cornell University, and Nancy earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in horticulture from the University of Arizona and a Ph.D. from the University of Florida in horticultural sciences. She has managed vegetable crop operations for 30 years and spent five years in extension and research with Texas A&M University. Their backgrounds have made it easy and natural for them to cooperate with the University of Florida, with extension, and with industry groups.

Ted Winsberg has observed that large-scale farming operations do not share information with one another in the same way that smaller ones often do. The Winsbergs and Roes are starting to see others try to farm on a small scale and market locally. Nancy works with those farmers, and the local farm-credit office holds meetings and sponsors small farmers. Ted Winsberg sees that their farm could become a center to help small farmers. He would welcome more opportunities to share his mechanical experience and expertise.

When Ted Winsberg was interviewed in 1989 for the Alternative Agriculture report, he was growing 350 acres of irrigated fresh market peppers. Although some of that acreage is still used for agriculture, it is very different today. In addition to the 350 acres of their home farm in Palm Beach County, they also rented a 400-acre farm near Martin, Florida, for 27 years.

Development approached on all sides of the farm, which was located in Palm Beach County. Ted and Trudy wanted to stay in the county. They explored alternatives with the American Farmland Trust, but believed that they did not have enough resources to defend the land against development. In 1985, Ted discussed his concern with Bob Wiseman (Palm Beach County’s manager), the local water utility head, and a Palm Beach County commissioner. Wiseman’s contributions to the community and the positive personal relationships that he had developed with key leaders helped them to work out options that could benefit the county and the Winsbergs. In the mid-1990s, the Winsbergs sold 176 acres of land to the county at one-third of its appraised value to create the Green Cay Wetlands and Nature Center. The interpretive nature center and 1.5-mile boardwalk provide suburban green space while the land filters 35 million gallons of water from Palm Beach County’s Southern Region Water Reclamation Facility. The wetlands also incorporate 86 different species of trees, shrubs, grasses, and aquatic vegetation that help to recharge ground water resources.

A plant constructed in 1992 produces dried biosolids. The county is using 100 acres of its purchased land and the remaining 76 acres that are not in wetlands are rented back to Ted at $1/year. Another 40 acres were sold for an affordable housing development that has 100 townhouses and 320 condominium and rental units. Hazen Ranch Road, where Green Cay Farm is located, was once rural but is now filled with gated residential communities, with many retirees living in the area. There is little interaction between the farm and its neighbors.

Ted Winsberg considered using the biosolids produced nearby as a soil amendment and to boost fertility on the farm, but Environmental Protection Agency and Florida Department of Environmental Protection regulations made it impossible. Ted appreciates the need to safeguard both human health and the environment, but he questions regulations that prohibit any discharge of reclaimed water into surface water. He also questions the regulations regarding any composition of compost within organic systems. He believes some food safety and surface water regulations are not practical. Third-party inspection requirements have slowed conservation initiatives and efforts to recycle and re-use water.

As the area urbanized and commercial and residential development crowded out farms, the local agricultural infrastructure has severely declined. No other farms operate within five miles. Extension in Florida is being defunded, and 10 staff positions are unfilled in Palm Beach County Extension alone. Now the Winsbergs may need to drive 70–80 miles to attend an extension meeting. Ted Winsberg and Nancy Roe believe that small-scale farmers stand to lose the most if extension is lost. The farmers need research and extension specialists to help them solve pest problems, and they are concerned that large agrichemical companies drive much of the current research agenda.

Changing weather and climate present additional challenges. The winters of 2007 and 2008 were warm and caused problems for cool-weather crops and led to worsening insect problems. Palm Beach County is the warmest winter-growing area in the United States. With generally warmer weather, farmers can now grow winter products as far as 100 miles north of Palm Beach County. The extended range of growth removes the competitive advantage they once enjoyed. Winter vegetables are now grown as far north as the Carolinas. Palm Beach County’s unique winter season is short or gone. Summer is nearly 30 days longer, as documented by Winsberg (not related to Ted) and Simmons (http://coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center/docs/flhotseason.php).

The farm has experienced some air quality issues with Vapam escaping from land used by an herb grower. Ted Winsberg anticipates new fumigant regulations.

The farm was cleared in the late 1940s. Its soils have been highly productive, but alternatives to methyl bromide will not sustain the high yields achieved. Ted’s average price for peppers over the years of his farming operation was 25 to 50 cents/pound, which is low compared to prices sold in other areas. For example, the Winsberg’s oldest son farms and grows peppers in Palo Alto, California, and sells them for $6/pound in farmers’ markets. It took the Winsbergs 20 years to pay for their farm. While they farmed, they needed production loans of up to $1 million/year. At one point, they were offered $300,000/acre for their land and the opportunity to sell it for development rights for 950 houses. Ted thinks it is almost impossible for a small farming operation to be financially viable with increasing input costs. In addition, he sees that distribution of the products from small farms is energy inefficient. He has been working hard to create a fuel-efficient distribution system for his vegetables.

At nearly age 80, Ted Winsberg’s outlook has not shifted, and he is upbeat about the future. He wants to continue being involved in agriculture even in an urban area. Whether the farm will be passed on to the next generation is uncertain. The Winsbergs’ daughter and son-in-law, Sylvia and Michael, established a 20-acre wholesale native tree nursery as a

part of the farm. Their business is linked to construction. Their teenaged son is not currently interested in carrying on the operation, so its future is uncertain.

Ted suggested that municipalities and developers should set aside land for small farms. He believes that more consumer education is needed so that people better understand why products are grown a certain way, why food costs what it does, and why there are not more organic products. Most Americans are not concerned at all about vegetables, but they should be. If people put more thought into what they eat, they would likely be willing to pay more for good food.

In addition to reviewing the current status and changes taking place among the original farms included in the 1989 Alternative Agriculture report, this committee commissioned a new series of case studies to provide in-depth examples of 21st-century successful sustainable farming systems. To increase the depth of the new case studies, the committee selected three farms from each of three important U.S. commodity sectors: dairy farms, specialty crop farms, and field crop farms. The nine new case-study farms were selected from a list of candidate farms that included recent winners of regional Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension (SARE) program awards, farms known to members of the committee, and farms nominated by committee members’ professional colleagues and networks. Within each commodity type, three farms from different geographic regions were selected to highlight the diversity of biophysical and socioeconomic environments surrounding U.S. agriculture.

Two experienced consultants—Lawrence Elworth (executive director of the Center for Agricultural Partnerships, a nonprofit organization) and Clare Hinrichs (an associate professor of rural sociology at Pennsylvania State University)—were contracted to conduct face-to-face interviews with the owners of the selected case-study farms. The consultants used a semi-structured interview schedule (see Appendixes E, F, and G) to ensure that similar topics and questions were used across all of the case-study farms. However, the flexible nature of the interview schedule allowed the consultants to probe for details on topics of particular relevance on each farm. Key topics covered in all interviews included:

• An overview of the size and scope of the cropping and livestock enterprises.

• A detailed understanding of innovations and creative solutions used by producers to address some common systemic and specific production challenges facing the sustainable production of dairy products, grains, and specialty crops in the United States.

• A detailed understanding of how the farmers manage risks associated with production, marketing, and family and worker well-being.

• A sense of how their farming systems have developed over time and what practices the farmers have tried and rejected.

• Information about what the farmers see as their major challenges in the future and how they plan to address them.

• Information about the farms’ current sources of information, the role of public and private sector science and extension networks, and possible remaining information gaps that might be addressed by renewed investments in the science of sustainable farming systems.

• Information about the role of public policies that might have facilitated or thwarted the producers’ success.

The case studies illustrate different farmer-designed approaches to sustainability within the context of their unique socioeconomic and biophysical environments. A profile of the new case-study farms is listed in Table 7-2.

The committee recognizes that many other farms have outstanding attributes that contribute to improved sustainability, but it selected farms that highlight important approaches to producing milk, specialty crops, and grains in ways that balance and enhance productivity, environmental quality, economic viability, and social acceptability. The methods used in the new case studies are best suited to provide in-depth descriptions of various aspects of each individual farm’s production and marketing practices. The small number of cases, nonrandom selection, and diversity across the case-study farms preclude any formal statistical analysis or generalization to the broader population of U.S. farms. The existence of these farms in and of themselves, therefore, is not unequivocal evidence of either the success, viability, or desirability of these systems. Rather, they provide insights into issues,

barriers, and opportunities for innovative structure and technologies that could enhance sustainability alternatives.

Some common themes and issues that emerge from the full set of cases are discussed before the detailed narrative descriptions of the nine new case-study farms presented in this chapter. In the following sections, the committee provides a summary of ways in which producers have responded to common production challenges, addressed socioeconomic goals and concerns, and interacted with markets, policies, and knowledge institutions. Information from the case-study farms illustrate some of the important principles for improving sustainability of farming systems discussed in Chapter 2.

All the new case-study farms recognize the importance of protecting soil resources and use either no-till or conservation tillage. A few farmers expressed that no-till is not practical for them because of concerns about weed pressure, particularly in organic production systems. Strategies used to reduce soil erosion and compaction include no-till or conservation tillage, winter cover crops, application of poultry litter and dairy manure to hillsides to reduce compaction, and leaving crop residue in the field. One of the dairy farms developed surfaced cow lanes, in which surfacing consists of a base of large rocks and a surface of fine rocks. The cow lanes allow the animals to access the paddock without inducing erosion.

Most of the farms interviewed use soil tests, and some even conduct plant tissue tests, to guide their soil fertility management. They all recognized the importance of recycling nutrients or using internal inputs to the extent possible to minimize costs and losses to the environment. Other than Stahlbush and Zenner Farms, most of the new case-study farms (even the grain and specialty crop farms) keep livestock. Manure or poultry litter are often used to manage soil quality and fertility. Although Stahlbush Island Farms does not have animals on site, it purchases manure and litter from a nearby layer operation. Cover crops are also widely used among the nine farms to maintain soil organic matter and nutrients. Cover crops and livestock manure, however, are not always sufficient to provide the nutrients required by crops. As a result, some case-study farms use purchased fertilizers to complement internal inputs. Three farms (Bragger, a dairy farm, and grain farms Goldmine and Rosmann) have nutrient management plans. Goldmine Farm’s nutrient management plan is mostly for erosion control.

In addition to ensuring nutrient adequacy of crops and pasture, the dairy farms have to manage nutrient output from their operations. Bragger Farm tests the manure quality of its animals periodically and adjusts their livestock rations to reduce phosphorus excretion. Radiance Dairy (75 milking cows) and Straus Family Creamery (215 milking cows) emphasized that they maintain the ratio of about 1 cow/acre or less to ensure that they have sufficient land and crops to utilize nutrients generated by their livestock.

Straus Family Creamery separates the solids from liquids in their dairy manure, then applies the solids to fields and uses the liquids in an anaerobic digester. Although Bragger Farm contemplated getting a methane digester, Joe Bragger, who has 285 milking cows, felt his operation is not large enough to benefit from it. The use of anaerobic digestion is not limited to dairy operations. Stahlbush Island Farms recently completed an onsite anaerobic digestion and biogas recovery plant that uses the farms’ vegetable byproducts. The size of the Stahlbush Island Farms (4,000 acres farmed) and the vertical integration of production and processing make anaerobic digestion and biogas recovery particularly feasible for this specialty crop farm.

The new case-study farms all use complex crop rotations that vary in length from 2–7 years. The rotations on some farms vary from cycle to cycle depending on such factors as weather and market conditions. Crop rotations are a key strategy for managing soil quality and fertility (cover cropping) and weeds, pests, and diseases (by attracting natural predators or enemies of the pests, breaking the disease and pest cycles, and suppressing weeds by competition). A few farmers stressed the importance of soil quality in promoting plant health, which, in turn, reportedly reduces the incidence and severity of diseases and pest infestations.

Although the weed species that pose problems in the nine farms vary, thistle is a commonly reported weed. Several farmers use mechanical measures, such as mowing and hand-digging, to reduce it. The nine farms use a variety of cultural practices, including close planting, flaming, hand-weeding, and ridge-tilling, to reduce various weeds. Two specialty crop farms said appropriate irrigation management contributes to weed control. A few of the nine farms use synthetic herbicides. One farmer reported that glyphosate plays an important role in his weed management even though he would like to reduce its use in his farming system. Another reported that he does not rely exclusively on glyphosate and that prices influence his choice of herbicide for managing weeds.

Most farms monitor pests closely to determine when to spray pesticide, whether they apply organic or synthetic pesticides. Some farmers select pest-resistant cultivars to reduce the need for pesticide applications. Biological controls, such as growing plants that attract natural predators of the pests and mating disruption, are used by some farms as pest-—control measures.

Water sources and availability vary by region. Among the nine farms, two grain farms (Goldmine and Zenner) rely mostly on rainfall for their crops. Six of the seven remaining farms have wells and ponds to meet part of their water needs. The three specialty crop farms use a number of the irrigation methods described in Chapter 3 (including drip or pivot irrigation, and microsprinklers) to maintain water use efficiency. Water used as a coolant in Stahlbush’s processing plants is reused for washing fruits and vegetables and then recycled for irrigation. Straus Family Creamery, another vertically integrated farming–processing operation, recycles water from the dairy and creamery as well.

Water quality was raised as a serious problem in most of the case-study interviews. The Bragger Farm is located in a priority watershed and has engaged in a number of practices to reduce nonpoint source pollution. The farm participates in the Wisconsin Discovery Farms Program, in which they gather detailed information about surface water quality runoff on their farm. The program’s website indicates that the Bragger Farm has an exemplary record of protecting local water quality. Francis Thicke of Radiance Dairy is mindful of keeping his cows out of nearby creeks. His strategy is to let them graze areas with access to the creek at night because they are less likely to go into the creek in the dark. The Department of Natural Resources did not identify any environmental issues associated with the wastewater processing of his operation.

All the farmers interviewed would like to reduce the use of fossil fuels on their farms. Five farms are using some form of renewable energy (including wood for heating, B20

biodiesel, wind and solar energy, and electricity and propane generated from biogas), and a few other farms are considering its use. The farmers’ consideration for using or increasing renewable energy seems to be independent of the size of their operations but rather stem from their desire for the farms to be energy independent.

Aside from alternative energy sources, all the farmers emphasize energy conservation. Three farmers specified that they decrease the number of times they run their equipment (for example, using no-till and reducing the frequency of mowing) to save energy. Albert Straus drives a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle and is developing an all-electric truck. Some farmers consider energy efficiency as a key factor in equipment purchases. Bill Chambers of Stahlbush Island Farms, which may use tractors more often than the other smaller operations, purchases tractors on the basis of their fuel economy. Joe Bragger purchased a plate cooler and a variable speed vacuum pump and realized substantial energy savings.

Although the committee selected three dairy operations, three specialty crop farms, and three grain farms, several specialty crop and grain farms featured as new case studies raise livestock as part of their operations. The dairy farms have various breeds of cows (Bragger—primarily Holsteins; Radiance—Jerseys; Straus—Jersey, Holstein, and Jersey–Holstein crossbreeds). Each farm has its own mix of feed ranging from alfalfa and corn silage supplemented with high-moisture corn, soybean meal, and a protein–mineral mix concentrate, to pasture supplemented with barley and wheat, to feed rations that are designed by an animal nutritionist. These farmers generally raise their own replacement cows, bringing in selected genetics via artificial insemination to improve their productivity and to increase genetic diversity of their herds. Two of the three dairy farms are certified organic. Both organic farms emphasize the importance of disease prevention practices in the management of herd health.

Three of the nine farms raise beef cattle (Bragger, Goldmine, and Rosmann Farms). Cattle breeds and breeding bulls are selected for traits that suit each farm’s production system and local environment. Each farm uses its own mix of feeds ranging from leftover feed and forages from dairy cows to pasture supplemented with hay to corn. Corn is fed to the beef cattle on Rosmann Farm so that the meat produced will be “choice” rather than “select” grade. Ron Rosmann, however, is considering a transition away from corn feeding to pasture finishing, but he recognizes that he would have to find or develop breeds that can be finished on pasture without compromising meat quality.

Five of the nine farms include poultry in their operations. Bragger Farm produces 64,000 pullets under contract with Gold’n Plump. Radiance Farm has 25 chickens, mostly for insect control. Likewise, Peregrine Farm produces 100 turkeys for managing insects. Full Belly Farm has 400–500 layers and Rosmann Farm produces 150 non-certified organic broilers for on-farm use and for informal sales to extended family. The Braggers’ pullets are kept in a laying barn, whereas the small poultry operations tend to raise chickens in mobile coops or raise free-range chickens.

Full Belly Farm has 90 ewes that produce about 140 lambs each year. The sheep are fed a vetch–oats–hay diet, and Paul Muller is establishing pasture paddocks to increase intensive grazing opportunities for his sheep. Rosmann Farm has 50 sows and raises 600–900 head a year. Similar to the low-confinement hogs described in Chapter 5, the pigs are housed in small groups in barns with access to outdoors. All barns are treated as hoop houses with a constant cover of bedding.

Aside from milk and meat production and providing opportunities for nutrient recycling, livestock are kept on most of the new case-study farms for other purposes. Joe Bragger ’s beef cattle act as scavengers and recycle feed and forages that are not used by dairy cows to enhance recycling. Peregrine, as mentioned above, and Rosmann Farms have poultry as a strategy of managing insects.

All nine of the new case-study farms reported that they are financially comfortable irrespective of the size of operation. A few farms specifically mentioned that they had increased profitability or improved economic security over time as they gain knowledge of their farming systems and improve management. The economic viability of several farms can be attributed in part to diversification of products (for example, Bragger, Full Belly, Peregrine, Stahlbush, and Rosmann) and of markets (for example, Full Belly and Stahlbush). Some farms take out production loans each year because of their production cycles (for example, Bragger, Straus, and Rosmann). In the farming operations that have integrated processing facilities (Straus and Stahlbush), the vertical integration could help control costs, increase opportunities for recycling, and diversify products and income streams. Six of the nine farms are certified organic, and most of those farmers acknowledge that organic certification and the organic premium contribute to their financial success. In contrast, Peregrine Farm did not continue seeking organic certification even though it uses organic practices because certification only increases the farm’s profit marginally.

The three farms that mentioned record keeping use it for different purposes. Radiance Farm keeps track of inventory, whereas Full Belly Farm tracks cash flow. Peregrine Farm assesses the economic performance of various parts of its operations to guide phasing out poor performers.

The farms’ marketing strategies seem to be correlated with their size. The smaller operations (Radiance, Peregrine, and Rosmann) tend to sell their products locally and rely on word-of-mouth for advertising. The markets of those three farms differ: Radiance sells most of its products to local grocery stores and restaurants; most of Peregrine Farm’s products are sold at a farmers’ market; Rosmann sells its products through a farmers’ cooperative, Organic Valley, and to some retail outlets. The medium-sized to large farms use various marketing channels including distributors; wholesale, industrial food ingredient, retail markets, or food service markets; direct sales to restaurants or international markets; CSAs; and farmers’ cooperatives.

The number of employees on each of the nine farms depends not only on the size of operation, but also on the type of farm (dairy, specialty crops, or grain), whether the farm has a processing operation, and its marketing strategies. Stahlbush, a specialty crop farm with a processing operation and the largest (4,000 acres) among the nine farms, hires the most number of workers. Full Belly Farm, although much smaller than Stahlbush (250 acres), maintains a large full-time labor force of 25–30 employees year-round to grow and handle

the wide diversity of crops and products. Peregrine, a 4-acre farm, uses mostly family labor and only hires part-time seasonal workers to keep operating costs low. The grain farms range from 600 to 3,100 acres in size, but generally operate using family labor, with one to three part-time or seasonal workers and up to one full-time worker when needed. Similar to Stahlbush, Straus Family Creamery employs the most number of people among the dairy farms because of its creamery operation. Many of the farmers stressed the importance of quality workers to their operations’ success. Finding skilled workers could be a challenge depending on the farms’ location. The largest of the nine farms (Bragger in Wisconsin, Straus in California, and Stahlbush in Oregon) have foreign workers, and Joe Bragger mentioned that few, if any, local people are available and willing to work on a farm.

To retain quality workers, the different farms use various approaches including competitive wages, health and dental insurance, profit-sharing, retirement plans, housing, and paid time off. A few farmers said that social justice is one of their concerns and that hired laborers need to be rewarded for their contribution to the farms’ success.

A few farmers also mentioned their roles in helping their workers develop farming skills. Francis Thicke of Radiance Dairy is helping his full-time employee develop knowledge and skills as a grass-based organic dairy farmer. His employee can select two heifer calves each year to build his equity. Similarly, Jack Erisman of Goldmine Farm gives his full-time employee ownership of one cow and her offspring each year. Full Belly Farm has a thriving internship program that requires a one-year commitment. Many of Peregrine Farm’s workers are students from the nearby community interested in agricultural sustainability. The Hitts said that half of their previous workers have their own farms.

All the case-study farms appear to have built their current farming systems through a long process of experimentation, innovation, and trial and error. In some cases, farmers have participated in formal agricultural research projects conducted by universities, the USDA Agricultural Research Service, or nonprofit organizations. Some farmers mentioned that they attend conferences regularly to keep up to date on the evolving science. Two case-study farmers, Ron Rosmann and Jack Erisman, indicated that they participate in organized learning exchange arrangements with other farmers.

All the farmers interviewed for the new case studies have shared information about their farming practices through a variety of venues. Many farmers have given talks on their farming practices and their impacts at conferences, universities, and other settings. Some serve on boards of local or regional committees and organizations related to farming or sustainable food systems. Others mentioned that they frequently share information informally via e-mail or personal contacts with other farmers.

When asked to identify problems or issues that might benefit from more formal research, two case-study farmers identified the following topics:

• Soil biology and nutrient availability.

• Correlations between organic matter, soil health, and the nutritional value of food.

• New methods of weed control (other than synthetic herbicides) for no-till or minimum till systems.

• Site-specific studies of cover crops and new crop cultivars.

• Development and access to cultivars that are suitable for organic farming systems.

• Alternative medicines, animal husbandry, and disease prevention practices appropriate for organic dairies.

• New precision-agriculture technologies, including sensor technology to distinguish between weeds and crops in cultivation equipment.

• Development of small, scale-appropriate equipment for vegetable enterprises.

• Studies on the implementation, impacts, and compliance problems associated with the USDA organic standard.

Although some of these topics might best be addressed by formal research conducted by public sector or private sector scientists, two farmers expressed a specific desire to see increases in on-farm research (echoing the conclusions of the committee discussed in Chapter 5).

In general, federal farm commodity and conservation programs do not appear to be important drivers of (or obstacles to) the improving sustainability of the farming systems in the nine case-study farms. Among the three dairy farms, Radiance and Straus did not identify any government programs that provide important resources or opportunities for their farms. Albert Straus, however, mentioned that California requires farms with animals on pasture and dairy farms to have a nutrient management plan. The Bragger Farm also has a state-mandated nutrient management plan and participates in federal and state conservation programs and federal commodity crop programs. Although two of the grain farms, Rosmann and Zenner, participate in government programs, Russ Zenner believes that farm programs are flawed in terms of ensuring vitality of rural communities and maintaining or enhancing natural resources. Jack Erisman of Goldmine Farm avoids federal farm programs or crop insurance because his farm is economically viable without those programs and because of his own negative experience with crop insurance. None of the specialty crop farms interviewed reported participation in government farm programs. Although Full Belly Farm has developed several conservation initiatives, none occurred with government program support. Alex and Betsy Hitts said Peregrine Farm was too different from most farms in the United States to participate in government commodity or conservation programs. Bill Chambers cited bureaucracy, administrative costs, and reduced flexibility as the reasons for Stahlbush Farm’s lack of participation in government programs.

The new case-study farms use various combinations of farming practices and approaches discussed in Chapter 3 and marketing strategies discussed in Chapter 4 (Table 7-3). All the farms are reported to be economically viable, and most are optimistic about their future prospects. Each farm illustrates important characteristics of adaptability, robustness, and resilience—key components of sustainable farming systems discussed in Chapter 1.

Adaptability is evident in the fact that all the farmers, irrespective of the size of the farm they own, either conduct trials or experiments on their own farms or participate in experiments run by universities or other entities because they recognize the importance of adapting their farming approaches to local conditions. Although most farmers have identified the farming approach that works well for their system, they continue to test new approaches and cultivars to improve efficiencies, reduce costs, and enhance environmental quality. A key component of each farm’s overall strategy is a conscious effort to adjust their

crop or livestock mix, process farm commodities into higher value products, or develop new products in response to emerging market demands. They strengthen their resilience by marketing through channels that reward farmers for using environmentally and socially responsible production practices. Direct sales are used in some cases to control price volatility and to eliminate loss of profits to processors, distributors, or other middlemen. Overall, the ability of the case-study farms to adapt their farming systems to changing climatic, market, and development conditions enhances their resilience and long-run viability.

The farms achieve robustness in different ways, including diversifying their mix of crops and livestock, selling to a variety of market outlets, and minimizing inputs from external sources. Diversification of the enterprise contributes to robustness because if one crop fails, other crops or product sales can support the farming enterprise. Minimizing external inputs insulates the farms from fluctuating costs and, hence, contributes to robustness. The farms also illustrate that they could use some of the best labor management practices discussed in Chapter 4 without compromising economic viability.

Although only a few case-study farmers described their farms as a “system,” their approaches reflect key elements of systems thinking. The following descriptions of each farm highlights some of the “systems” elements of case-study farmers use in the overall management of their farms.

• Bragger Farm—Although its least profitable enterprise, the beef cattle play an important role as scavengers and help recycle unused feed and forages not suitable for dairy cattle consumption. The beef cattle are grazed on upland slopes that are not suitable for cropping. The poultry enterprise complements the beef and dairy enterprises by providing a diversified income, an important source of crop nutrients, and opportunities for the efficient use of available labor. In other words, the beef cattle and poultry enterprises contribute to maximizing the use of feed and forage and land on Bragger Farm.

• Radiance Dairy—Francis Thicke selects cows within his own herds to raise bulls for breeding. He selects for cows that provide a calf every year, maintain body condition and udder health, produce moderate amount of milk on pasture, and have a long productive life. Instead of focusing on short-term milk production, he balances long-term milk production with animal health.

• Straus Family Creamery—Albert Straus emphasized that “closing the loop” on resources is a driving concern for the Straus Family Creamery. The operation has an anaerobic digester with a biogas recovery system that generates 90 percent of the electricity used by the dairy and 50 percent of its propane needs. Manure solids are composted and reused on farmland.

• Full Belly Farm—A clover understory is typically planted in the orchards because it aids water infiltration, sequesters carbon and nitrogen, and poses little competition for water with crops. Paul Muller believes that a diversified organic system increases carbon sequestration and soil fertility via cover crop management, increases water infiltration by building soil organic matter, and enhances beneficial insect and soil microbiota.

• Peregrine Farm—Alex and Betsy Hitts use intensive rotations and cover cropping to manage their system. Their farm consists of two acres of vegetable crops (80 varieties) and blueberries, and two acres of cut flowers (more than 50 varieties). The rotations and cover cropping are key strategies for weeds, insect, and disease control, but they also contribute to soil quality and fertility and the farm’s financial stability.

• Stahlbush Island Farms—Bill Chamber emphasized five concerns about pesticides: 1) pesticides often lower the yield of crops receiving applications, 2) pesticides can drift from where they are applied, 3) pesticides have negative effects on beneficial soil microorganisms, 4) pesticide application poses health risks, and 5) consumers are worried about potential pesticide residues in foods. These concerns illustrate the potential adverse effects of pesticide use on the farming system. His approach to pesticides is to balance productivity with profitability and long-term sustainability.

• Goldmine Farm—Integration of livestock into the cropping system contributes to the success of Goldmine Farm because it adds to and diversifies the farm’s income streams. Keeping land in pasture helps to restore soil health and contributes to weed control when that land is planted with cash crops.

• Rosmann Farm—The diversified crop–livestock system is premised on internal cycling of nutrients and reduced purchased inputs. Six-year crop rotations include corn–beans–corn–oats or barley or succotash–alfalfa–alfalfa. The two years of corn in the rotation contribute to economic viability and the oats and barley are used to feed animals. The alfalfa in the rotation and animal manure provide nutrients for the cropland.

• Zenner Farm—Russ Zenner ’s approach is to improve soil microbiology by reducing use of chemical inputs, and thereby enhance crop health, quality, and yield. He direct-seeds his entire farm and has adapted and designed his planting and spraying equipment to better suit his operation.

The Bragger Farm is located near the town of Independence at the head of a long valley in the Driftless Region of west central Wisconsin. The area is characterized by hilly terrain and narrow valleys, most of which contain streams. It receives 30–35 inches of rain yearly. Topography and rainfall make careful soil and nutrient management important for the sustainability of farms in this region, most of which have focused on dairy.

The Bragger farm was founded by Joe Bragger ’s father and mother, who each came from Switzerland in the 1960s and met in the United States. With little money in the early years, Joe’s father started working on dairy farms near Waumandee, rented a farm, and then bought the current farm in 1968. The farm started with 400 acres and 40 dairy cows. Pasture predominated. There was a stanchion barn and a dilapidated shed, and a ram pump provided the water. Joe recalls from his childhood on the farm that “we’d march the cows out to pasture and we’d march the cows in.” Joe’s father slowly built up the herd from the original 40 head by buying cows at auctions.

Initially, Joe had no intention of working on the farm, having been trained as a diesel mechanic. He farmed for one year with his father, but “Dad and I didn’t see eye to eye.” In 1990, his father died in a tractor accident while spreading manure, and Joe assumed a major role on the farm. There were 63 cows and 660 acres of pasture, woods, and cropland at that time.

The farm is currently owned and operated jointly by Joe, his mother, Hildegard, and his brother, Dan. Hildegard lives in the main house on the central farm, Dan lives in a new modular home on a nearby hillside, and Joe and his family live on another farm parcel about a five-minute drive away. Joe refers to the organization of the farm as “a loose affiliation of tribes,” one that works for the family members participating in the operation. Joe takes overall management responsibility for the farming operation, and he focuses on cropping and the farm machinery. Hildegard raised all the calves until 2007. Dan oversees the dairy, which now milks 285 cows on two farms. Noel, Joe’s wife, is in charge of the contract pullet operation and the beef operation.

The Braggers currently own 884 acres of land. They supplement their holdings through an involved system of land rental arrangements with nearby property owners, many of whom live a long way from the operation. They rent approximately 400 acres from eight or nine different land owners that, with the land Braggers own, fit together like a parcel of mostly contiguous pieces. Many of the rented parcels were previously owned by farmers,

but are now owned by hunters and sportsmen, who often live in Kenosha, Janesville, or Madison. Joe rents and farms those lands because he needs ground to spread his manure. The rental agreements include various prohibitions on practices, including specifications on when manure can be spread. However, he also rents some of his land to hunters, which provides income to pay off the newest piece of land he has purchased.

The upper parts of the hills are open and have a nice topography, but they support less production, and the risk of failure is higher on these somewhat shallower, rockier soils, some of which slope as much as 16–32 percent. Joe does not remove corn stover for bedding on the ridges because he prefers to leave more residue on the ground. In addition, he spreads poultry litter rather than dairy manure on the hillsides to reduce spring compaction by the truck traffic, which creates field roads that will later erode into ditches and gullies. The Braggers try to make use of all their land by keeping pastures or making hay on the edges of the woods at the tops of hills. Rents were in the $20–$25/acre range when Joe’s father started farming. Now they are closer to $70/acre, and land in the Arcadia area to the south is in the $150/acre range.

The soils on Bragger Farm include heavy clay soils on the ridge tops that require careful management to harvest as much rainfall as possible. Other areas of the farm have loess soils that range from 8–20 feet of topsoil. Although the soils on the ridges are mapped as only 40 inches deep, it is likely that the rocky soils impede probes from measuring the true depth of the ridge soils that are actually 8–13 feet deep.

Compaction is a major concern. Deep tillage is not an option because of all the rocks in the soil, so compaction has to be minimized by staying off the fields during high soil moisture conditions. In addition to watching when they work on their fields, the Braggers minimize vehicle traffic and the impact of equipment by maintaining tire pressures and using large-profile tires.

Joe takes soil samples each year on about 25 percent of the land to fit the four-year rotation on his hay fields. His soils often call for an application of potassium and phosphorus, but he uses phosphorus judiciously when needed. He is not convinced he needs to conduct soil testing at the level recommended for his farm (samples on a 5-acre basis) because of the relatively small-sized fields. For example, he does not split an 8- or 10-acre field into two and send two separate samples for each portion of the field. His opinion is that because he has managed these fields as one and has maintained the same rotation and management practices on them for more than 15 years, there is little or no value in dividing them into 5-acre grids. The results delivered tend to be similar over time and do not appreciably change his management strategies.

He has begun planting corn for a second consecutive year on some of his gentler slopes. If he plants a second year of corn on a piece of land, he will add 8,000–9,000 gallons of dairy manure per acre to achieve the desired levels of potassium. Joe manages his manure applications to the amount of phosphorous needed and balances out the nutrient requirements with commercial fertilizer. He applies manure in strips on his slopes, basically on the contour. He also foliar-feeds potassium on his alfalfa four times a year to produce “excellent” alfalfa. Poultry litter, cleaned out from the pullet house, is applied where needed to his pastures and new seedings.

Corn typically needs 55-60#/A of phosphorus and 180# of nitrogen. Based on an analysis of manure at 3-3-8, he applies roughly 20 tons of manure. The actual nitrogen requirements depend on soil residue levels to account for the no-till farming system. For corn

following alfalfa, Joe credits 120 units of nitrogen from the alfalfa, and the remaining nitrogen requirements come from the 20 tons of manure application. The second year of corn following alfalfa receives a 50-lb nitrogen credit, and manure is applied at a rate of 6,000–8,000 gal/acre, which provides another 50 units. Some nitrogen is supplied in the starter fertilizer (10–20 units), and the remaining nitrogen needs are met through a commercial fertilizer application.

The liquid dairy manure application (6,000–8,000 gal/acre) provides a form of slow release nitrogen that breaks down and is available to the crop throughout the growing season, much like the nitrogen supplied through decaying alfalfa. It is important to note that in the first year, the Braggers are putting on a little extra nitrogen supplied by the manure in an attempt to build up soil potassium levels for the following alfalfa crop. The corn planted after soybean receives 50 units of nitrogen from manure, a 50-unit nitrogen credit from the soybean crop, 10–20 units in the starter, and around 80 units from commercial fertilizer. Fields planted to continuous corn receive about 50–80 units of nitrogen from manure and the remaining needs through commercial fertilizer. This operation does not try to meet the total nitrogen requirements on continuous corn through manure applications because doing so could increase the soil test phosphorus above acceptable levels.

The farm currently has 100 acres of pasture, which includes 68 acres of grassland that is hayed; 390 acres of corn, of which 150 acres are harvested as silage and the remaining 240 acres are harvested as grain for the dairy cattle; 264 acres of alfalfa; 2.5 acres in the Conservation Reserve Program; 120 acres of soybean; 21 acres of winter wheat; 10 acres fallow; 4.5 acres in a food plot for deer; and 1 acre of sunflowers for entertainment, public service, and a small experiment. The Braggers own 880 total acres, of which about 500 acres are tillable. The remaining 400 acres of cropland is rented.

The base rotation is a five to six year rotation of alfalfa and grass (fescue) or hay and then corn. Some fields are planted to corn, soybean, and occasionally wheat and do not have alfalfa or grass in the rotation. The land in the valley is mostly in the forage-based rotation (seeding, followed by two to three years of alfalfa–hay mix, followed by one to two years of corn harvested as either grain or silage). Occasionally a field or two will be planted with a barley cover crop that is harvested as baleage and fed to the beef cow herd. The fields on the ridge tops are in a rotation of corn and soybean or in a corn on corn followed by beans. A field might be planted to alfalfa following soybean, but this is limited because the stony soil damages the harvesting equipment.

According to Joe, corn has proven “a pretty economic crop.” Because the on-farm nutrient sources improve soil fertility, yields have gone from 80 bushels up to 160 bushels on some fields. The farm is really operated under different management systems using some common resources such as manure and equipment. While Joe sells some of his corn and beans when he has excess, many area farmers sell cash grains. Joe prefers to plant corn, soybean, and wheat on the tops of the hills as cash crops. He puts forages on his bottom land.

When planting corn into the previous year’s hay or alfalfa, Joe will spring-kill the existing cover and no-till (or actually strip-till) the corn into high residue. Soybean residue

is harvested and used as bedding or feed for dry cows because soybean residue is less effective at preventing erosion than corn stover. Despite the value of the residue, high levels of residue can lower soil temperature, and that factor has to be considered at planting. Joe initially went to no-till because of time considerations, but as he saw the advantages for his soils, he was won over. He would like to see crop insurance reward good practices that aim toward improved sustainability on the farm. For example, he suggests that insurance premiums could be reduced for those who use such practices as no-till or strip-till.

Leafhoppers are a big problem in alfalfa—Joe might spray chlorpyrifos for control up to three times a year with his potassium applications if infestations warrant it. He uses triple stacked corn varieties (Roundup-Ready^®, corn borer resistance, rootworm resistance) and looks at Bt as an insurance against corn borer. He speaks of some difficulty in recognizing and responding appropriately to economic thresholds with insect pests: “I quit scouting. Scouting has always led to spraying for leaf hoppers.” He now sprays for leafhoppers routinely one week after the first two cuttings and then evaluates for the need to spray after the third cutting. Soybean are routinely scouted not so much to determine if spraying for aphids is necessary, but to determine when to spray to get the most for the investment.

The key weed problems on the farm are lamb’s quarter, nut sedge in the lower areas, and, increasingly, hemp dogbane on the ridge tops. Joe uses Roundup before no-till planting and an additional Roundup application after planting along with a pre-emergence herbicide. Price considerations strongly influence decisions about spraying on the farm. Joe tries to use the most cost-effective chemical program possible, and that means the chemical program used might change as prices change. Overall, however, he says, “I won’t skimp on Roundup. Eventually that one weed that gets by will become 1,000.” However, Joe does not rely exclusively on Roundup; he also uses other products.

Joe is now in the midst of constructing a large new machine shed on the central farm to replace a slightly smaller 40-year-old building that recently went down under last winter ’s snow load. As much as possible, he is incorporating energy-conserving features (including good insulation and windows to provide high levels of natural light) into the shed. A wood boiler will eventually heat the new machine shed using trees and brush that are removed from the edges of his fields.

Rather than owning all the equipment needed on the farm, Joe leases a tractor from a nearby grain farmer for chopping corn and alfalfa and another tractor for packing silages and snow removal as a way of keeping costs down. Their needs for the equipment are at opposite ends of the calendar, and the system works well for both. “There is very little machinery that we have that we use just twice a year.”

Because of his background in diesel mechanics, Joe cares a lot about the condition and performance of farm machinery. Although he plants a lot of field trials and different crops and covers, if a particular cropping practice wrecks a machine, it might affect his decision to use it again.

The dairy herd includes 180 cows on the Bragger Farm and 70 cows managed for the Braggers on a nearby farm. The latter arrangement, in its fifth year as of 2008, has enabled the Braggers to expand their dairy enterprise. The arrangement has also provided a stream of income for their neighbor, who uses an existing barn at her farm and appreciates being able to work from home, while caring for a special needs child. The Braggers own the cows and provide the feed and move the manure, and the neighbor milks the cows. Joe has modeled this arrangement on his own largely satisfactory experience as growers for Gold’n Plump. It generally works well, although the Braggers sometimes have to stretch to accommodate special requests by their neighbor to “take time off.” Joe suspects that those cows might “some day come home.”

The Bragger herd is primarily Holsteins, with a couple of Brown Swiss and a few Finnish Red–Holsteins and Brown Swiss–Holstein crosses. The Braggers raise their own breeding stock, and bulls are sold because of the current cost of grain for raising them. Prior to the high feed prices (March of 2008), the Braggers raised about 100 head of feeder and finished cattle. They keep only a few heads now to sell as “Bragger Beef” out of their freezer on the farm.

The milking cows are bedded with sawdust, which is a substantial expense ($450/load which lasts only a week). The sawdust acts as a replacement for the corn stover, which was previously harvested from fields. Leaving the corn stover in the fields helps reduce erosion and improves the soil health and structure. Fresh cows are segregated by the days they are in milk. In segregating them, the Braggers are aware of the “social” networks among cows and the stresses of moving them around and from one group to another. The Braggers are careful to make sure that there is ample light, ventilation, and sawdust bedding to keep the cows dry.

The cows are milked twice a day. The feed is alfalfa and corn silage, supplemented with high moisture corn, soybean meal, and a protein–mineral mix concentrate that the Braggers purchase. The Braggers have built storage areas for corn silage, protein supplements, and haylage. They continue to use their two upright silos for high moisture shelled corn. That saves them substantial corn-drying costs while providing palatable and high-energy feed sources for the cows.

Joe is paid based on the butter fat, protein, and quality of the milk, and he believes that healthy cows produce more protein, have higher butterfat content, and a lower somatic cell count. Much of their milk goes to a large butter maker in the area. The Braggers have considered the possibility of a value-added option such as cheese, but it would depend on the interest of the next generation and on market necessity.

Recent energy efficiency improvements to the dairy have included a plate cooler, which paid for itself in three years because of energy savings, a variable speed vacuum pump, insulation to the new shed, and wood heat for the machine shed.

One issue of concern for the dairy is that of stray voltage, which comes from an older inadequate distribution system. The voltage stresses the dairy cows and has an effect on milk production and can reduce production by 10–20 lbs/cow per day. It also greatly affects longevity of the dairy cows. The problem is particularly common in rural systems. The stray voltage problem on the main farm is one reason the Braggers do not use rBST on the herd at the main farm, although they use it on the herd tended by their neighbor.

One hundred beef cattle are pastured on the farm. The herd includes Limousin, Short Horn, and Holstein–Hereford crosses. The beef operation is the least profitable part of the farm, and Joe said he would drop it, particularly if they could put up another poultry barn. The priority of the beef cattle is evident in the “green cow” zone of the dairy barn. Joe’s “green cows” are steers that get leftover feed from the dairy cows. The point here is to minimize inputs purchased directly for them.

The beef cattle are grazed on the upland slopes that border the woods. Those areas have not been cropped because of the slope and terrain restrictions. The cattle are over-wintered on a flat corn field on the home farm to minimize damage to slopes during the spring thaw. In this operation, the beef cows act as scavengers and recycle the unused feed and forages that are not suitable for dairy cattle consumption.

The heifer calves are raised in hutches until they are about 2 months of age, at which time they are vaccinated and moved to a group pen. Heifers are raised in groups of about 10 heads per pen until they are about 4 months of age. They are, then, dehorned, revaccinated and moved off the milking operation to another farm. Joe and Noel live on an adjacent farm one to two miles from the milking operation. The heifers older than 4 months of age are raised on this farm until they reach breeding age, which is about 12–14 months. When they are ready to be bred, the heifers are moved to another neighboring farm where they are artificially bred. The heifers remain on this operation until they are within two months of calving, at which time they return to the dairy and are placed in a pen with the dry cows. The Bragger Dairy Farm raises all its heifer calves as replacements for its dairy operation.

The poultry enterprise began at the instigation of Joe’s wife, Noel, in 1995. She quit her teaching job, seeing contract poultry as something that would allow more time at home to raise their children. The farm produces 64,000 pullets annually under contract with Gold’n Plump, a poultry company based in the upper Midwest, which has 140–150 broiler barns in the area and a few pullet barns. The birds are raised from chicks brought in by the processor, which also provides the feed. The pullets spend 21 weeks in the two-story barn, and then go out to four large laying barns in the area. After paying off the initial costs of the barn (about $500,000 10 years ago), the Braggers have only insurance, taxes, and minor upkeep as current expenses. Joe estimates that Noel’s work time in the pullet barn is approximately one hour a day, rarely more than two. The relatively low maintenance and profitability of the pullet operation has made it a good fit with farm needs and family responsibilities. The manure from this operation also has a high value that contributes greatly to the success of the operation. This manure replaces approximately $8,000–$12,000 of commercial fertilizer purchases and provides additional soil benefits from the micronutrients and other soil amendments.

The farm uses six full-time employees. Two of these men are in the H2A program, and they run equipment. The rest are in the United States on (one-year) J1 visas. They milk the

cows and provide other herd care. Virtually no local people are available and willing to work on the farm, because the area has a competitive labor market with a major furniture manufacturer (Ashley Furniture) and a poultry industry (Gold’n Plump). Joe said “foreign workers are a nightmare” from a bureaucratic standpoint. However, he has had good experiences with many of the workers he has hired. Reliability has been valuable: “I can set my clock by Mario.” He notes the quality of the workers on the farm is key to the farm’s success. He expresses some frustration with regulations that can impede farmers’ ability to support their workers. For example, Wisconsin state rules require workers’ eating and sleeping quarters be 500 feet from where livestock are located (federal rules specify 250 feet). Hildegard’s house is less than 500 feet from the cows, and its basement could house workers if allowed. Some of Joe’s workers do not live on the farm; in fact the H2A workers must be housed off of the farm and have to arrange their own accommodations. The J1 visa holders are allowed to live in the main farm house with Joe’s mother.

A fundamental concern on the Bragger Farm is to balance phosphorus produced by livestock with the needs and availability of land on the farm. The Braggers believe that the current operation could support a maximum of about 300 cows. In 1999, Joe completed a nutrient management plan for the farm, covering 108 fields that averaged 8.3 acres. Joe looks at how to apply nutrients at certain phases of the rotation that will work well for long-term needs of the rotation.

Solid pen pack manure is always applied to land going into corn. If that manure is applied to alfalfa, the harvesting equipment would gather it up and contaminate the forage crop. Poultry litter is used on pasture and other areas that are difficult to access because of steeper slopes or long travel distances and on land that will eventually be seeded to alfalfa.

The Braggers evaluate manure quality through a frequent testing program. They are pleased to see that phosphorus levels in the manure have been decreasing because of the reductions in dietary phosphorus. The decrease in manure phosphorus has increased the level of nitrogen supplied to corn when manure is applied on the basis of phosphorus needs of the crop. The farm also tests the milk urea nitrogen levels to determine whether excess protein is being fed or if the cows would benefit from an increase in dietary protein.

Manure from the dairy barn flows by gravity into a manure pit; water from the dairy milk house is spread into a drain field that is checked and relocated regularly. The manure pit was constructed with cost share and technical assistance from the local Land Conservation Department. (In Wisconsin, each county has a Land Conservation Department funded through state funds from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture and the Department of Natural Resources.) The liquid dairy manure is analyzed for nutrients each year, and all of it is applied on the farm’s land. The manure application is contracted out twice a year. As noted previously, poultry litter from the pullet operation has been a valuable amendment for soils on the farm.

Joe has a deep passion for his woodlands. He cuts firewood and sells timber, such as white oak, red oak, and hickory, and builds hunting and horse riding trails for hunters and others to enjoy.

The water for the farm comes from a well. The large spring in the hillside supplies water to the transition barn, the dry cows, and the calving facilities. The spring is above the farmhouse and has been tiled so that it flows into a trout-spawning area next to the transition facilities. Joe’s father built the lower trout-rearing pond to control seep water in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and a local sportsmen’s club. The original pond dates to 1949 and was built by the previous owners of the farm and the local club. The large spring was the original source of water for the entire farm. It uses a ram pump to supply water to a cistern from which it can be distributed to the house and other buildings on the farm.

In the dairy, water from the heat exchanger for the milk is used to water the cows. The Braggers have contemplated installing a methane digester, but believe a 300-cow operation is needed to justify it. In thinking about an anaerobic digester for the farm, Joe reflects, “We will not be at the front of the curve. We’ll do later what others do first and benefit from their tinkering.” If they increased the dairy herd, they would certainly phase out the beef cattle.

The farm provides the wood to heat all their homes. An important energy-saving consideration is simply to run everything (farm equipment) less. Joe sees their no-till approaches as very consistent with that energy-saving strategy.

All the milk produced on the farm goes to Grassland Dairy, where it is made into butter. Grassland is a longstanding family-owned dairy company based in Wisconsin. The company has no policy on the use of rBST; Bragger Farm milk is from cows both treated and not treated with rBST. The Braggers have a great relationship with their milk hauler, who has been hauling their milk for more than 30 years. In fact, Joe is one of the last four farmers with whom the hauler is still working from the time he started his business. The hauler takes the milk from the Bragger Farm to whichever plant he has a contract. Because no new dairy plants have been built in Wisconsin for some time, dairy plant capacity to handle any additional milk production cannot be assumed, which is a consideration for expansion of the Braggers’ dairy enterprise. The dairy enterprise accounts for 89 percent of gross receipts on the farm.

The pullet operation with Gold’n Plump brings in about $50,000 a year, and because of low operating costs nets about $45,000. The $8,000–$12,000 current fertilizer value of the poultry litter used on the farm is an additional financial bonus from the pullet enterprise.

Most of the beef cattle are marketed at auction. However, the Braggers process some of their beef locally and sell about 6–8 heads a year “through the freezer on the farm.” Much of those sales go to local buyers, including hunters and sportsmen, who may buy a quarter or half a cattle, and sometimes smaller cuts. The Braggers sell by the box weight, not the hanging weight, which makes them different from some beef farmers. Cuts are packaged in see-through vacuum packs, not white-wrap. Overall, the beef enterprise significantly lags the dairy and pullet enterprises in terms of profitability.

The Bragger Farm operates as an unwritten family partnership. Decision making happens in conversation among the principals (Joe, Dan, Noel, and Hildegard), but Joe says the “buck stops here” with him. The land is under Joe’s mother’s name. For estate planning

purposes, they have recently changed the structure of the farm loan, assigning all the debt of the farm to the land she owns. A production loan is taken out each year, signed by Joe, Noel, and Hildegard. Joe files the taxes for the farm.

The Braggers participate in federal and state conservation programs and in federal crop programs. The Bragger Farm has participated in EQIP for cover cropping, forestry, and no-till. The farm is in a priority watershed (Middle Trempealeau), which led to the funds for the manure pit.

Joe has served as president of his county Farm Bureau and president of the Wisconsin Soybean Association. He now gives an increasing number of talks on his farming practices and their impact on the environment regionally and nationally. As the first farm participating in the Wisconsin Discovery Farms Program, the Bragger Farm has received research and media attention. A Discovery Farm is an operating, commercial Wisconsin farm cooperating in on-farm systems evaluation and demonstration projects. The network works with a systems farm at University of Wisconsin, Platteville, to evaluate nutrient management strategies and practices aimed at reducing nonpoint source pollution while protecting farm profitability. A primary objective is to establish baseline data that can be used to determine environmental impacts of various farm management practices. The Discovery Farms Program is evaluating the impact of agriculture on the quality of surface water runoff by monitoring edge-of-field sites on privately owned farms throughout the state. Relationships determined between field management and the quality of surface water runoff is providing information on the sources, magnitude, and timing of nutrient and sediment losses to streams in agricultural areas. Understanding the factors that contribute to nutrient and sediment losses and the timing of when they occur is an important step in reducing or mitigating the effects that farms like the Braggers’ have on the Mississippi River Basin. The Bragger Farm entered the Discovery Farms Program in 2001, and data collection recently ended.

The trout-rearing pond on the farm is one prominent example of “a feel good thing” that offers no direct economic gain, but offers something to the surrounding community. Another is Joe’s willingness to strike a deal with someone he rents land from, who was also interested in sweet corn. Joe planted one acre of sweet corn on that land and went halves with this individual on the venture. Among other things, their sweet corn was featured at a local church festival.

Joe is highly mindful of neighbors’ observation of and interest in what is happening on his farm. He has experimented with planting small trials of specialty crops like canola, flax, and sunflowers, in part, he says, to “keep the neighbors interested in what Joe is doing.” He also conducts small-plot trials of wheat and canola to gather information and learn how they do in the context of his farm. In 2008, he planted a small trial of sunflower (potentially for biodiesel, though not ultimately harvested, as the birds got there first) on a plot of his rental land, up on the ridge, and attracted a lot of interest. “People just liked to look at them,” he noted.

In terms of interaction and exchange with farm neighbors, Joe identifies a friendly, but guarded style of relations, where farm neighbors clearly watch and notice what others are doing. However, he observes that these days “none of us will talk to our neighbors about what works for us. Too much pride,” in part related to the intensified competition for land. Reflecting on the more competitive climate among farmers in the area, Joe says, “I now always keep one or two secrets back.”

The surrounding region is characterized by a population of aging dairy farmers. If farmers cannot count on the next generation to continue the farms, they are typically turning to beef cattle, cash grains, or renting out their land. The Bragger children are still young and showing interest in the farm. In his early 40s, Joe is not yet thinking too hard about succession issues on his own farm.

The growing interests and presence of people in the region who are not actively farming have implications for the Bragger Farm. For example, sportsmen who own much of the land Joe rents only want manure spreading to occur in the late winter (to minimize conflict with their recreational and vacation priorities), yet this is the worst time for manure spreading from an environmental protection standpoint. Although the popularity of hunting imposes a pressure, it offers some income opportunities. Outside interests in the land can reduce availability of land for farming and constrain specific agricultural practices. Joe suggested, “There may be more money in deer around here than in farming.”

Joe worries about diseases that might affect his cows and how to anticipate and prevent problems. Weather is the perennial farmer worry; “You just have to deal with whatever comes your way.” Joe observes that in the course of his work as a farmer, he may not have learned to control or manage risk, but his stance toward risk has changed with age and maturity: “I just don’t get so worked up about things anymore.”

Noel Bragger has recently resumed teaching at a Catholic school. This is not for health insurance, which is not offered, but rather “to have her own thing,” as Joe puts it. Joe notes some potential adjustment in handling all the farm enterprises and quipped that it might mean more work for him.

Joe sees sustainability as something difficult to explain with a simple thumbnail description, because “there are different levels of sustainability.” He notes that sustainability is workable over the long term, but the context is changing constantly. Important outside influences affecting sustainability, in Joe’s opinion, are access to markets and the price of inputs, such as fertilizer. He stresses the importance of maintaining productive soils and keeping them in place for long-term farm viability.

He is proudest of the way his extended family all comes together and works together in running the farm. He stresses his pride in his four children’s growing involvement in the farm. “I’m proud I can tell my 13-year-old to go out there and do this work and he can do it. Those interactions through the day are what it’s all about.” Joe also mentions a sense of accomplishment in the protection of the creeks and waterways on his farm and the general productivity of the operation.

While the Bragger Farm demonstrates a comparatively conventional farming operation, focused on dairy but with a significant place for the contract pullet operation, it has also successfully incorporated key farming practices for improving sustainability (for example, no-till and strip-till) and implemented careful management and monitoring of land and nutrients (through the Braggers’ involvement in the Discovery Farms Program). Integration of the cropping system with the dairy operation and the availability of land on which to spread manure and to pasture cattle have resulted in a stable system that has minimized the need for purchased nutrients. The addition of the pullet barn produced a further income stream and a valued source of nutrients, which make the diversified system more economically stable.

Francis and Susan Thicke own and operate their organic, grass-based dairy just outside of Fairfield, a town of 10,000 in southeast Iowa. Their current herd includes about 80 milking cows, all unregistered Jerseys. They run an on-farm processing plant, where they produce cream-line milk and other dairy products, sold in the Fairfield area. The distinct marketing arrangement is a “feasible proposition” according to Francis, because of Fairfield’s unusual market demographics. In the early 1970s, Fairfield became a magnet for a growing community of people associated with the practice of Transcendental Meditation. The “meditator population” has, from the beginning, been strongly committed to natural and organic foods, creating an excellent niche market for a dairy such as Radiance.

The dairy operation began in 1980, first at another location in the Fairfield area. Starting as a small cooperative effort among friends, the business milked two cows and sold raw milk at that time. Demand soon grew, and more cows were added each year. In 1987, the state determined that the dairy violated Iowa’s raw-milk regulations, and the dairy was required to begin pasteurization. In 1992, the Thickes moved to Fairfield from Washington, D.C., and purchased the dairy, which had 22 cows at that time. In 1996, they moved the dairy to its present location, which had been a small, conventional farm. In moving their operation, the Thickes specifically sought to purchase less costly marginal land. It was rolling but well-suited for grazing and close to town on a paved road. Developing the dairy farm took some time. For four years, they lived upstairs in the barn, while also slowly constructing their present home.

Francis’ movement into organic dairy farming follows from his family history of farming, academic training, and work for some years in Washington as a national program leader in the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service. He grew up on a conventional dairy farm in Minnesota, milking Ayrshires. The farm converted to organic in 1976, a transition encouraged by Francis and his brothers, and assented to, at first somewhat skeptically, by their father. Francis’ brother, Art, continues to farm there today and is widely recognized for his approach to grazing. Art has provided critical mentoring and advice as Francis developed his own grass-based dairy farm. After completing a B.A. degree in liberal arts, Francis completed an M.S. in soil science at the University of Minnesota and a Ph.D. in agronomy at the University of Illinois. After graduate school, Francis worked for USDA in a position that allowed him to travel around the United States, see diverse agricultural circumstances, and play a role in designing and implementing agricultural programs. He liked his work, but when the opportunity to begin dairy farming in Fairfield arose, he decided to return to a farm. At the time, Francis was concerned he might not remember how to do day-to-day farming. But, as Francis observed, “Farming is like riding a bicycle;” once you know how to do it, you don’t forget.

The Thickes’ approach to farming centers foremost on thinking of the farm as an organism. They follow the evolving science of organic and sustainable farming, but not at the expense of their intuition. (Francis strongly advocates listening to one’s “inner agronomist.”) He sees a need to turn around recent assumptions about farming, including that “in Iowa, we tend to think the longer we farm, the more we’ll wreck the environment. Instead we need to farm in ways that enhance the environment, rather than degrading it.” His philosophical take on farming emphasizes “farming in the moment” and doing what needs to be done. His approach, he suggests, enables one to have more fun and lets important things rise to the surface.

The Thickes own 236 acres of land. They also rent some 150 acres at other farms in the area. As the Radiance herd has grown, they have needed more hay, which lines up well with local farmland owners, who will rent out land if farmed organically. In some cases, people seeking to rent out their farmland have approached Francis. The resulting rental arrangements are verbal and informal.

With its emphasis on rotational grazing, balancing herd size to available pasture is central for Radiance Dairy. Francis aims for a maximum of one cow/acre, but would prefer a bit less, even one to two cows/acre to ensure an adequate buffer on the land. He discussed excess or buffer capacity—meaning more pasture forage than absolutely necessary in good weather conditions—in several contexts from the standpoint that poor or extreme weather could leave the farm without high-quality pasture for the cows. Excess pasture under good weather and growing conditions is harvested as hay.

Francis’ goal is to make the farmland erosion proof. Healthy pasture helps prevent soil erosion and leaching of nutrients. The farm has 200 acres of pasture, divided into 60 paddocks of roughly two acres. The paddocks are divided into halves or thirds with portable fencing materials for grazing on any particular day. They have rented another 150 certified-organic acres on which they raise hay, small grains, and soybean.

Francis laid out the paddocks based on his scientific agronomy background and an intuitive sense of how best to configure the pastures given their varying characteristics. The pastures were established in 1997. Francis uses a no-till drill to interseed the pastures. The farm soils are a silty clay loam that has a geological clay hard pan about a foot down. When the farm was purchased in 1996, it had been in corn and soybean production for many years. Francis planted the whole farm to a variety of grasses and clovers. Although he conducts soil tests on the farm about every five years, he does not consider the tests the best or only way to monitor improvement of the soils in his pastures. He sees building of soils as the primary and critical task, which then leads to good forage. He applied three tons of lime per acre in 2006 to correct soil pH. He used calcitic lime because the soil has more than enough magnesium. Over time, Francis has seen an increase in the number of earthworms, which he takes as a clear indicator of increased soil health.

The Thickes do not have many empty spots in their pastures, although they do have Canadian thistle patches in a few places. They have found in the past two years that the patches have diminished in size and density, which they attribute to the increasing density of pasture forages interseeded with a no-till drill and to timely mowing of the thistles. They are not, at this point, concerned about importing nutrients onto the farm by importing feed because the farm had a very low nutrient status when they purchased it. They are now building

soil fertility up to optimum levels. However, they began hauling composted bedding-pack manure to some of the rented land that is not contiguous to the dairy in 2008.

The cows are outwintered in paddocks selected for increased nutrient application. Hay bales (dry hay and baleage) are fed in a grid pattern in the paddocks to cause the cows to spread their manure at the desired rate of nutrient application. Residual hay from the bales serves as bedding for the cows. When needed, round bales of low-quality hay are unrolled in the wintering paddocks for additional bedding. When winter temperatures and wind are excessive, the cows are kept on a bedding pack in a pole barn near the milking facility. Paddocks selected for out-wintering are rotated each year. The following spring, residual bunches of hay, along with occluded manure, are pushed into piles, which are turned frequently to facilitate rapid composting.

Priority for outwintering cows is given to paddocks in which volunteer tall fescue (entophyte infected) has begun encroaching. In spring, after composting is completed on the outwintered paddocks, the paddocks are rotovated to a depth of 2.5 inches to kill the fescue and then planted to brown midrib sorghum–sudangrass, or some other annual forage crop. The following year, those paddocks are planted to a diverse mix of perennial grasses and legumes. Planting a summer annual like brown midrib sorghum–sudangrass for one year before reseeding perennial forages provides several advantages. First, it allows fescue seeds in the soil to germinate and then be killed the following year, and thus, depletes the fescue seed bank. Second, a summer annual will grow aggressively during midsummer and provide grazing forage during the time when the growth of cool-season grasses slows. Third, a summer annual requires warmer soil temperature for planting, so it is planted later in the season, which allows time to complete composting of residual material from outwintering. During the composting period, surviving cool-season forages in the paddocks are grazed at least once.

The manure and bedding from the barns and milking parlor are also composted. The perennial forages planted in paddocks include bromegrass, orchardgrass, timothy, red clover, white clover, Kura clover, alfalfa, and chicory.

In the spring and early summer, the pasture grows more rapidly than the cows can consume it, so some pasture areas are cut and baled for winter feeding. By midsummer the pasture growth slows and the areas that had been cut earlier for hay are brought back into the pasture rotation. During the rapid growth phase in spring and early summer, the rest period before a paddock is regrazed is 20–30 days. As the summer gets hotter and drier, forage regrowth slows, so rest periods are extended to 40 days or more, depending upon rate of forage regrowth.

The rented land is planted to a mix of alfalfa and grass. After four to five years, when the alfalfa stand diminishes, the land is rotated to soybean, then to small grains, then back to hay.

To reduce mud and erosion, Francis has surfaced cow lanes (with EQIP cost-share support) that provide access to the paddocks. Lane surfacing consists of a base of larger rock (1.5 inches in diameter) with fine rock on the surface. Francis is now contemplating planting trees along the pasture lanes to provide shade for the cows as they walk to and from the paddocks.

The farm now has about 80 milking cows, with about 150 in total, including the dry cows and heifers of all ages. After each milking, the cows are moved onto new grass. The

grazing animals are sorted into three groups: lactating cows, dry cows and bred heifers, and yearling heifers. The lactating cows are rotated through the paddock system first, so they can glean maximum nutrition from the forages. The dry cows and bred heifers come through next. The yearling heifers rotate through a separate group of paddocks.

The cows are also fed about 5 lbs/day of barley and wheat during the summer and about 10 lbs/day during the winter, although the Thickes would like to move away from feeding grain. They grow some of the needed grain on their rented land and buy the balance from other organic farmers. On average, the Thickes’ lactating cows produce 32 lbs of milk per day. Some of their cows continue to be good milkers for 11, 12, or even 14 years.

From the beginning, Radiance Dairy has milked Jerseys, which produce milk high in protein, fat, and total solids. Cows generally produce one calf per year. Francis selects cows from within his own herd to raise bulls for breeding. He describes his approach as selecting for cows that are well adapted to his farming system, rather than focusing on milk production. He favors cow characteristics such as producing a calf every year, the ability to maintain body condition while producing a moderate amount of milk on pasture, maintaining a healthy udder, a good disposition, and living a long life. Recently he brought in a bull from a herd in Nebraska that feeds no grain, and through the use of artificial insemination has brought in selected genetics from Jerseys in New Zealand and elsewhere.

Francis manages the herd for two calving windows—one in spring and one in fall—in an effort to avoid calving during the hottest of summer and the coldest of winter. He needs to have milk year-round but aims to have more cows dry in the summer, when many of his customers are away on vacation and less milk is sold.

Francis gets a fair number of calls from people wanting his cull cows to serve as “family cows.” When he has excess milk for his market, he sometimes sells cows that are older, or less than ideal for his herd, as a family cow. The roughly $300/cow received when such a cull cow is sold essentially matches what it would bring from selling it for slaughter, and the cow gets a new lease on life and extra coddling in its new home.

The farm also includes a small, noncommercial chicken flock of about 25 birds. The chickens free-range around the farmyard and help with fly control by eating fly larvae.

Animal health, as Francis sees it, is integrally tied to the robust ecological health of the farm. Problems associated with herd health have been diminishing on the farm over the years. Nonetheless, pinkeye has sometimes been a health issue for the Radiance herd, exacerbated by flies. Experimenting with a comprehensive approach to fly control has helped to manage that challenge. In summer, Francis buys weekly shipments of parasitic wasp larvae that he spreads around the farm, particularly in pasture areas where the cows have recently grazed. The tiny wasps hatch and then lay eggs in fly larvae, preventing flies from hatching. To capture flies that hatch in spite of the farmyard chickens and parasitic wasps, fly traps (using attractants) are used around the barnyard. In the milking parlor, he treats the cows with a spray of soybean oil and essential oils on their backs and legs to kill flies. Sticky tapes are strung along the ceiling of the milking parlor to catch flies that leave the cows and fly to the ceiling.

During milking, any cow that shows signs of pinkeye (for example, tearing up) receives a light eyewash spray. The careful monitoring approach, coupled with eye patches for cows that do become afflicted, has kept the problem in check. Nonetheless, Francis sees a need for more research on fly control systems suitable for organic (animal) agriculture.

The calves sometimes get scours, which is treated effectively with herbal boluses. In most cases, sick animals are brought back to good health with natural methods. When antibiotics or other materials prohibited in organic production are used on sick animals, the treated animals are removed from the herd.

Cow manure is not a waste at Radiance Dairy. Most of the manure produced on the farm is spread throughout the paddocks by the cows as they graze. Manure from the milking parlor, the barnyard where the cows wait for milking, and calves in a barn is composted near the barn. In the past, the compost has been spread on pasture areas that need additional fertilizer. Future plans are to haul the compost to the rented land off the farm, which is used to grow hay and small grains for the cows. Dead cows are composted on the farm.

Milking takes place in a New Zealand swing-style milking parlor that Francis designed and built. It has a central operator ’s pit, with spaces for eight cows on either side of the pit. Francis knew what design he wanted after visiting grass-based dairies in Minnesota. What he now has for Radiance flows well for handling the cows. The dairy processing facility is immediately adjacent to the milking parlor. He had to work creatively with the inspector from the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship to keep milking and processing under the same roof, although in functionally separate spaces. The inspector ’s supportiveness and flexibility has been critical to implementing some of the innovative features of the dairy. Processing equipment was comparatively affordable, because some items were brought from the other farm to the present farm, and some items were bought secondhand, or adapted to purpose.

Francis sees the farm’s movement into milk processing in the late 1980s as a key to its success. At that time, no dairy in Iowa was processing milk on farm, although a few others have since begun to do so. “We were ahead of the curve on that,” he says, noting the current enthusiasm for local foods.

Radiance Dairy does not homogenize its milk; thus it has the “cream line.” Most of the milk it sells is whole milk, but Francis notes that even Jerseys’ skim milk tastes rich compared to conventional milk. Beyond whole, 2 percent, and skim milk, the product line includes whipping cream, yogurt, cheese (Monterey jack and ricotta), and paneer (a South Asian cheese popular with many in the meditator community). The Thickes are extremely responsive to customer feedback and concern. For example, their yogurt included a probiotic at one time. However, some customers became concerned about that, so they took it out. On the demand side, customers have recently asked if Radiance could produce fresh mozzarella, so they are now looking into developing this new product line.

At present, Radiance Dairy milk is sold in plastic jugs. Francis has contemplated and researched the implications of switching to reusable glass bottles, which are appealing on aesthetic, environmental, and possibly health grounds. He thinks many of his customers would like a reusable glass bottle. However, such a switch might not be cost-effective, given the capital costs required to purchase a new bottler and a bottle-washing machine, and to build an addition on the processing plant to house the bottle washer. For now, Francis plans to install a solar hot water heating system for the processing plant and milk house. With solar hot water, the economics of returnable glass bottles will be more favorable, and Francis hopes to make the switch to glass bottles within the next two years.

The Thickes deliver all their processed dairy products to grocery stores and restaurants within 24 hours of production. They have a cold storage in which they keep inventory until delivery and an incubation room for making yogurt. The dairy processing facility appears clean, orderly, and efficient. Francis says he does not obsess about “biosecurity” with the various visitors to the dairy. (For example, visitors are not required to use shoe covers.)

Radiance Dairy is a family labor farm, with a clear division of labor between Francis and Susan. He leads on farm and herd management, and Susan handles much of the cheese making, marketing, and business management. However, a small cadre of nonfamily workers is critical to the successful operation of the farm and dairy. A young person (in his 20s) has helped full-time with the cows for the last three years. He comes from a local conventional farm. Francis emphasizes the opportunity to help him develop as a grass-based organic dairy farmer. Working with an idea offered by his brother Art, Francis has moved to an arrangement where this worker can select two heifer calves for himself each year, as a way of increasing his stake in the herd. That arrangement would facilitate the possibility of his taking over Radiance in the future, if that becomes a viable option, or starting his own herd. The worker lives in a modular home on the farm.

Radiance Dairy has two additional part-time workers from the nearby area. Both work about three-quarters’ time, processing and making deliveries. They have been working at Radiance fairly long term (one since before the Thickes bought the dairy). They are close friends (one recruited the other), and their friendship might contribute to workforce stability, as they enjoy working together. In addition, the daughter of one of the plant workers works a few hours a week assisting with cleanup in the plant. Also, a high school student who lives nearby assists with milking on weekends during the school year and more often during summer vacation. The longest-term processing worker at Radiance makes $17.50/hour.

The most frequently used equipment on the farm are two all-terrain vehicles to open and close paddock gates, move cows and fencing, and undertake general chores. The farm also has a full line of hay-making equipment (disc mower-conditioner, rake, round baler, and balage wrapper) and four tractors. The tractors are moderate-sized, and one has four-wheel drive. Francis would like to get a second four-wheel-drive tractor.

Pond development (cost-shared through EQIP) has been critical for watering cows in the various pastures. Water quality concerns are generally minimal at Radiance Dairy. Although no swine concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are in the watershed, Francis is concerned about environmental threats posed by CAFOs in the larger region. He has been active in Jefferson County Farmers and Neighbors (JFAN) to fight CAFOs.

For watering cows in paddocks throughout the farm, Francis installed a solar-powered water system. He placed a 4,000-gallon tank on top of the highest hill on the farm. In a pond just below the hill, he placed a submersible pump and installed a solar panel on the edge of

the pond. The solar panel powers the pump, which pumps water to the tank on top of the hill. Water then gravity-feeds from that tank to a water system that provides water to all 60 paddocks on the farm. The water system consists of a 1-inch polyethylene pipe injected under the ground about 8 inches deep and over a mile long. In the fence line between every other paddock is a 55-gallon water tank with a float valve connected to the underground pipeline. The water system is drained and blown out with an air compressor for the winter. Because ground water in southern Iowa is low in quantity and quality, water for the watering system came from Iowa’s rural water system (water pumped into the countryside from a system of reservoirs) before the solar-powered water system was installed.

Francis strives to keep his cows out of the creeks running through the farm. One strategy is to allow grazing with access to the creek at night only, when, Francis says, they are less likely to go into the water. With flash grazing, cows do not damage streambanks.

In anticipation of possible local concern about wastewater processing from the dairy, Francis had the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) check the wetland it runs into for any problems. The DNR identified no environmental issues.

Francis expressed concern about the emphasis on corn-based ethanol in current federal and state approaches to renewable fuels, both for the environmental impacts of more extensive row cropping and for trends towards centralization in biorenewables processing.

In general, Francis sees the current emphasis on greenhouse-gas emissions in agriculture as a new way of talking about a longstanding concern: efficiency in the operation. He sees grass-based dairies as a particularly energy-efficient model. Because of his own emphasis on grazing, he does not feel particularly worried about the rising energy and feed costs that now concern some agricultural sectors.

With rising energy costs and intensified public discussion about energy, Francis is now thinking more about other alternative energy options to incorporate into the farm. He is considering the possibility of a wind generator, as the area is good for wind energy. He thinks a solar hot water heating system could be a good addition to the dairy.

The Thickes made a conscious decision to sell all their dairy products locally, because they “didn’t want to lose that connection.” Radiance Dairy sells its products to two groceries and 12 restaurants in the Fairfield area. Thus, Radiance does not sell products directly to customers. Hy-Vee, an Iowa grocery chain, and Everybody’s, a locally owned whole-foods store, are the retail outlets. Most of their buyers have standing orders. Products are distributed as they are produced, with bottled milk delivered to stores on Mondays and Thursdays. The processing schedule means that Radiance never keeps much inventory of milk or other products on hand at the dairy. The low inventory sometimes surprises and disappoints regular customers who expect to drop by and make special purchases.

The Thickes raised prices for Radiance products a few years ago, but Francis says their prices are lower than the prices for other organic milk brands. He and Susan are now considering whether they need to raise their prices again. They prefer to keep their prices as low as possible—because they are selling to friends and neighbors—and base their prices on the cash flow needed to pay bills and make a modest living.

Radiance does community service advertising (for example, an advertisement in the high school yearbook), but in general does little to no formal advertising. It relies on reputation in the community and word-of-mouth. The dairy does not have its own website.

Francis and Susan certified Radiance Dairy organic in 1993 and became certified organic again in 1997–1998 when they moved to their new farm site. In accordance with organic certification requirements, Francis records what pasture every cow is in on every day. Francis noted, “I don’t like the paperwork for organic. I’ll be honest; I do the minimum to get by. I don’t keep a lot of records. I mostly do it by observation.”

An interesting benefit of being a certified-organic farmer, said Francis, is not only the premium it brings for dairy products but also the legitimacy it brings to his speaking about the organic sector at conferences and in public policy settings.

Radiance Dairy is affiliated with the Buy Fresh Buy Local Initiative in the Fairfield area (the distinctive logo is posted on the side of the Radiance Delivery truck), and Susan plays a leadership role in the initiative.

The very purchase of the dairy back in 1992 entailed what Francis calls “creative financing.” As the Thickes were unable to interest a bank in lending to them, Francis’ brother Art helped to finance purchase of the dairy herd. The dairy owner rented them the farm and small processing plant and was willing to forgo payments on the farm and processing equipment for one year. By 1995, Francis and Susan had accumulated enough equity to secure loans to purchase a farm about four miles away and build the milking and processing facilities there. They moved the operation to the new site in 1996.

The farm had been organized as a sole proprietorship. Based on tax arguments offered by their tax accountant, Francis and Susan have recently made it a limited liability company (LLC). They are now budgeting and paying themselves salaries.

On the production side, they keep track of each cow, herd, and paddock. They also track purchased feeds and seeds and keep records of hay and other crops produced on the rented land. Francis is disinclined to calculate or dwell on measures such as net profit per cow, because he finds those measures do not capture what matters most to him about his farm, which is meeting the demand for dairy products in the local community.

On the marketing side, sales records (invoices) help in inventory management and adjustment. The federal milk marketing order also requires them to keep records of their sales of each product. Susan does all record keeping and accounting for the farm. Records for the farm are not computerized.

At one point, the farm carried $500,000 in debt, but that now stands at about $300,000. Four years ago the debt-to-asset ratio was 46 percent; it is now under 30 percent. The bank now considers Radiance Dairy a very good credit risk and would gladly make further loans. However, Susan, who handles the farm finances, is accelerating the payments. They now seek to buy things needed for the dairy on a cash flow basis.

In terms of risk management, Francis said, “I don’t think too much about that. I don’t do a lot of analysis, but I’m not the best business person.” He quickly noted that Susan pays attention to the numbers and the business side of the operation, and looks for efficiencies. But Francis stressed that efficiencies do not always infer economic efficiencies.

The Thickes very much see Radiance Dairy as embedded in and serving their local community. The Thickes interact frequently with their customers. As Francis notes, “People just stop you on the street and thank you.” While such connections are gratifying, they also bring the “little burden of informal tours”—those sometimes spur-of-the-moment requests by customers to show friends or visitors the farm.

Aside from immediate local social connections, Francis has long put a priority on participating in the broader education and policy arena. As his farm has flourished, he has used it as an example, and he believes this lends credibility to his positions. He has made presentations to Rotary, Kiwanis, and national organic conferences. He is a Food and Society Policy Fellow (Class of 2002–2004), which provided training and a venue for public writing and speaking on food and agriculture issues. He serves on the boards of the Organic Research Foundation, Iowa Food Policy Council, and Iowa State Technical Committee. He further noted, “With my extra time, I like to do political things.” Francis has served on the Iowa Environmental Protection Commission, where he relished pressing for a more conservationist approach to environmental issues facing the state. Francis enjoys this work and has considered running for office. He explained his attraction to policy work: “I think farmers won’t change on their own. Policy needs to lead to change.”

Francis is also active in formal and informal educational efforts related to sustainable agriculture and food systems. He speaks to classes at Iowa universities and colleges. He has long been an active member of the Practical Farmers of Iowa (PFI). For example, in the summer of 2008, he hosted a PFI farm tour at his farm that focused on wildlife and agriculture.

The Thickes have reached a place where experimentation has yielded to a well-established, diversified, and generally resilient system. Planning for the transition of the dairy when Francis and Susan are ready to retire is one issue on the horizon, in part, “because this is a community dairy.” The Thickes have considered looking for someone to carry on the dairy in the future. They are exploring options that include working with present workers on the farm to help them build equity in the herd and explore an eventual management role, and creating a community board. Francis underscores that “To us, it’s important that this dairy would continue as a community dairy.”

When other farmers come to him for advice on how to do similar dairy farming and processing, Francis offers the following advice: 1) First look at the market. While at one time, Fairfield seemed a uniquely promising market, Francis notes that the growing interest in local foods, particularly in many college towns and larger metropolitan areas, presents good opportunities for farmers interested in local marketing; 2) Look carefully at the costs of dairy processing equipment and consider working with a consultant to be sure these critical decisions are the best ones for the operation; 3) Make sure to have a specialty product, with unique features. An on-farm dairy processor selling ordinary conventional milk would probably be less successful than one selling milk with some unique qualities.

Several factors, then, help to explain the success of Radiance Dairy. First, its very loyal and distinctive customer base in Fairfield has been built over the 28 years the dairy has ex-

isted. Second, its overall product is unique: local, organic, not homogenized, grass-fed, and from Jersey cows. Third, the dairy product line is diversified and carefully and regularly finetuned in response to customers’ requests.

Francis summarizes the approach of his rotational grazing system and local-market focused dairy as follows: “All the pieces work together. We try not to change any one thing without doing it in the context of the whole.” He also stressed that he believes in producing “food for people, not a commodity for the market.”

The Straus Family Creamery is located in western Marin County, California. The dairy farm sits just on the east side of scenic Tomales Bay, while the creamery is located approximately five miles inland on a property leased from a local beef rancher.⁹ The region has a long history of dairy farming. In the early 1960s, there were 150 dairies in Marin County. As of 2008, 27 dairy farms remained in the county.

Albert Straus’ parents, Bill and Ellen, started the dairy farm in 1941 with 23 cows. Ellen was particularly influenced by the message of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in the early 1960s, which would come to shape both their farm practices and wide involvement with agricultural land stewardship efforts in Marin County. The farm ceased using chemical herbicides by the mid-1970s and has not used chemical fertilizers since the 1980s.

One of four siblings, Albert received his B.S. degree in dairy science from California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, where he wrote his senior thesis on how to set up a processing plant for raw milk.¹⁰ He became a partner in the family farm in the early 1980s. At that time, the Strauses were doing no-till for silage. They fenced off all the creeks through the 1980s and created riparian buffers. Albert estimates that they built a pond per decade from the 1950s on. In 1993, Albert began the formal conversion of the dairy to certified organic. In 1994, the farm became the first certified-organic dairy west of the Mississippi River. Up until then, the Straus family farm marketed its milk through the local dairy cooperative. When they decided to produce their own dairy products in 1994 (to gain more control over the prices they were receiving), they had to leave the cooperative.¹¹ Albert observed, “If we hadn’t gone organic, we wouldn’t be around as a farm. It got us out of having to keep getting bigger.”

The decision to produce and market organic milk, yogurt, butter and ice cream under the family name was another critical juncture for the Straus family. Today, the dairy and creamery are two separate operations organizationally. The dairy is established as a C-corporation; the creamery is an S-corporation. Originally, the dairy was set up as a partnership, which later became a sole proprietorship before becoming a C-corporation. The creamery started as a sole proprietorship, became a C-corporation, and has recently become an S-corporation.¹² In a formal arrangement between the two distinct enterprises,

the creamery contracts to buy milk from the dairy. The creamery also contracts to buy milk from two other nearby certified-organic dairies in Marin County, one of which has been supplying Straus Family Creamery since 1995, the other since 2007.

The present Straus dairy farm consists of 660 acres of sometimes steeply rolling land that encompasses two farms—one of 166 acres purchased in 1941 and another of 493 acres acquired in 1956.¹³ The dairy typically includes approximately 300 milking cows and 300 replacements, which allows for about 1 cow/acre.

Soils are mostly a clay–loam structure. Most of the animals are removed from the fields during the winter to minimize their impact on the pastures. The Strauses use no-till methods to plant grasses and for 25 to 33 percent of their silage crops. They favor no-till methods specifically to minimize soil erosion.

In the 1960s, the herd consisted of both Jerseys and Holsteins. As of 2008, the herd is about one-third Jersey, one-third Holstein, and one-third Jersey–Holstein crossbreed.

Since 1986, the farm has milked three times a day rather than only twice (at 4:30 AM, 12:30 PM, and 8:30 PM).¹⁴ The currently used system has produced 10 to 15 percent more milk using shorter shifts, but it requires more labor than the old system. Instead of two seven–eight hour milking shifts, the milking takes about four hours, three times a day. Milking three times a day is somewhat more expensive than twice a day but yields benefits consistent with an organic sensibility. The cows are seen by workers more frequently. There is less stress on the cows from shorter milking times, and they spend shorter periods of time on concrete. The herd produces on average 65 lbs/day of milk per lactating cow.

An automatic transponder on the legs of each cow allows for individual identification and the ability to track volume of milk, temperature, amount of solids and fat, and other factors. The information allows the dairy to manage the individual cows more effectively, ensure higher-quality milk, and, ultimately, become more profitable.

In terms of genetics and breeding, 30–35 percent of the cows are artificially inseminated with other genetics, which is essential for achieving genetic diversity without the risks of bringing in outside animals into the closed herd.

The animal nutritionist who has for many years helped design feed rations for the cows now serves on the National Organic Standards Board. As the Straus dairy farm made the transition from conventional to organic, the task of developing a balanced feed formula became simpler because there were fewer options. At the same time, it became more difficult given some scarcity of suppliers. When Straus was a conventional dairy farm, the Strauses used anything they could find that would deliver needed nutrients—saki waste, tofu waste, orange peels—but the feed had to become consistent when they went organic. They currently use a computerized feeding system that can precisely account for the dry matter that the cows get from pasture.

Albert stressed the need “to be diligent” about herd health and focus first on prevention of disease. The main health issues include mastitis, problems with feet and legs, and calf issues such as scours, pinkeye, and flies. The Strauses stopped de-worming calves six years ago with no ill effects. They focus on preventing diseases by addressing feed problems right away, keeping bedding clean and dry, and, when necessary, using alternatives. Specific actions include careful documenting cow health, dipping calves’ navels, and keeping feed off the ground. Albert uses nongenetically modified vaccinations, treats hoofs with copper sulfate, and uses hydrated lime on the bedding. Flies are managed with solar-powered zappers and through efficient manure handling. Fly control aids in the reduction of pinkeye. Cows that need treatment or other cows that are culled from the herd are all sold as conventional. They sell some steers for organic beef. Albert notes that they do not really want to be in the organic beef market, but can rationalize doing some to support the local slaughterhouse, which might otherwise go out of business.

They have recognized that their high production times in the summer do not match well with the relatively low consumption that characterizes that season. As a result they try to manage their herd so that production matches the demand curve by drying cows and calving to match the consumption cycle.

Most of the farmland is in pasture, although 180 acres are typically devoted to a silage mix (oats–bell beans–vetch) that is planted in October and harvested in April, chopped, and stored in a bunker silo (concrete on the bottom and dirt sides). The farm uses a no-till seeder and some discing to plant the silage, which is grown on the tops of the hills. The best pasture also is available during roughly the same time—November to March, after which it dries up. The area receives on average 30 inches of rain per year. Water and the climate of the farm are not suitable to raise crops or hay; therefore, making silage is important. As a result, 50 percent of the hay needed is brought onto the farm, mostly alfalfa and grains and concentrates fed to the cows. They figure that the cows get 30 to 40 percent of the dry matter in their diets from pasture. Eventually, Albert hopes to increase the production of forages and silages to use on the farm and, if possible, obtain feed from as close to his farm as possible. Regarding current debates about the pasture standard of the National Organic Program, he says, “It’s not a simple issue. They try to paint it black and white. I can do 120 days on pasture. But I can’t do 30 percent of cows’ dry feed from grazing.”

Manure solids from the dairy are applied on the fields, after being separated from liquids that go into the anaerobic digester. They conduct soil tests regularly to ensure that a nutrient balance is maintained. They spread the manure in a widening set of concentric circles from the dairy. Since 1976, water quality tests in streams have indicated that nothing is getting into waterways from the confined areas.

The primary weed problems are hemlock and thistles, which are managed chiefly through mowing, grazing, and competition from other more desirable plants. In very wet years, they might have some mold problems in their silage. California Fish and Game introduced wild turkeys some years ago. The wild turkeys have become a problem because they

eat seeds and grains and pose a small but possible Salmonella threat. The methane digester has helped with fly problems

The creamery has been essential to the successful development of the farm’s agricultural system. Albert observed, “If I didn’t have the creamery, I would probably be selling to Horizon. I did talk to them.” Instead, he now produces his own line of organic dairy products.

Between its three local supplying farms, the creamery currently brings in and handles 9,000 gal/day of raw milk, a decrease from 12,000 gal/day of raw milk that was once brought in. Albert noted that too much organic milk is on the market, because many new organic dairy producers have recently come on.

The milk products are not homogenized; thus, the whole milk is cream-top. Surveys were initially conducted at farmers’ markets to determine what milk products customers prefer. Although the survey results indicated that most people would prefer reduced-fat milk, 60 percent of their sales are whole milk. Milk in glass bottles with the Straus Family Creamery label accounted for more than 30 percent of milk sales in 2007. The milk products include whole milk, 2 percent milk, 1 percent milk, nonfat milk, half and half, and cream. The Strauses have discontinued production of chocolate milk and buttermilk.

The farm also sells ice cream, yogurt, and butter. Butter is sold as lightly salted and sweet butter varieties, and in quarters, pounds, or a 20# and a 40# size for food service, such as bakeries and high-end restaurants. Ice cream is made with egg yolk stabilizer and is organic. The five flavors of ice cream are all super-premium and are the highest priced in their category.

Whole-milk yogurt is sold as a European-style yogurt. It is incubated in a vat and then condensed via reverse osmosis for packaging in quarts and pints. The yogurt, which contains only milk and culture, is the best-selling yogurt in its category. Sixty to seventy percent is sold under the Straus label with about 30 percent sold under private label as “thick and creamy” yogurt. The family would prefer to sell more yogurt branded as Straus product.

The Strauses attempt to seek sources for the flavorings in their products as close to California as possible to improve sustainability. They are considering using agave from Mexico as a sweetener, which has the added benefit of a low glycemic value. They are looking into developing some food service products such as a nonfat yogurt base and nonfat ice cream.

The Straus Family Creamery also innovates with some very specialized dairy products. For example, its recently produced special “barista milk” won second place for making cappuccinos in an international competition.

Albert mentioned, “My notion of sustainability says that all packaging should be reusable, as much as possible.” The creamery uses glass milk bottles, which are made in Canada from 40 to 50 percent recycled glass and sport the Straus Family Creamery label and logo.

The use of glass bottles was a deliberate decision that emerged from his personal view that “organic” should include minimizing the waste stream and having a very clean, inert product to contain the milk. Consumers did not drive this packaging choice, as most of their consumers do not necessarily remember the days when glass milk bottles were the norm. Delivery trucks pick up and return the used bottles. Nonetheless, the glass bottle system has its tradeoffs as it incurs extra work and expense.

Considerable attention has been paid to changing standard chemical use in the plant and moving to nontoxic cleaners. The plant uses a formulation of peracetic acid as the primary disinfectant in its equipment, because it does not leaves any residue.¹⁵ Scientific staff members at the creamery are also experimenting with colloidal chemistry in developing nontoxic formulations.

Water from the creamery is currently hauled (12,000–15,000 gal/day) to the methane digester at the dairy. They are working to re-locate the dairy to the Petaluma–San Rafael area to include a demonstration farm and facilities for processing and retail sales on 80–100 acres. The new location would have the advantages of more available water, waste treatment, energy savings from reduced water trucking, proximity of labor, nearness to distribution networks, and options for alternative transportation compared to the current location.

Albert oversees the dairy, but noted, “Right now, I am not hands-on there, although I’m managing certain aspects.” Much of the dairy management falls to a full-time farm manager who has been there for 20 years. There is also a part-time book keeper. The dairy farm employs two milkers. The milkers tend to remain for three to five years, and an additional relief milker provides support. The farm also employs a full-time mechanic who works on dairy and farm equipment and brings the definite benefit of “being inventive.” The family is seeking an additional full-time person to raise the calves; Albert believes a dedicated person is need for that position to ensure animal health. They provide “decent” housing at the dairy for employees. One structure is a mobile home, which they plan to improve.

The creamery has a larger and more complex staffing structure (70 employees), and Albert is highly involved. At the management and office end, the organization now includes a vice president for operations, vice president for marketing, chief financial officer, merchandising manager, and three to four part-time merchandisers whose territories includes southern California and the South Bay. As the Strauses consider food service options, they recognize that they will need a sales force.

Most of the creamery’s processing and plant workers are from a particular dairying area of Mexico. They commute from Petaluma and Santa Rosa, because of a lack of housing in the immediate area. Employees are generally recruited by word-of-mouth. Albert seeks to recruit people with higher education (many have not much more than a third-grade education). “Bringing up the quality and experience level for workers is a goal and it will take time,” he said. In order to retain employees, the Strauses offer competitive wages, health and dental insurance, a simple IRA option, one to two days off each week, paid vacation, and safety training. They also offer incentives for education for bilingual employees and for car-pooling.

The price of feed has risen 80 percent since December 2007, which has increased prices for dairies, while the price of milk has inched up 3 to 5 percent and is unlikely to increase much more. Too much conventional milk and more than enough organic milk are already on the market. The dairy and creamery are looking to reduce costs and gain efficiencies. Given that they produce a high-end product, they also keep in close contact with buyers to ensure their continued market position. Albert noted, “If we had not gone organic, we would not be in business now.” The commitment to organic is strong: “We’re an organic company, not a conventional company with an organic line.”

Organic certification is central to the success of the Straus Family Creamery. They use two different certifiers—Marin Organic Certified Agriculture for the dairy and California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF) for the creamery. Because the needs of the two enterprises are different, Albert recently switched the creamery certifier to CCOF, which he sees as “more proactive” in areas that matter for that business.

The certification process requires annual documentation of practices and inspections (now yearly, but the frequency might increase), but overall Albert finds the procedures manageable. He notes national organic standards and dairy industry standards sometimes conflict.

According to Albert, organic certification requires a different mindset for the farmer: “It changes the tools in what you can use and you have to think about things differently.” That means different feeding; different animal care; and a more proactive approach to herd health, which includes keeping bedding clean and dry, avoiding feeding problems, and relying on alternative medicinal approaches.

A particular concern has been verification that his organic feeds are free of GMOs. While testing is not common in the United States, he said, “We’re not the first to do this. The European Union, Japan, they do it.” After finding that a quarter of the supposedly organic corn he had purchased showed GMO presence, he is now seeking 100 percent compliance for non-GMO feed on his farm and the other two dairies supplying the creamery. He contracted recently for organic triticale from the Central Valley. While he does his own milling, he also now works with a mill in the Central Valley that purchases grain from the Midwest and elsewhere and does the needed GMO testing. Albert sees non-GMO verification as a critical issue overlooked by many in the organic dairy industry: “If we don’t show people it [non-GMO verification] can be done, it just gets buried ….” Milk from the Straus Family Creamery is also certified kosher. In addition, the dairy follows a Marin County grass-fed standard.

“Closing the loop” on resources is a driving concern for the Straus Family Creamery. Energy, water, and waste issues exemplify this concern.

A major project at the dairy is its anaerobic methane digester, which currently produces 90 percent of the electricity used by the dairy and 50 percent of its propane needs. Phase I of the project was a pond retrofit, supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Phase II was the generator and co-generation, done through a 50 percent cost-share with the California Energy Commission. Twice a day, the barn is flushed clean with recycled water and manure is scraped with a tractor toward a holding pond, where decomposition and methane digestion begin. Solids are separated from liquids. The liquids go into a second, covered pond where the anaerobic digestion takes place. The separated manure solids are composted and spread on farmland.

The methane digester system is designed to take advantage of regulations for “net metering,” where meters can run in reverse, so any excess electricity feeds back into the grid. Albert believes that installation of the methane digester has led to reduced manure odors and lower fly populations. He notes that others in the area are now following his lead and installing on-farm methane digesters.

For the last five years, he has driven a plug-in electric car (RAV4), powered by the farm-generated electricity and used mostly for errands. The Strauses are now trying to develop a fully electric truck, including building it and testing it with various sizes and types of load. “Doing something no one else has done takes more money and more time,” says Albert. He recognizes that the innovations entail significant costs and time upfront, but the energy savings can pay back those costs over time. He sees such technological development as exciting and necessary for the farm and creamery. He had some failed experiments with wind generation. His long-term goal is to become independent of imported energy sources.

The dairy farm relies on 10 wells for water. The creamery hauls in its water from Petaluma (about 50 miles away) in its own trucks. Creamery waste water is hauled to the digester on the farm. Water is not that expensive, but the transport and labor to move it represent a notable cost.

There is considerable attention to recycling water from the dairy and the creamery. The Strauses have built a pond in each decade to handle waste water. They now have five ponds, one of which is aerobic. Another pond is anaerobic with a floating cover. It was built using Clean Water Act Section 319 funds from the Environmental Protection Agency ($70,000–$80,000 at 50 percent cost-share), which came through the Resource Conservation and Development Program for pollution reduction. The anaerobic pond is the digester with the floating cover to collect the gas. They have achieved a 99 percent reduction in fecal coliform and an 80 percent reduction in biological oxygen demand in the effluent that comes out of the system. No effluent is allowed to go into the streams.

The Straus Family Creamery is participating in a benchmarking and best practices effort with the State Energy Commission in conjunction with Lawrence Livermore Berkeley Laboratory. The effort aims to create tools for more efficient water and energy use in dairy plants. The Straus Family Creamery hopes to be one of two pilots, which will assess return on investment.

Local environmental quality issues and ensuing regulations have been important for development and change in the dairy industry in the Tomales Bay area. In 1976, California regulations came into effect stating that nothing could enter waterways. As Albert said, “That was the start of it.” Following a study in 1998, Tomales Bay was designated as im-

paired from coliform bacteria. Among the concerns are the health and viability of oysters grown in the Bay. California is about to require nutrient management plans for animals on pasture. Dairies in the area are all required to have nutrient management plans. Farmers must report every autumn to a regional water quality board.

On the farm and in the surrounding area, Albert observes a lot of songbirds and takes this as one good indicator of biodiversity. Albert’s mother, Ellen, played a leadership role in establishing the Marin Agricultural Land Trust (MALT), which has now attained easements on some 42,000 acres in the county. The California Coastal Commission has made it difficult to develop in this area. But land prices have escalated to $10,000/acre, even if they are worth but a fraction of that. Unfortunately, according to Albert, when very wealthy people buy MALT land, it might effectively go out of agricultural production, as their interest is often more in maintaining a “visual corridor” than in maintaining working farms. Management of nearby Point Reyes National Seashore has sometimes also been at odds with retention of farming activities, such as dairy. Thus, competing land use interests clearly influence the future possibilities for farming in this region.

The Straus Family Creamery has seen double-digit sales increases for the past several years. The glass bottle milk is sold in Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico, with the majority sold in northern California. Sales are growing by 30 percent each year. The San Francisco Bay area is a large and important organic market.

Distributors move 99 percent of the milk for the Straus Family Creamery (maybe 96 percent for all packaged products). However, Straus has encountered problems associated with distributors, including ensuring a premium price and making sure the distributor provides priority to moving Straus’ products. Priority for distribution can become an issue, as in the case when a distributor eventually launched its own organic line. The Straus Family Creamery was planning to increase its milk prices in September by 3 to 5 percent. Albert believes that a larger increase would cause them to lose market share. Therefore, they have to work on reducing costs and becoming more efficient.

Straus Family Creamery butter is marketed nationwide through Whole Foods and also goes to some food services, where it is used for making ghee and other specialty foods. Until five to six years ago, the Straus Family Creamery made all of Trader Joe’s private -label milk, but the retailer first took the southern California and then the northern California stores away from Straus. (The farm still sells its own cream-top milk in some Trader Joe’s.) Albert Straus commented on the challenges of working with a major company such as Trader Joe’s, where contracts are not made and loyalties seem sometimes to be limited. The situation with the Straus Family Creamery’s whole-milk yogurt at Trader Joe’s illustrates this point. The creamery had developed a very successful and popular European-style yogurt sold at Trader Joe’s under the Straus Family Creamery label. Trader Joe’s then sought a shift so that the yogurt would be sold instead under the store label. At the moment, yogurt produced at the creamery is marketed 60 percent Straus Family Creamery-branded and 30 percent private label.

The creamery also produces premium organic ice cream that uses only egg yolk as a stabilizer. Flavors include vanilla bean, Dutch chocolate, mint chocolate, raspberry, and coffee. Ice cream has long been a special passion of Albert’s since he won an ice-cream making competition as a student at California Polytechnic State University. He remains involved in the research and development of new products. In the past, products were developed to “our taste.” Recently, more attention has been paid to customers’ tastes and input, as in the case of a new nonfat frozen yogurt.

The company does little advertising, but it is in the process of developing a marketing plan, given new professional staff in this area. It had one bad experience with an advertising campaign in which the retailer did not put its product on the shelf until after the campaign was over. It conducts in-store demonstrations with retailers. Although the Straus Family Creamery participates with its distributors in advertisement and discount programs, it has so far been able to avoid slotting fees. The Straus Family Creamery has thus far not tapped the school milk market, but it sees that market as unlikely in the near term given the creamery’s product costs and the current limitations of school food service budgets: “No way we could sell it. We’re at 40 cents to break even, and it would have to be 20 cents.”

The Straus Family Creamery markets at the San Rafael Farmers’ Market and is considering the Palo Alto Farmers’ Market as well. Overall, however, direct marketing plays a minor role in the marketing mix. The Straus Family Creamery also supplies milk for a nearby artisanal cheese-making enterprise, Cowgirl Creamery. The Straus Family Creamery participates in two large trade shows each year, including West Coast Fancy Food.

In terms of financial arrangements, the farm leases equipment to reduce debt. The dairy also takes out a silage loan each year.

Farming in California requires dealing with a wide range of public and governmental interests. Albert has been involved with a number of groups addressing the agriculture–environment interface. He has been involved in the Animal Waste Committee, a multiple stakeholder group in Sonoma and Marin counties that has been working for some 20 years on increasing dialogue on agriculture and environmental issues in the Bay. He has also been part of the Tomales Bay Agricultural Group, a nonprofit organization that engages all livestock farmers and works to collect data on successful nutrient management practices in the region. Albert is also part of a state and industry Dairy Quality Assurance program that includes the use of voluntary “good agricultural practices” (GAPs). He said, “In California, with more and more people, we’re so populated and this puts the focus on agriculture. Parts of it are good, but it can be very draining. It can be a lot of time at meetings.”

Albert was scheduled to participate in the Slow Food Nation event held in San Francisco late summer of 2008. He attended Terra Madre in Italy with Slow Food International in 2004 and 2006.

The Straus Family Creamery is still a producer member of Marin Organic. However, he expressed some concern to “get all the meanings into one label.” In terms of research partnerships, the Straus Family Creamery has worked with California Polytechnic State University on energy issues and with Chico State University, which has an organic dairy program. It has had fewer interactions with the University of California, Davis. He commented, “Universities are sometimes manipulated in different directions than I would necessarily take.”

Albert is trying to build a business that is appealing to others to become involved, including perhaps his 13-year-old son. He took his son with him to Terra Madre to begin to see the world context in which the dairy and creamery operate. The trip generated excitement and a clear sense of the viability of their enterprises, relative to other like-minded food and farming ventures.

He tries to share information with new dairymen and women interested in his approach. He has answered emails from Alaska, Russia, and other distant places, and he consulted once for a dairy operation in Virginia.

Albert observes how easy it is to become consumed by the business, with its accelerating demands. When he met his wife, he agreed to take one day off a week. Now he tries

to make that two days off weekly, in some effort to achieve balance between work, family, and public service.

Albert’s definition of sustainability includes developing practices in anticipation of issues rather than in reaction to problems. His farm attempts to do that by figuring out ways for the cows to provide energy for the farm through the digester; developing electric vehicles; finding a viable market niche with premium organic products; and conducting on-farm processing.

Key challenges to sustainability have been the availability of water and the need to bring in feed from off-farm. A major asset for the Straus Family Creamery has been its proximity to and links with a burgeoning customer population that wants to support organic or sustainable farming and purchase quality, organic dairy products. The timing of the Straus Family Creamery’s entrance into organics and the location of its dairy are relevant. He also tries to look forward, such as with the electric truck, and to differentiate the creamery from others through products, such as the ice cream and the high quality of the entire product line.

His stance is premised on leadership in experimentation: “I try to show that things work and then people follow.” He also noted, “Being first is part of our story” (for example, the first organic dairy west of Mississippi and the first to use a methane digester in California). He strikes a strong note for innovation and risk-taking: “If I were to do the same thing day in–day out, I’d be stuck.” Albert has begun to think about specific indicators to track and monitor the sustainability of his integrated enterprises.

The Straus Family Creamery faces a decision about relocating the creamery, most likely to another location somewhere between Petaluma and San Rafael. Albert speaks of the importance of having a labor force living closer to the plant and being closer to major roads to enhance product distribution. Such a move will cost tens of millions of dollars. However, a new location would create an opportunity for a more publicly visible site, with public demonstration and education possibilities. Such public interactions on site are not really possible or desirable at the present location.

“Controlling the message” has become increasingly important as the business has developed. A New York Times article several years ago erroneously implied that he used antibiotics, and the article got him into trouble with others in the organic business. Given the rising public interest in food issues, many journalists are looking for stories, and Albert sees the media attention as something that needs to be carefully managed.

To pursue some of the research and development opportunities at his farm and creamery, Albert believes he would benefit from a dedicated grant writer on staff. New, innovative ventures such as the methane digester are worthwhile, but require outside money and support. A new idea for putting a fuel cell on the dairy will also require creative financing.

Albert believes that more research is needed in alternative medicines, animal husbandry, and disease prevention for organic dairies. He also cites the need for more and better bilingual materials for training the growing Spanish-speaking work force in dairy.

Full Belly Farm is a 250-acre certified organic operation raising vegetables, herbs, nuts, flowers, fruits, and livestock near Guinda in the Capay Valley of Northern California. Smaller, independent farms continue to operate in the Capay Valley, a narrow, picturesque area running parallel to the Sacramento Valley to the east and the Napa Valley to the west. The farm runs along Cache Creek, which supplies much of the farm’s water. Full Belly Farm involves an active partnership among four farm owners who live in three households on or close to the farm.

Paul Muller,¹⁶ one of the four farm owners, brings a Swiss Catholic family farming background to Full Belly Farm. He grew up in San Jose on a “drive-in” family dairy farm, which marketed directly to customers in the area. In 1968, in the face of urbanizing pressures on farms in the San Jose area, the Muller family (including Paul’s four brothers and one sister) closed the dairy and moved to Woodland, located about 45 minutes south of Full Belly Farms, where the Muller family bought a 300-acre farm. Over time, Paul’s parents, four brothers, and sister have grown that operation to 10,000 acres producing wheat, tomatoes, and peppers. The conventionally run farm continues to be operated by members of Paul’s family.

Paul started farming on his own, separate from the family farm, in the early 1980s on small rented parcels in the area, while he also was working part-time. He raised seed crops at first and then moved into fresh vegetable crops, after he saw they could be viable. His wife, Dru Rivers, worked then as manager of the University of California, Davis, student farm. Having seen the environmental impacts of agricultural pesticide use, such as farmer cancers, farmworker illnesses, drift from agricultural chemicals such as paraquat, and out of concern when Dru was pregnant with their first child, the couple decided to move higher up in the watershed in 1984. An aging 100-acre almond orchard was for sale. As they could not then afford to buy the farm, they rented it for five years, along with Judith Redmond and her husband at the time. Rule #1 starting out at Full Belly Farm, according to Paul, was “no pesticides—we’re going to figure it out.”

For those first five years, the farm marketed its produce through a local farmers’ cooperative. That arrangement ultimately proved to be a losing proposition for all of the co-op members due to difficulties in coordinating production and the overall small market share for their products. In 1989, when the farm’s landlord died, his widow asked if the four Full Belly Farm partners would buy the farm. In 1989, a multiple family partnership was formed that, with some changes, has continued to the present.

The early years of Full Belly Farm coincided fortuitously with key developments in alternative and sustainable agriculture. First, CCOF, which had formed in the mid-1970s, was

evolving as an organizational presence and influence in California and beyond. Through its involvement with CCOF, Full Belly Farm contributed to the early institutionalization of organic in California, including the state’s legal definition of organic. In those years, restaurateur Alice Waters had begun traveling around northern California, looking for and speaking about the value of fresh organically raised produce. Among her finds was one of

Full Belly Farms’s early crops of sweet corn. In that way, Full Belly Farm connected almost from its start with the nascent movements for both organic and local agriculture. Full Belly Farm is based on a partnership among four people: Paul Muller, his wife Dru Rivers, Judith Redmond, and Andrew Brait, a former Full Belly Farm intern who bought Judith’s former husband’s share. The partnership owns 100 acres, of which 70 acres are farmed, leases another 200 acres, and also operates 70 acres owned by Andrew, of which 30 acres are farmed. The nonfarmed acreage is primarily riparian areas that offer critical wildlife and biodiversity value.

The current business structure allows the combination and integration of the individual skills of each partner. Paul observes that the arrangement is good for a management-intensive operation like Full Belly Farms. Currently, Paul oversees soil management, associated planning and design, and equipment maintenance and repair. Dru manages sales and oversees the animal and flower operations, and the interns who work on the farm. Judith handles financial management, book keeping, computers, and general business operations. Andrew manages farm operations for specific crops and orchards and handles sales to accounts that he has developed. Paul comments that “partnerships are interesting—like a marriage. You’re not king of the heap. You’re constantly working together.” The arrangement has enabled, if not required, the partners to develop strong interpersonal and cooperative skills, which they consider important models for their children.

Their business model has also facilitated the farm partners, their family members, and some workers to introduce new activities and enterprises, continually diversifying the mix. There is room, and indeed encouragement, to experiment with new ventures that are then treated and evaluated as new enterprises that eventually have to survive on their own. New enterprises are assessed by how they fit with the existing farm, how profitable they are, and how well they serve the wider community.

A summer camp run by Paul and Dru’s daughter, Hallie, who studies agricultural education at Chico State University, offers a good example of how a new enterprise becomes part of Full Belly Farm. She came up with the idea, hired her siblings to help, and developed a week-long camp that involves harvesting and cooking foods raised on the farm and participation in other farm activities. The camp has now grown to three one-week sessions, which serve about 80 children who are mostly from families who belong to the farm’s CSA. The camp concept has further expanded to include visits from school children, teachers, and parents during the school year. The educational activities bring in additional income, build stronger relationships with the community and customers, and enrich public understanding of food and farming. Based on her experience developing the camp, their daughter has offered to become the farm education coordinator upon graduation.

Full Belly Farm currently operates 370 acres in total. Of those, 176 acres are owned and 194 acres are rented. Some of the leases are for multiple years; others are shorter term and potentially less stable. The farm involves a complex multiplicity of crops and strategies, based on thoughtful efforts to “design a farm that is ecologically diverse; vertically

integrated—from healthy soil to content consumers; has a stable, fairly compensated workforce; and has year-round cash flow for economic stability.”

Full Belly Farm grows some 80 crops, including a diverse range of vegetables, flowers, herbs, nuts, and tree fruit that create year-round activity. The orchards are interspersed with, and not distant or separated from, the other crops. A typical field size is 3–10 acres.

According to Paul, out of 100 acres at any one time, there are typically 30 acres to vegetables for the current season or being harvested, 30 acres to vegetables for the next season, 30 acres to cover crops or forage, and 10 acres in tree crops, roads, hedge rows and others. However, he stresses that the ratios are not fixed and could shift on the basis of the farm’s needs and market outlook. The rotations, although part of the farming system, are somewhat fluid, with no formal or fixed master rotation plan. Generally, all cropland has a cover crop about once a year. The summer cover crop, drilled in with a 15-inch grain drill, is a buckwheat–cow peas–sudangrass mix. A vetch and oats combination (with some screenings from the wheat that Paul has experimented with and some clover) is sown in mid-September as a typical winter cover crop. The winter cover is managed like a crop; for example, it gets an early irrigation to encourage fall season growth to protect the soil from winter rains.

Paul and his partners typically plant a clover understory in the orchards. It aids water infiltration, sequesters both carbon and nitrogen, and only marginally competes with the crop for water in the summertime. Paul believes that a diversified organic system harnesses a wide range of energy for the system—from beneficial insects and soil microorganisms, to animals that convert complex carbon into meat and fertility, to increased solar gain and carbon sequestration through cover crop management, to increased water infiltration by building soil organic matter. He also stresses that a diversified system creates a more interesting work environment that engages the imagination and energy of partners and of farm laborers.

Full Belly Farm relies on cover crops and animals to provide nutrients for the fields. Winter crops include rape and safflower. Paul and his partners are considering the possibilities of using those two crops for biodiesel. At present, selling safflower oil for $6/qt through the CSA is a better option, although they like the idea of leasing the oil to users who would then return the used vegetable oil to the farm to convert to biofuel.

Paul explained, “When we got here, the place had not been farmed that hard. Frankly, the soils may have been better then because of years of no discing. We started tilling, and learned from the results that we observed. With cover crops, compost, calcium and micronutrient additions, the tilth now is pretty good.” He and his partners try to keep permanent beds, which they work less (in practice, these “permanent” beds go for two to three years). The pattern is to mow any excess material that is standing after crops or after the cover crop and sheep grazing, then turn the beds over with a chisel plow, beddisc, and shaper. They have done some laser leveling on occasion. Conservation tillage could work, but they would need the right cultivars as a cover and issues about how to do conservation tillage without pesticides arise. Tools and knowledge for conservation tillage in their system remain at an early stage, but he sees growing possibilities for conservation tillage on their farm.

A central strategy in managing weeds is to manage moisture, which is perhaps easier to do in California agriculture than in some other places. Basically, weed growth can be managed by first managing moisture. Paul typically discs a field before planting and then pre-irrigates to let the weeds germinate and come up. Then he works the beds lightly again before planting in order to kill germinated weeds. Depending on the crop and weed pressure, these operations might take place twice. During the growing season, Paul and his partners rely on close plantings and cultivation to reduce any subsequent weed problems. They also flame the beds on the carrots to reduce weed competition. In the tree crops and some of the vegetables (like broccoli or leeks), they establish an understory crop such as clover. All the weed control strategies are management intensive and require careful timing.

Paul emphasized that healthy plants generally experience less insect and disease pressure and that timing of planting can matter (neither too early nor too late). He and his partners have encountered leaf curl but rely on cultivar selection to reduce problems. They use lime sulfur and organic copper as a treatment if necessary. Apple blight pressure can be reduced with agromyacin. They have encountered tobacco mosaic on tomatoes, which can be transmitted by thrips and can be exacerbated by tobacco-smoking workers who tie up the tomato vines with hands that may bear tobacco traces. They use GC-Mite (cottonseed oil, garlic oil, clove oil) for thrips, mites, and aphids, if needed. For codling moth on apple, they use mating disruption. In corn, they have used trichogramma releases and Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) formulations, as well as reduced the amount of corn they grow in the dead of summer. They hire a consultant to monitor their tree fruits and nuts (which results in a formal written report). But more informal, ongoing monitoring is also critical for this farming system. The labor crew, for example, is trained to monitor for insect pests: “We tell them they’re an important part of this.” They deal with navel orangeworm in almonds and walnuts by harvesting early and shelling their own nuts. In addition, they count on generalist beneficial predators and parasitoids to help in pest management. Overall, the farm’s insect strategy connects to choices and options for markets and particularly knowing what is acceptable for a given market (for example, walnuts that are cosmetically damaged by walnut husk fly are not sold in the shell).

Animals have been a part of Full Belly Farm since the beginning. They are Dru’s particular passion and something she pushed for (based on his dairy childhood, Paul’s initial inclination was to get away from animals). Animals serve as an integral part of the rotation (for example, sheep “graze off” harvested fields) and a valuable part of the market mix for Full Belly Farm.

The farm keeps 90 ewes. It lambs out every year, and bring about 140 lambs per year to market. CSA customers generally buy lambs live and then pay for the slaughter. Full Belly Farm has been working with local growers to establish a USDA-inspected harvest facility, and it is soon to realize a local cut-and-wrap facility. However, the bureaucratic and regulatory hurdles are immense. The organic wool from the sheep is also a desirable and year-round marketable product. The farm raises a vetch–oats hay for the sheep. It is starting to establish four to five acre pastures for the sheep. One person is designated to manage the

animals; it takes about half of each day to care for them. Netted wire and/or New Zealand fence protect the sheep and lambs from coyotes and dogs, which can be a problem.

Initially, Full Belly Farm raised chickens only for internal use. Then, Paul and his partners saw a neighbor ’s model with chicken houses and started producing chickens as a market enterprise. Starting out with a couple hundred chickens in 2007, the farm now has 400–500 layers on pasture per year.¹⁷ They keep the chickens in mobile coops that they build on the farm. The coops are rotated through the orchards and along the field edges, because shade requirement for the chickens is an issue.

They also keep goats, which are milked for on-farm consumption, one milking cow all year for on-farm use, and a few pigs. Paul describes the full complement of four cows residing on the farm as “a utilitarian slash love relationship.” Seeing and caring for those animals also form part of the camp experiences that Full Belly Farm offers to children.

The nutrient program is fairly crop specific. Paul and his partners use cover crops to provide nitrogen and maintain carbon and microorganisms in the soil. Given the hot and dry weather, the latter two factors require attention. They apply 8–10 tons/acre of purchased compost per crop cycle to each field. The compost comes from Sacramento green waste. It is monitored for pre-emergent herbicides and also heated to a specific temperature. At pre-plant and transplant, they also sidedress with seaweed or liquid organic fertilizers that are on the Organic Materials Review Institute’s products list (that is, OMRI listed^®). They have added gypsum to the soil, but are changing to adding lime at one to two tons/yr. In addition, they will use composted pelletized chicken manure when additional nutrients are needed and for additional nitrogen, based on the plants’ need and field history. Paul notes that many current cultivars are “racehorse” feeders, designed to grow quickly and produce tasty vegetables, but they require a full complement of inputs, including nitrogen. He is looking for cultivars that are better suited to their system of farming and the specifics of their site, and they have done some seed-saving. He asks, “Can we breed plants for high yield on lower inputs or as better nutrient foragers in organic systems?” He sees appropriate cultivars as important to help reduce their current reliance on external (organic) inputs.

Full Belly Farm has deliberately kept its equipment to the minimum needed. Paul commented, “A cutting torch and welder are the best tools for setting out and starting to farm.” Because Paul and his partners got into farming at a time of consolidations, they were able to pick up equipment fairly easily and rebuild and modify it. They have tended toward smaller, cheaper cultivation equipment and do as many repairs as possible on the farm. The farm has eight 80–120 hp John Deere and Kubota tractors and two two-wheel-drive offset Kubotas for cultivation. The goal for the equipment is that it be scaled to the operation, can be serviced by the dealer on which they rely, and is affordable. Paul sees a need for smaller machinery. Although Italy and Asia make some great models, he said, for the most part, such equipment is not readily available in the United States.

Given the fruit and vegetable crops produced, Full Belly Farm needs and has various storage equipment and coolers. However, the farm’s strategy of trying to harvest crops only when the market is secured (that is, picked to order) helps to reduce storage capacity needs.

Energy and biodiversity provide organizing and integrating concerns on Full Belly Farm. Paul commented, “We harvest much more total energy in our system. A diversified, integrated system harvests more total energy on the farm.” In discussing the logic of the clover understories, for example, he added, “We see the interface with pollinators as an underappreciated crop.” Similarly, he pointed to the carbon sequestration possibilities on the farm as a benefit of the farm’s system and approach. Paul stressed that such energy and biodiversity considerations need to be part of “the total economic bottom line.”

Full Belly Farm has tried B-99 biodiesel to power their diesel irrigation pumps, but the fuel has caused problems for seals in fuel injector systems. Now it has made the transition to B-20, which it hopes will avoid similar problems. It has solar panels on its large shop, where important postharvest activities take place. The $100,000 system provides 23 kilowatts and has a grid tie. It powers about 60 percent of packing shed needs—the coolers, ice maker and root washer, and shop. In the long term, Paul and his partners hope to invest in enough solar to meet all of their power needs.

Beyond fuel and electricity concerns, Paul speaks frequently of energy in a broader sense, as in the way that plants growing and infiltrating the soil with their roots are also capturing carbon for restoring the soil.

The riparian areas and hedgerows provide important habitat for native pollinators and wild spaces that add to the aesthetic values of Full Belly Farm. Native plant corridors have also been integrated into wide hedgerows between fields. They intend for those plantings to widen the range of pollen and nectar sources, which directly benefits many farm crops, but also contributes to the broad concerns of enhancing wildlife habitat, biodiversity, and environmental quality in the region.

The farm irrigates with water from Cache Creek and wells if needed. The irrigation system uses drip tape in the tomatoes, which the farm reuses for other crops such as melons. Sprinklers are used in the orchards and other crop fields and have the ability to shift to micro-sprinklers (very little flood irrigation is used). Cache Creek and several wells supply the farm’s water. There have been no significant recent concerns about quality or quantity of water.

Paul stressed that beyond the strong philosophical and ecological values that guide Full Belly Farm, ultimately “we have to grow something we feel tastes better and has a better shelf life.” He also recognizes the importance of “growing what the market wants, rather

than just what we like.” In its marketing, Full Belly Farm emphasizes both the freshness and great variety of the products. The farm has a diverse mix of direct-market and wholesale outlets. It sells to 15 restaurants and at 3 farmers’ markets in the region. It also sells 1,500 CSA boxes of fresh produce per week that are delivered to locations in the East Bay, South Bay, San Rafael, Sacramento, Davis, Woodland, and Esparto. (The Bay area is about 100 miles away.) In addition, it sells to Whole Foods stores in Mill Valley and San Rafael, Whole Foods Wholesale, and a number of other wholesale accounts.

Because the farm has a relatively large full-time labor force, it can grow and handle its very wide diversity of crops and products. For example, it can generate $50,000/acre gross on flowers, because of the availability of labor to cut, handle, and bunch the flowers. It is also able to service a large CSA clientele. As fruit and vegetables are packed, it can efficiently and systematically take culls and process them as sun-dried products—from peaches to onions. The labor force enables Full Belly Farm to reduce loss from cullage and also extend the market window with differentiated products.

Harvesting proceeds to custom-fill orders, which reduces the need for storage because only what the market needs and wants is picked. That strategy mostly eliminates the undesirable situation of being forced to sell what has been picked in less than profitable markets. The day’s picking schedule is laid out on a large chart in the packing shed at the beginning of the day. The chart precisely organizes each specific customer order and which staff person is responsible, with the exact amounts of each crop identified for harvesting, cleaning, processing, and loading. For wholesale, the orders can be palletized for hauling in refrigerated trucks. Paul noted that refrigerated trucks have been a welcome addition, because they allow earlier loading, resolve some hazard analysis and critical control points concerns, and improve the work experience.

A recent innovative twist on the CSA began in the summer of 2008: CSA-style “wellness boxes” of food for 100 employees at a firm in Palo Alto. Paul is considering how to direct this market niche toward its potential to support sustainable agriculture development. Firms committed to wellness for their employees could be encouraged to appreciate the links to local and regional agricultural land use, possibly by investing in the land resources for new sustainable farmers in the Capay Valley.

The sheep have proven to be another profitable and multifaceted microenterprise. Wool is sent out for making into yarn, which is sold under the farm’s own label. It costs $5/skein, and Full Belly Farm can sell the yarn for $8–$9/skein. Fleece hides are tanned in Bucks County, Pennsylvania; Full Belly Farm can sell the hides for $150 each.

Considering the farm’s various food products, Paul indicated that focused attention on flavor and freshness relates to its marketing approach. He pointed to remarks from a very satisfied CSA member who said, “My kids didn’t eat tomatoes, but they love your tomatoes.” He noted the sophistication about wine, and speculated that similar things can be done for other crops, identifying superiority in taste and nutrition.

Full Belly Farm is concerned about the “fair price” for its products. Although not an exact formula, arriving at a “fair price” involves consideration of the current market price, farmers’ market price, and the conventional and organic wholesale price. Fair also means an accounting that considers the sustainability of the system, and necessary compensation to, and investment in, soil, farm biology, health care for farm employees, and the long-term vitality of the farm.

Initially, buying the farm required a co-signature from Paul Muller ’s father. Purchase of the farm was paid off in the first 10 years, because Paul and his partners were “aggressive in choosing to be out of debt as quickly as possible.” Since then, the partnership has deliberately avoided taking on new debt, although it has not been averse to making investments in the farm. Paul observed that, “The financial end [of the farm] came together through good management.”¹⁸ After some initial hesitations, the partners have instituted a bookkeeping system that enables them to track cash flow and create an operating reserve sufficient to maintain the farm for multiple months into the future. Maintaining the reserve means they do not need outside production loans.

Workers are essential to the farm production system. They are also integral to the complex social fabric of this farm. The farm employs, at the peak of the summer season through October, about 55 full-time employees. Year round, 25–30 full-time workers are employed. They include entire family units; one extended family has worked at Full Belly Farm for some 25 years. Because of the year-round nature of the production system, the farm can provide stability for its employees and for many, full-time workers through the year. All employees are paid hourly wages with profit-sharing bonuses in August equal to one to three weeks pay.¹⁹ Full-time workers receive health insurance with a co-payment. Workers take three weeks off around Christmas.

Many workers’ extended experience at Full Belly Farm is an asset, enabling flexibility. The workers know how to handle the diversity of tasks that the year-round production and marketing requires. The many tasks in the packing shed provide ways to meet workers’ families’ needs, by creating jobs for workers’ wives, for example. Paul said, “This is work that has some dignity if you give it some dignity.” He added that “part of the reason for diversity on this farm is to create stability for workers.” Multiple crops and enterprises and year-round activity enhance stability for Full Belly Farm workers.

Paul described education as a core commitment of Full Belly Farm: “We want to grow more farmers.” Full Belly Farm conducts a thriving internship program, mostly coordinated by Dru. It began in 1986 when some Israelis came to intern. Now interns apply online and are selected on the basis of their seriousness about a career in agriculture and their ability as self-starters, among other factors. The interns are asked to make a one-year commitment to the farm so that they can see the whole production cycle. Five interns are employed at any one time, and they work on a rotation of five- and six-day weeks. They are paid a salary and provided room and board on the farm.²⁰ Full Belly Farm tries to include one international intern in each group (over the years, they have had interns from places such as Japan and

the nation of Georgia in the Caucasus). While there is no explicit educational curriculum, the interns work directly in all parts of the farming and marketing operations, and they meet with the partners once a week. They are expected to work and to ask questions. They eat breakfast and dinner on their own, and share lunch with all the farm workers. For the amount of management time that the internship program involves, Paul noted with evident satisfaction that somewhere between 15 and 20 interns have since gone on and started their own farms. He explained the farm’s commitment to the internship program: “It’s to stop the hemorrhage of young people from rural America, and to regenerate the farm population through models of successful farm entrepreneurship.”

For the past 20 years, Full Belly Farm has hosted a Hoes Down Harvest Festival (http://www.hoesdown.org/) in October. The event has evolved over the years and represents an effort to develop a wide sustainable agriculture community and deepen relationships among those already involved in Full Belly Farm. Admission in 2008 was $20/adult and $5/child (with age 2 and under free). Different organizations and businesses donate, and the fundraiser also distributes resources back out to local and regional agriculture and resource groups. The event is structured to be kid-friendly. (Paul said that “kids [who come over the years] look forward to Christmas … and Hoes Down.”) Activities include working with lavender, making biodiesel, a watershed walk, and a how-to-prune session. Some 5,000 people might attend. Close to two-thirds of the farm’s CSA members attend. There is optional camping Saturday night and, in 2008, continuing workshops and activities on Sunday at Full Belly and other farms in the Capay Valley. Paul observed: “There’s a hunger for all of this,” and “everything about this kind of agriculture is really exhausting, but really rewarding.”

Connected to the summer camp described earlier, Full Belly Farm has developed an educational activity stream that involves bringing school groups to the farm for two to three night stays, when they camp in the orchard. Dru coordinates that enterprise.²¹ About 8–10 schools engage in the visits, which generally involve third-graders and their parents. Calls to participate have come from as far away as Santa Barbara. Waldorf and some charter schools see the visit as an integral part of their curriculum. Paul stressed the educational value but noted that some bureaucratic regulations on camps might present a barrier and might “be at odds with this need for place connections.” He added, “Enterprises don’t happen sometimes, because rules stifle.” He expressed the need to just get things started while also looking into shifting the rules.

Decisions about land to rent can be influenced by community and economic considerations. For example, at the time of the interview, Full Belly Farm was renting a nearby almond orchard. Paul described that rental as something of “a philanthropic effort” on behalf of the older farmer who owns it but can no longer farm it.

Given the visibility and reputation of Full Belly Farm, Paul noted, “We get a lot of people who are seeking information and advice asking us, ‘How do you do this?’ It is dif-

ficult to answer all of the inquiries, and devote enough time to it. There is an obvious need for an ‘organic’ extension agent.”

The evolution and management of specialty and niche agricultural markets present some concerns. Paul pointed to the recent trajectory with heirloom tomatoes in northern California. Heirlooms became more available, received buzz, and their prices were good. Then a couple of farmers in the region planted a vast quantity of heirloom tomatoes, and the price went down for all farmers. Paul suggested that supply management decisions could be made collectively by farmers, and he observed, “We [the broader farm community] haven’t learned to look beyond our own self interest as narrowly defined by maximum yields in order to integrate social goals—like dealing with the increasing scarcity of farmers and real efforts needed to regenerate both the farm population and rural economies.”

Full Belly Farm relies on making information available to its customers on a regular basis. Ideally, the outreach forges strong relationships, which will be a hedge when food safety scares arise. The farm was not in the market (harvesting tomatoes) during the recent Salmonella in tomatoes scare, so that episode did not much affect it. However, the E. coli outbreak from spinach affected the farm’s sales, as it wasthen in the market selling spinach. Wholesale spinach sales dried up completely, and even sales at farmers’ markets slowed significantly. Although some customers trusted Full Belly Farm and continued to buy their spinach, other customers pointed to USDA’s blanket spinach warnings and criticized Full Belly Farm for even bringing its spinach to sell at those markets. About 5 percent of its CSA customers also objected to receiving Full Belly Farm’s spinach in their boxes at the height of the issue.

Paul’s four children (three are college age or near, and one is still at home) have connected with the farm in different ways. He notes that he and Dru have not pushed the farm on them, but they are drawn by its complexity. A son recently graduated from Humboldt State, for example, is now building and innovating a chicken tractor design for the farm. Paul expressed satisfaction with those experiments, observing that “no intern really knows as much as a farm kid who grew up with all this.”

Paul suggested that few viable models exist to transition into farming and establish new small farm enterprises. Successfully combining production and marketing can be particularly challenging for new fresh produce operations (paraphrased, the question is, “if beginning farmers in the region only get the crummy farmers’ markets, how do they survive?”). His concerns emerge, in part, from watching the challenges experienced by some Full Belly Farm workers who have tried very hard to start up their own farms in the area, but have had particular difficulty finding and managing markets. Networking models (he spoke of creating a “community model”) are needed that can connect beginning farm-

ers with viable markets and customers that larger, longer established farms like Full Belly enjoy. He noted the problems faced by former Full Belly Farm employees who sought to go out on their own, yet encountered struggles in making partnerships work, while balancing the challenges of supporting a family, and also trying to farm and market their crops. Paul stressed the need for creativity in supporting beginning farmers who aim to farm sustainably and in finding better options for them to get a toehold.

Paul sees the need for research into site-specific cover crops and crop cultivars and the development of small, appropriate-scale equipment for vegetable enterprises. He suggested how to do conservation tillage without pesticides is a critical research question, as is the use of composts within a system like the Full Belly Farm’s. Additional research on roller-crimpers and other conservation tillage equipment is also needed. He noted, “The farm is a different crucible than a research station.” Thus, the research needs to be participatory on-farm research that results in viable, practical solutions combined with extension and dissemination of the information gained.

Crop subsidy programs do not figure in the Full Belly Farm system. Although numerous conservation initiatives have been developed on the farm, none occur through government programs.

Integration across diverse cropping systems, a long growing season, a stable and experienced labor force, a steady flow of revenue-generating products, and the ability to include other enterprises that engage and reinforce the farm owners’ relationships with their customer base while generating income have contributed to the sustainability of Full Belly Farm. The service that the enterprises provide and their products and the way they are grown are also important to the community. Given its now substantial record of operation and leadership, Full Belly Farm reaps the benefits of a committed regional customer base.

Paul articulated a need for more deliberate, regional connections to sustainable agriculture: “Make people in urban areas understand where the expectation of abundant food, cheaply priced, takes you. There has been a systematic extraction of resources, fertility, and talent from economically depressed rural areas. The abundance that farmers produce has been their undoing because of the low prices that result from surplus food. It has also been the undoing of the tremendous base of fertility and biodiversity that we inherited—upon which abundance was derived and which we are squandering. There has to be change. The market is not doing that, especially for beginning farmers. There has to be a conscious reinvestment in our food-producing capacity and in the long-term stewardship of agricultural resources.”

The ability to raise and sell crops for most of the year and the incorporation of animal products into the system provide sustained and interwoven opportunities for Full Belly Farm to generate income. The farm has also been inventive in developing new, complementary enterprises, such as the camps, to generate income, while also creating a well-informed

and devoted customer base. At the same time, Paul is the first to note that the distances he and his partners travel to market some of their products do not suggest a sustainable practice. Thus, the dependence on some relatively distant markets remains a challenge.²²

When asked what he saw as most notable about the farm, Paul Muller spoke of many things, but stressed the following: “We have a business and it still works. Projections for the future are in the right direction. Social things are key here, like offering stable employment and having the CSA. We’ve sacrificed some things, sure. But now that we have resources, we want them invested here for the farm and region.”

Peregrine Farm, owned and operated by Alex and Betsy Hitt, is located about 15 miles from Chapel Hill, on the eastern edge of Alamance County, North Carolina. It is a region that remains rural, although under increasing subdivision pressure. The farm’s location near the large, well-educated, and prosperous demographic of the Research Triangle area was critical to the Hitts’ decision to acquire this farm and to their eventual farming success. Some 40 other small farms (three to five acres) operate in the area, all within a 50-mile radius of Chapel Hill.

The Hitts began farming in North Carolina in 1981, shortly after they both graduated from Utah State University, he with a degree in soils and she with a degree in forest recreation. They moved east specifically to begin a horticultural operation and chose that region of North Carolina for its demographics, climate, and proximity to family. Alex credits early mentors in business and in horticulture as instrumental in shaping their planning on how to start and organize their farm. His summer job as a college student at a profitable startup outdoor equipment and backpacking store in Houston exposed him to a successful business entrepreneur. That entrepreneur provided an inspiring model of “bootstrapping” and conveyed the value of developing a written business plan. While at Utah State University, Alex also benefited from training with a horticulture professor who maintained his own sideline U-pick enterprise. The professor ’s farm enterprise gave Alex a realistic first-hand look at small acreage and small capital farming.

From the outset, the Hitts planned to create a self-sustaining farm operation. Not a lot of land was available in that part of North Carolina in 1980, and interest rates were high. They found the farm based on a set of criteria that they had established in creating the business plan. It is a 26-acre parcel that, until 1975, had been part of a larger 108-acre farm that had been pasture and some mixed cropping.

The Hitts worked with an accountant to establish a subchapter S corporation to enable them to finance purchase of the land. They developed a prospectus based on their business plan that eventually reached 200 people (family members, friends, friends of friends). Eighteen individuals invested in the farm, with amounts ranging from $3,000 to $10,000; most investors resided outside of North Carolina.

The Hitts had read many studies (including those of Booker T. Whatley) about self-sustaining operations that, at the time (early 1980s), focused on pick-your-own produce as a particularly appealing and profitable farming option. They began growing 22 varieties of raspberries and thornless blackberries, which they eventually switched over to thorned varieties (for their superior taste) on 4 of the 26 acres. In the process, they also learned the vagaries of the pick-your-own business, which for them proved not to meet the economic projections in the popular media or extension publications. For example, although the Hitts achieved the “car count” they projected for their location, customers generally picked far

less than expected (rather than 10 lbs/car, perhaps only 1 gal/car).²³ The Hitts gradually transitioned to selling their berries wholesale by the flat to nearby shops. They had to learn all facets of wholesale production and marketing—handling appearance, shelf-life, scheduling—that were challenging and, as they determined, still insufficiently profitable for their small operation. They eventually stopped growing all berries except for blueberries, noting with hindsight that they had also brought to North Carolina assumptions from another climate. Over time they moved into vegetable greens and began to rely primarily on the Carrboro Farmers’ Market (Carrboro is a town adjacent to the west side of Chapel Hill) and local restaurant and co-op sales to market the now four acres of vegetables and flowers that they manage.

In the early years of their operation, the Hitts say, “we were willing to live very close to the ground.” They initially lived in a tent on the property. For the first eight years, Alex also worked off the farm as a painting contractor. Running the farm was all consuming: “We didn’t go anywhere or do anything else for 10–12 years.” They gradually built their current house, which sits in the woods a short walk from their four production acres. The investors were all paid off by the end of 12 years.

At present, crop production at Peregrine Farm consists of two acres of vegetable crops (80 varieties) and blueberries and two acres of cut flowers (more than 50 varieties). Alex takes responsibility for the vegetables, the blueberries, and the seasonal work crew of two hired people. Betsy is in charge of the flower business, including cutting every single stem herself.

The farm is divided into quarter-acre sections (100′ × 100′) with 24 planting beds in each section. The division provides the ability for the intensive rotations and cover cropping that are important to the system. Low tunnels occupy one-quarter of an acre, although one-eighth of an acre is planted at any one time—the tunnels are on slides so that they can be moved during the growing season and plantings rotated. High tunnels occupy three-quarters of an acre with only half of that space planted in tomatoes at any one time. They also have greenhouses in which they start raising their transplants in mid-December.

They plant every week, half transplants, half direct-seeded. The small tunnels are started in February. They start in the fields with sugar snap peas and spinach–kohlrabi–beets, and with lettuce (transplants). The busiest planting time is in March and April. They raise all their own transplants in their greenhouse. They then plant tomatoes and peppers, and the high tunnels are for tomatoes. Vegetable planting is usually completed by May because they stopped growing fall greens in 2000. The way they decided to discontinue growing fall greens was typical of the way they make decisions—the greens offered minimal marginal income and, with the additional time in the fall, they were able to spend more effort on preparing land for the next season.

Varieties are selected and retained based on their flavor and not the units of production. New varieties are tried based on suggestions from chefs and customers at the farmers’ market. The Hitts say that it takes three years to learn how to grow new varieties well; they often raise new varieties within the crops that they are already growing successfully.

The entire key to their operation is a tightly designed system of rotations—for fertility pest and crop management. Their system provides the farm with a diversity of crops and the ability to alternate heavy and light feeding crops, and cool- and warm-season crops.

Small tunnel rotations are done on a 12-year cycle; field rotations are done on a 5-year rotation; high tunnels are on a 3-year rotation (tomatoes–flowers–cover crop).

Another key crop management practice that they have instituted is a series of uniform blocks (100′ × 100′) that use the same dimension of landscape cloth, irrigation lines to provide for economies of management, standardization of materials, and the ability to compare the performance of blocks of varieties over time.

The soil on the majority of the farm is a Cecil sandy loam with a porous clay subsoil that is productive and retains moisture—it was formerly in pasture. Some additional bottom land tends to flood; hence, that land is not always in production.

They test the soil in each quarter-acre rotation unit annually. They typically apply dolomitic lime, rock phosphate (for phosphorus and minerals), and potassium sulfate as indicated from the tests. They see phosphorus as their “biggest nutrient to manage.” They also rotate the farm’s turkeys from block to block (blueberries, flowers) to provide nitrogen and phosphorus.

Early on they used composted horse manure; they had tried dairy manure but had trouble with the seeds. They currently apply feather meal on the day of planting their cash crops. They do not use side dressing and apply nitrogen maybe one out of five years. They also add purchased worm castings to the transplant mix.

Regular use of cover crops restores soil fertility and organic matter. They rely on cover crops—two sets of winter cover crops and two sets of summer cover crops, rye–hairy vetch and oats–crimson clover—chosen to maximize organic matter and nitrogen. The cover crops need to be timed correctly. Tomatoes and peppers are raised on a no-till system that relies on crimping the cover.

The Hitts’ biggest pest challenges are vertebrates—rabbits, deer, birds, and coyotes that have become established in the area and can threaten the turkeys they raise. Those animals are the hardest to control. They rely on electric fences around all their fields. They have relatively few insect problems, and they rely on the diversity of the system to retain generalist predators. The main pests are fruitworm on tomatoes, for which they use Bt, and western flower thrips.

To control weeds, they rely on a combination of rotation, cover crops, well-timed cultivation, some hand thinning, and some flame-weeding. They also use landscape cloth on early tomatoes and hot peppers.

The disease management strategies are to break up disease cycles with rotations; use high tunnels for tomato diseases; avoid excess irrigation; and maintain careful field sanitation. The primary issues are foliar anthracnose, bacterial leaf spot, and southern stem blight, which they manage with an organic formulation of Kocide, resistant variety selection, and field sanitation (removing diseased plants). Because of the range of crops on the farm and the amount of flowers grown, they have ample pollinator habitat so they do not have any separate planting to increase diversity.

The Hitts raise about 100 turkeys, half of which are Bourbon Reds and the other half of which are Broad Breasted Bronzes. They began raising turkeys in part to address an insect

problem. They get a premium for the birds at Thanksgiving, but there have been complications in the past couple of years in getting the birds processed. The Hitts have learned a lot about the business, and they believe that they now have a stable processor in the area to handle their needs.

The Hitts’ operation makes use of two “seasonal” employees who each work from March through October about 30 hrs/wk. They work under Alex’s direction and take turns helping with the two weekly farmers’ markets. The workers are provided benefits, but they live off the farm. The housing arrangement differs from other small farms that take on and house “interns” and is a strong preference of the Hitts. All of their employees, who tend to change from year to year, are interested in sustainable agriculture. Many have come from the sustainable agriculture program at nearby Chatham (County) Community College and live in the area. Employees assist with the full range of production and handling tasks. Getting workers to understand and practice an “economy of motion” in those tasks is sometimes an issue.

The Hitts have one small Ford tractor, chisel plow, flail mower, cultivator, and hand rototillers and mowers. They have two small walk-in coolers for the cut flowers and a cool room for handling tomatoes to sort by ripeness and prepare for farmers’ markets. They also have two trucks for delivery to markets.

Given the history of their operation, the Hitts feel that they “were at the beginning of the curve on local foods.” The majority of production from Peregrine Farm is now sold at the Carrboro Farmers’ Market (Wednesday and Saturday) in which they have been involved since 1986. They are required to be at the farmers’ market 27 weeks of the year and note that 75 percent of their gross income comes from those two markets. The rest of their production is sold through Weaver Street Cooperative—a local store with three sites with which Peregrine Farm has had a longstanding relationship—and to a handful of local, chef-owned restaurants. Customers, including the chefs, can and do order items to pick up at farmers’ market, thereby simplifying delivery. The key to their marketing has been to create direct and solid long-term relationships with their customers. Because they can track crops and sales over time, they can make decisions to alter the crop and marketing mix.

The farm was certified organic for about five to six years in the 1990s. Over time they have let the certification lapse, even though they have not changed their practices. The administrative time and expense of certification have small marginal value now that they have a well-established customer base and reputation. However, they can see the value of the certification process in that it provides an incentive for planning, for keeping records, and for tracking inputs, such as manure, more carefully.

Peregrine Farm is very much a partnership between Alex and Betsy Hitt, and the partnership is critical to the success of the overall enterprise. The size of the farm is based on what they can manage on their own with modest hired seasonal labor.

Attention to record keeping has been key to this farm’s operation from the outset. They began with extensive records on Quicken software and later on QuickBooks as the need for more sophisticated records increased. Alex also took a course at North Carolina State University on farm-management record keeping that yielded useful information to adapt for their type of operation. Their records have included, from the beginning, planting, production, and financial records. Record keeping was important initially to inform investors about progress in the business but has become a foundation for the farm’s ongoing monitoring and success.

Record keeping is essential given the need for each production unit to be maximally productive and to manage the biological and marketing diversity on which the operation is based. They use Excel software for recording crop production and planning. In the Excel workbook, they track more than 200 varieties of vegetables and flowers. Turkeys and blueberries are handled as separate enterprises. The recordkeeping system is particularly valuable as a management tool in planning for orders, as an assessment of the value of individual varieties and plots, and in marketing. They are very systematic in their record keeping, and they input data weekly.

Alex noted that their ability to build their own sheds and outbuildings has been particularly important in keeping expenses down and allowing them to add buildings as needed. Alex and Betsy are technically employees of the S-corporation.

Peregrine Farm typically carries very little debt. The Hitts do not take out operating loans but occasionally take short-term loans ($3,000–$5,000) for capital or cash flow in the spring. They had no debt at the time of the interview.

They keep extensive records to make sure that their minimum target of $20,000 gross per acre is met. They have done progressively better each year, recently getting $27,000–28,000/acre. They actively chart trend lines to monitor the economics of each part of their operation. For example, they track labor expenses and try to keep those expenses to 15 to 19 percent of their gross sales.

The Hitts are unsentimental about crops that don’t yield adequate income per acre. They eliminate poor performers and try something else or shift the season, if the strategy can increase income.

Quality of life is an explicit and ongoing priority and consideration underlying many of the Hitts’ decisions about elements and practices of Peregrine Farm.

The Hitts gravitated to the Carrboro Farmers’ Market in part for what they cite as quality-of-life reasons. They noted, “The farmers’ market is our community…. To us, local is the community in which you live, shop, go to the doctor, and it’s basically 15 miles away.”

Both Alex and Betsy have been active in governance of the market that is critical to their business and their community.

For the past five years, they have sent a weekly electronic newsletter to about 300 people. Through the newsletter, they let people know about crops coming in, keep in regular contact with their customer base, and share seasonal pictures of the farm and news from the farm. They do not currently have a website, but are considering creating one, in part “to manage information about them and their farm that is already on the web” at other sites.

They also attend and speak at sustainable agriculture, “slow food,” and other meetings. Alex has served on the board of directors for Weaver Street Market Cooperative and is currently serving on the board of Carrboro Farmers’ Market.

They have not participated in government programs, but they went to the Small Business Administration for help to rebuild their greenhouse after Hurricane Francis. In general, they said, “We were too early, too weird, too different” for government agriculture programs.

The Hitts have many contacts and “good working relationships” with university and extension people from North Carolina and other parts of the country. They are cooperating on variety–disease susceptibility trials with North Carolina State University. Alex remarked, “We go straight to the specialists,” but they also turn to fellow growers at their farmers’ market with questions, “since they are most like us.” Networking in general is important to the Hitts. Betsy has become very active in the National Association of Specialty Cut Flowers. Alex and Betsy attend conferences related to their specializations on the farm.

They have not experienced food safety problems. The scale and care with which they farm, their precise record keeping, the direct control they have over their crops, and their direct marketing to long-term consumers minimize their exposure to food safety concerns. They note that, across the board, food safety protocols such as a national animal identification system would have a disproportionate and negative effect on small farms such as their own.

Half of their previous employees now own farms. The Hitts are very open in sharing information on farming and business management with their employees so that, in a way, the employees are apprentices. They are concerned about where help is going to come from in the future, as fewer people seem available. A gas allowance was provided to workers when fuel costs increased dramatically in 2008.

The Hitts have become more actively involved in the local and regional food movements, including the Southern Foodways Alliance and Slow Food (they have attended Terra Madre in Italy several times since 2004).

Two ponds and an adjacent stream, without much development upstream, provide water for the irrigation system. With careful management, the Hitts seem to have enough water, although they have expressed some concern about quantity. Everything is on drip irrigation—although the drought in 2007 affected establishment of cover crops. May is the month with the highest demand for water.

With the exception of transportation to markets, the Hitts’ fossil fuel demands are minimal. They have been using durable flats for raising transplants and have reusable landscape cloth. They had been using drip lines for about three years at the time of interview.

The Hitts have noted some evidence of climate change in terms of temperature and rainfall. They are thinking about how climate change might shift their planting calendar. They might do less production in high summer, when it is very hot.

Flooding in the bottomlands provided a lesson. They moved that site out of their regular production rotation to reduce risk, and “We got terrible new populations of weed seeds there after that.” Farm transition issues are a major preoccupation for the Hitts, who are in their early 50s now. They are not yet ready to stop farming, but are beginning to think about succession and transition issues.

“Being as diverse as we are has been making us sustainable,” the Hitts said. This idea is key to sustainability and to risk management. “Our system is established or carefully balanced.” Curiously, their very success creates new challenges; they share a sense that farming is not quite as exciting anymore, because in a way they have the system down. The day-to-day operation now is fairly straightforward in terms of knowing what to do.

The Hitts identify labor—and especially quality labor—as the chief barrier to their farm’s sustainability. This is a new time for small-scale farming as a second generation of farmers is coming along. The Hitts and other farmers are facing the issue of farm succession, and many of them do not have children or children who are likely to enter the business.

They feel that society has turned a corner on improving food quality. They have concerns about the economic downturn, which leads them to want to develop even stronger relationships with their customers.

Peregrine Farm has always been a business that was also a farm. Although the Hitts are skilled and attentive farmers, their development of and adherence to a well-designed business plan along with their ability to keep, analyze, and apply an extensive record-keeping system has been very important. From the outset, their habit of careful and regular record keeping helped in their overall success. Their innovative financing system and their willingness to be frugal in the early years allowed them to build a successful operation and to learn from their mistakes. They are proudest of the fact that they have done better financially every year they have been in business; that they have both been able to have full-time jobs on the farm; that half of their employees now have their own farms; and that they are able to contribute back to the sustainable agriculture movement.

Their willingness to do all the work on the farm and be personally involved in the marketing, along with their decision to focus on high-quality projects, has enabled them to develop strong relationships with their customers. They take care to maintain those relationships. The value of their location in proximity to Chapel Hill with its well-educated, prosperous, and socially active population cannot be overstated.

Some advantages in being first-generation farmers and not from the area in which they are farming are that “we always look at things with fresh eyes, and we ask questions.” Rotations and the subdivisions of land into quarter-acre sections with 100′ × 100′ plots makes possible the diversity of crops. The diversification reduces risk from overdependence on one crop, allows for direct marketing of a range of crops over an entire season, and offers opportunities to try small amounts of new crops in response to demand. Rotation is the key to the fertility and soil health programs and also to the pest management regime. A key contribution is the development of a well-defined system of plantings and cover crops along with the systematization and record keeping that is integral to its functioning. This has provided for important efficiencies and, as a result, income. A testament to the value of the system is its adoption by many of the people who previously worked with them and now own farms.

Stahlbush Island Farms, Inc., an integrated grower, processor, and marketer of vegetables and fruit, farms approximately 4,000 acres in three regions in and south of the Willamette River Valley in Oregon. Bill and Karla Chambers acquired their original Corvallis-area farm in 1985, and have expanded and developed their business since then. The business centers on production of high-quality industrial food ingredients, retail frozen and canned fruits and vegetables, and value-added products that are certified either as sustainable (for example, through the Food Alliance) or organic.

Bill Chambers grew up on a cattle ranch in the Willamette Valley, which “started as a hobby and became a business.”²⁴ By the time he was in high school, the family farm was 450 acres, and his family was raising 120 head of cattle (Hereford, Simmental, and Short Horn). Bill’s parents were both entrepreneurs, each having a business in other areas besides farming (one in construction and the other in broadcast and cable television). From his work on the family ranch, Bill says, he first “got the production ag bug.”

Realizing that the returns in cattle were not all that promising, Bill enrolled at Oregon State University (OSU) with the initial idea of becoming a veterinarian. During his senior year, he had studied in New Zealand in an agricultural sciences and management program, which exposed Bill to a different, “more progressive” agriculture. Upon completing his B.S. in agricultural sciences and agricultural economics at OSU, he worked for Farm Credit in Washington State for two years. There, he became immersed in long-term agricultural lending, credit analysis, and appraisal. Bill likens the learning through that work experience to “two informal years of graduate school,” which helped shape his approach to farm business management. He then returned to OSU for formal graduate training, during which time he met and married Karla. Karla holds a B.S. and M.S. in agricultural economics from OSU. After 13 months of graduate school, Bill received his M.S. in agricultural economics.

In 1985, Bill and Karla had the opportunity to purchase the 500-acre Corvallis-area farm that is the core of their current operation. The farm’s owner was keenly interested in seeing his farming operation continue, but none of his own seven children had sufficient interest or the needed skills to take it on. Bill and Karla had some capital to put into the farm, and the retiring farmer was willing to finance them. He was also willing to stay involved as an informal adviser for the first year after the sale as the Chambers transitioned into the operation. His attention to detail and willingness to share information on the history of the farm proved beneficial to the Chambers as they became independent farmers.

The Chambers began with three people doing the production work on the farm—Bill, a mechanic, and a general laborer. The farm had been a conventional operation, raising a

rotation of sugar beets for seed (one year out of five because of problems with unintended “volunteer” plants) and soft white wheat. The farm had used agricultural chemicals extensively, and the availability of agricultural subsidies had influenced cropping decisions. Bill recognized that the crop rotation they had inherited at the farm was not sustainable. The Chambers had a different situation and interests than their predecessor had: “I saw we were taking a lot of risk with that rotation and it wasn’t a good business strategy.”

In the winter of 1986–1987, Bill decided to look closely at the 10 most successful farming operations in Oregon to determine what they had in common. He concluded that the common characteristic of those successful operations was that all had some kind of vertical integration. He reflects: “That gave me a direction to look.” He considered several options, including flower production and specialty grass seed, but determined the returns for neither of those would be good enough. Moreover, he could be held responsible for such things as the genetics of new grass seed varieties, over which he might have little control.

At about the same time, the Chambers got a contract to raise pumpkins for edible seeds (for the snack food market). As the farm incorporated pumpkins for seed into its production system, Bill noted that the pumpkin flesh, which was then typically left in the fields and treated as waste, could be an underused resource. He remembered thinking, “If I could create shelf life for pumpkin flesh, someone might send me money for it.”

That year, 1989, their second child was born. During Karla’s maternity leave from OSU where she then worked, they put together a business plan for frozen pumpkin. Bill made cold-call visits that spring to three major pumpkin pie companies (Sara Lee, Mrs. Smith’s, and Country Home Bakers) to see if they were interested in another supplier of pumpkin. The outcome of the discussions was fairly typical. All three companies expressed interest, but wanted product samples before making a decision or signing contracts. At the same time, the bankers wanted to see committed pumpkin buyers before financing a processing plant.

Bill and Karla came up with a 10-year plan to incorporate pumpkin processing into their operation. The farm was by then financially stable with the wheat and seed sales. They refinanced the farm, and built a small pumpkin-processing facility beginning in early summer 1989. Their business plan included the production of wheat and pumpkin for seeds and flesh. It also included building a plant to process the flesh (using an existing building and finding used equipment for everything but the refrigeration). They decided to let the farm pay for that experiment for four years, at which time they would evaluate and, if need be, shut down the processing plant and sell off the equipment. The summer they built the plant, Bill farmed all day and worked on the processing plant from 7 PM to 2 AM. The family included two young children then, and Karla worked full-time in a faculty position at OSU.

Their goal for the first year was 500,000 lbs of frozen processed pumpkin flesh. However, as Bill put it, “Murphy [as in Murphy’s Law] lived in this plant” that first year. Parts broke and would sometimes take as long as a week to be repaired. They only managed to produce 55,000 lbs of frozen pumpkin flesh in the first year. However, the production was sufficient to provide samples to the three pie companies. Mrs. Smith’s was very impressed by the high quality of Chambers’ pumpkin flesh, which had none of the flaws present in pumpkin from its existing suppliers. The company signed a contract for 2.2 million lbs.

Today, pumpkin remains a mainstay of Stahlbush Island Farms’ production, running 60–75 days per year at the plant. Because pumpkin does not use the plant fully, the Chambers soon ventured into processing other vegetable products, including carrot puree and broccoli puree. As they identified and developed additional markets for industrial food ingredients, Bill said, “We’ve always had a focus on quality. ‘Quality is like beauty—in the

eye of the beholder.’ We try to figure out what is important to our customer.” He noted that while vertical integration might not be “the fashion today” in sustainable agriculture, “for us it has been absolutely critical” and, indeed, a large part of Stahlbush Island Farms’ success.

Stahlbush Island Farms now includes three farm locations in Oregon totaling 4,000 acres, 1,500 of which are owned and 2,500 of which are rented. Of that total, 3,500 acres produce vegetable crops and the remaining 500 acres are in small fruit crops. The crops raised include perennials—blueberries, blackberries, strawberries, and rhubarb—and annuals—spinach, broccoli, corn, peas, and pumpkin. The operation includes 25,000 square feet of greenhouse space.

All farmland for Stahlbush Island Farm is now Food Alliance-certified. Of that, about 30 percent is also USDA-certified organic, and another 5 percent is in transition to organic certification. The farms in the Corvallis area include three separate sites and total about 2,000 acres (500 of which are rented).²⁵ A farm southeast of Eugene in the McKenzie Valley involves about 1,000 acres; that land is rented and farmed as sustainable. Another farm near Medford in the Rogue Valley is 1,000 acres and all certified organic. Most of Stahlbush Island Farms’ rented lands are on 5–10 year leases. Bill points out, “It is way less expensive to lease land than to own it.”²⁶

All production decisions at Stahlbush Island Farms (for example, varieties and irrigation) are guided by the demands of customers, whether buyers of industrial food ingredients or they themselves “buying” ingredients for their own retail lines. Such buyer requirements in part stimulated the move to sustainable farming. In 1991, their first customer for puree was a baby food company. The Chambers learned that the cucurbit family has the propensity to pick up chlorinated hydrocarbons from pesticides. Through soil sampling, they learned their soils had persistent and inadvertent residues, an externality of former farming practices. Residues in some fields exceeded acceptable levels for baby food. That experience helped motivate the Chambers to move their farming practices in more environmentally sustainable directions. In the late 1990s, they became the first farm certified sustainable by the Portland, Oregon-based Food Alliance, a third-party certifier.

Given the size and complexity of their operation, Stahlbush Island Farms has experimented with different ways of structuring farm management over the years. They have tried assigning employees responsibilities based on specific parcels of land, on specific activities (such as irrigation), and on specific crops. They currently organize farm management separately based on lands with annual crops and lands with perennial crops, but Bill notes that this may not be the final or only way to manage the operation.

The soils in the Corvallis area and near Eugene are alluvial soils—well-drained river bottom land of sandy to silty clay loam to silty clay, whereas the soils southeast of Eugene

are rockier. The soils near Medford are 100 percent volcanic and quite variable, ranging from mucky clay to sandy soils.

Bill noted that he was taught that soil is a “mineral sponge” to be managed according to a sort of input-output model. He now rejects that model, stressing that he now sees “soil as an ecosystem that needs to be managed.” An ecosystem perspective on soil better suits his idea of improving the farm. The Chambers’ approach to farm sustainability aims to protect and improve soil health and the health of water systems in the Willamette River Valley.

The fertility program for Stahlbush Island Farms relies on university (OSU) recommendations, but the Chambers are “backing off from that some.” The farm conducts soil and tissue analyses annually on the principle that “unless you measure it, you can’t manage it.” It uses an extensive amount of manure litter from the layer industry in the North Willamette Valley. A company cleans chicken houses and composts the material for a year. Stahlbush Island Farms buys that product, which provides the highest nutrient density per ton for the cost of transport. Bill said, “For organic fertilizer, it’s all about the freight.” Moving composted manure can be costly, but Bill has found that for some crops, this method is cheaper to raise them organically. The Chambers also aim to have winter cover crops on all their cropland each year, although on some occasions, crop timing and weather has prevented covering 100 percent of the land (for example, pumpkin harvest)

The crop rotation for the farm is based on the principle of two years of vegetable crops and one year of dryland or hay crop. Multiple variations are used, depending on the specific farming system. For the organic fields, the rotation changes to six years, with two years of alfalfa hay following four years of vegetable crops. The dryland crops are typically soft white wheat, annual ryegrass, or perennial ryegrass. Between the vegetable crops, a winter cover crop is always grown, which is a combination of grass or winter cereal and a legume. The cover crop is then incorporated into the soil during tillage for the next year ’s vegetable crop.

Bill said that “weeds are where we struggle the most.” The farm uses steel first. All cultivating tractors are RTK (real-time kinematic) GPS (global positioning system) guided. The decision to move to GPS was both to reduce pesticides and to cultivate more reliably. Bill sees benefits in how GPS “breaks the human interface in operating the tractor.” GPS guided tractors allow the workers to cultivate more easily at night, make quicker passes in the field, and use less fuel. They also turn more efficiently, requiring 5 percent less space than a conventional tractor for turning. Stahlbush Island Farms has developed and fabricated its own cultivation implements in order to cultivate closer to the row, down from a 6-inch gap to a 1.5-inch gap. It, of course, uses different cultivation regimens for its various crops. Herbicide use often depends not just on the crop, but on the specific customer for that crop. Squashes are the most difficult crops for which to control weeds.

Bill noted “for the most part we just tolerate” insect pests. They monitor corn for root-worm and earworm and “can mostly tolerate those two.” On broccoli, the Chambers use Bt and pyrethroids for lepidopteran pests. For aphids, they interplant cilantro to attract

predators. With their blackberries, they are particularly concerned about orange tortrix; they monitor carefully and end up spraying about one out of three years. The farm has no calendar spray program, but use monitoring and measuring of problems to make appropriate cost-effective decisions.

The Willamette Valley is dry enough that disease problems are not great. Disease management is probably most intensive on cane berries, on which they use lime sulfur and Bordeaux mixture.

Rainfall varies considerably across the three farm locations, with the Corvallis farm area receiving 40 inches/year while the Medford farm area receives 19 inches/year. Therefore, Stahlbush Island Farms uses every form of irrigation except flood irrigation, given the wide range of crops raised at the multiple locations. The preferred form is drip, used on all perennials except rhubarb and strawberries. The Chambers are trying to eliminate big guns because of the energy costs and land lines because of the labor involved. They currently use pivot and liner irrigation on their other acreage and are just starting to experiment with annual drip tape. Water continues to be plentiful; they have had only one year where water rights were an issue in the regions of their farms. Even so, water in the Willamette is fully allocated, and developing additional irrigated land would be difficult because of concerns about salmon. Two-thirds of the water used in the Corvallis area comes from the river.

Crop-specific and efficient equipment is critical to the functioning of this vertically integrated operation. Stahlbush Island Farms now fabricates most of its own plant and field equipment and has done so for a number of years. The operation has 13 fabricators, a draftsman, and an engineer on staff. For example, employees developed innovative in-row cultivation equipment with sensors for crops like pumpkins. Precision and custom equipment is designed to enhance the productivity of the operation overall. Some new and specially designed equipment, especially for harvesting, reduces hired labor requirements.

Because of the size of the operation and the amount of equipment required, the Chambers can order equipment to their specification from dealers who are eager for their business. For example, at the time of interview, they had just taken receipt of several new tractors, specifically built for their operations.

Water is visually prominent, especially at the original farm site in Corvallis, which is an island in the river. A braided water system, constantly changing, can flood in winter. Rains can be significant at some times of year. Before World War II, the original farm site flooded frequently and dramatically, such that people could not really live there. When the Army Corps of Engineers built dams, the land could be more readily farmed.

For Stahlbush Island Farms, water for irrigation is a more significant concern than water for the processing operation. Crops are irrigated from surface water. Well water is used in the processing plant. All water in the processing plant is used three times: 1) as a coolant; 2) for washing fruits and vegetables; and 3) recycled again for use in irrigation.

Any organic residue picked up in the processing plant through that cycle thus goes back onto fields. This sequence conforms to Bill’s view: “There’s no such thing as garbage, just underutilized resources. The question is how do we make use of them to create value?”

Bill noted that they have virtually lost wild bees in the areas where they farm, although he recently found two wild hives. They hire bees to pollinate their cucurbits and berries.

At the time of the interview, Stahlbush Island Farms was actively addressing ways to use waste products from processing and turn them into biogas for the production of electricity. Construction was underway on an on-site digester at the main Corvallis farm.²⁷ With the processing plant running 24 hrs/day, 365 days/year, it uses about 750 kwh/day. The Chambers hope to produce two times the electricity they currently use. Bill refers to the energy cycle on the farm as solar energy processed through plants and then through the digester. He sees the potential for “electricity becoming another crop of the farm.” The goal for the farm is to eventually be better than carbon neutral.

When Bill purchased seven tractors in the summer of 2008, his decision was guided, not by lowest capital cost, but by the tractors with the best fuel economy. He is also interested in compressed natural-gas vehicles, and he is beginning to look into them for the farm.

Stahlbush Island Farms is structured as a privately held corporation, with Bill and Karla as the only stockholders. The partnership between them is at the very heart of the enterprise. As Bill says, “My wife and I are business partners and life partners. Her skills and attributes are almost a perfect complement to mine. She does marketing and short-term administration. I do farming, operations, and long-term administration.”

The guiding principle for the company is to provide quality for the customer by finding out what is important to the buyer. Bill and Karla used to visit customers face to face once a year. Stahlbush Island Farms now has six full-time staff in sales and marketing, each with a portfolio of customers to remain in contact. Karla oversees the establishing and maintaining of strong working relationships with customers through regular communications. Bill notes that Stahlbush Island Farms will grow different varieties as requested by its customers or process with more or less solids as the customer specifies. The Chambers, however, will also tell a customer when something cannot be done and still be a quality product. The business is very demand driven, yet guided by the Chambers’ knowledge and expertise. The Chambers have found that giving customers choices can produce better business decisions. For example, they always try to give two samples to customers and then ask which they like better and why. That approach is part of working toward customer commitments and contracts: “We don’t grow it if we don’t have a market for it,” Bill said. “First we get the contracts, and then we plant.”

Stahlbush Island Farms sells into three food market segments: 1) industrial food ingredients; 2) retail; and 3) food service, but it has targeted the first two the longest and most actively. Its industrial food ingredients segment, which began with the frozen pumpkin, has now expanded to processing 42 different crops into more than 300 different SKU’s sold domestically and to export markets. The retail segment is a smaller, but growing part of the business. Retail includes the frozen sustainable fruit and vegetables “Stahlbush Island” brand, canned organic “Farmers Market” label (including canned pumpkin, canned sweet potato, and canned pie filling), and, most recently, a canned organic pet food brand, “Nummy-Tum-Tum.”²⁸ The development of the retail brands creates the greatest value for the business. The food service segment has been the last to be developed, but it is now gaining attention with focus on local restaurant chains and food service distributors.

Twenty percent of the farm’s business is exported, going to about 20 countries. Japan is its major export market, and China is one of growing importance. It also does some spot marketing through brokers but generally finds that using brokers inhibits communication with customers. Stahlbush Island Farms attends and exhibits at food-trade and natural-food shows.

The processing plant, which operates year-round, functions, according to Bill, as a “job shop processor.” He said, “We are not usually the low-cost producer. We seek the customer where price is not the key deciding factor.” As a result, Stahlbush Island Farms only plants what it has sold under contract, which eliminates sales and price risks. Stahlbush Island Farms will accept a waiting list for orders of its products. Despite their positive experience with contracts for industrial food ingredients, the Chambers also moved into the retail market “where we could be our own customer.” Bill noted that with industrial buyers, the average life span of a product is only three to four years before the product is discontinued. Developing its own retail lines provided a way for Stahlbush Island Farms to gain some control over the costs of that constant product churning on the industrial side of the business.

Stahlbush Island Farms occupies an ultra high-quality market niche, which has become important to avoid potential recalls of its food products. The company brings in outside auditors to assess operations for food safety, and its industrial customers can also (and do) send in auditors. The company goal is 98 percent or better out of 100 points for good food-safety performance. It typically achieves that level or better when audited by a private food-safety auditing firm. The Chambers’ approach is to “take food safety and push it back down on the farm.” They also regularly audit the farm with their own internal quality-control group, ensuring that they meet Good Agricultural Practices.

Sustainable and organic certifications have been important for Stahlbush Island Farms as ways to increase the overall competitiveness of the operation by addressing the demand of quality-oriented market segments.

Stahlbush Island Farms is a significant employer, with 120 full-time year-round employees and another 340 either part-time or seasonal workers. Bill’s goal is to provide 10 months’ full-time employment for most of the workers, which involves continually looking for things that can be done year-round.²⁹ Hispanics make up the majority of seasonal labor at Stahlbush Island Farms. In Oregon, about 70 percent of employees in natural resource industries, including agriculture, are Hispanic, according to a recent study. The diversity of the crops raised enables Stahlbush Island Farms to provide work over a large portion of the growing season and to make best use of the human resources engaged in the operation: “I’ve tried to select crops that allow us to have employment as long through the season as possible and a diversity of things for those people to do.” In perennials, workers might prune blueberries in winter, then harvest rhubarb, then harvest strawberries, then harvest blueberries, then train blackberries, for example. Employees often go back and forth between work on the farm and in the processing plant, although some workers specialize on particular tasks. Bill mentioned, “A lot of business people think of labor as an expense. I think of them [laborers] as an asset. People are important to me.”

The Chambers recruit nationally for skilled and professional positions, but they are able to heavily rely on the Corvallis area, which, with nearby OSU and other companies, is a hub for scientific and technological expertise. The farm also employs two in-house crop consultants as technical specialists for the farm operation.

Among other community activities, the business supports youth efforts like 4-H/FFA. Bill noted approvingly, “4-H supports entrepreneurship and kids learning responsibility.” In 2008, Karla bought 45 animals from 4-H/FFA members at the county fair, and she used her influence to encourage others in the community to purchase the animals as well.

The Chambers receive many queries from other farmers and prospective farmers and have been happy to share information about their farming practices with anyone who asks. They view information about the processing plant as more proprietary. In addition, both Bill and Karla have served in many different faculty, leadership, and training roles at OSU, which permits them to reach others about entrepreneurship in agriculture and the business of Stahlbush Island Farms. Karla currently serves on the Federal Reserve Board of San Francisco. She has served on the boards of various regional and local foundations and organizations as well. Bill has served on local school and several corporate and district improvement boards. The couple’s work and service have been recognized with awards such as the 2000 U.S. Presidential Award for Leadership in Sustainable Agriculture and 2001 Agribusiness of the Year.

The Chambers’ experience of supplying ingredients for the baby food market in the early 1990s helped motivate their turn to more sustainable farming practices. Rethink-

ing his received assumptions about pesticide use, Bill saw externalities for which society was not paying. He emphasizes five things about pesticide use that came to concern him: 1) pesticides often lower the yield of crops receiving applications; 2) pesticides don’t always stay where you put them; 3) pesticides have negative effects on beneficial soil microorganisms; 4) applying pesticides poses health risks, and Bill does not like asking someone else to do something that he does not like doing himself; and 5) pesticide residues in foods worry consumers, and therefore “less is more.” In 1992, the Chambers set a goal to eliminate pesticides from their operation in five years, although, Bill noted, “We failed in this.” The cost of organic nutrients was a factor, but he also decided complete elimination of pesticides was perhaps an inappropriate and nonsustainable goal.

According to Bill, Stahlbush Island Farms sees sustainability in terms of three main criteria: profitability, responsibility with resources (such as soil, water, air, wildlife, and people), and taking care of customers. The Chambers’ goal is to continually make improvements in all three areas.

Bill noted the importance of finding the balance between profitability and the unsustainability of pesticides. He has developed a rule of thumb he calls the 2 × 4 × rule, which requires thinking through alternatives. For example, if the alternative to a pesticide is no more than twice the direct cost of a pesticide application, he will use the alternative. If the alternative is four times the cost of the pesticide application, he will use the pesticide, carefully choosing the one that is least harmful to the environment.³⁰

Stahlbush Island Farms has sought to create a culture of continual innovation to reduce costs, improve quality, and enhance the environmental and resource conservation aspects of its operations. The Chambers helped found the Willamette Farm Improvement Association (this group no longer exists), which was funded by USDA-Western SARE. They work extensively with OSU, participating in plant breeding trials for berries and studies on insects and cover crops. They also conduct their own internal research on the farms, although this is more informal, through deliberate experimentation, rather than formal, structured scientific research. Bill sees two categories where further research is especially important: 1) soil biology, and especially nutrient availability; and 2) the application of electronics to agriculture (for example, sensor technology to distinguish between weeds and crops in cultivation equipment).

Stahlbush Island Farms has not availed itself of government conservation programs or farmland protection programs. Bill cited the transaction costs (“the cost of dealing with the paperwork creates friction greater than the value from participating”) and reduced flexibility (program participation could limit future options) as reasons why not. The Chambers support country-of-origin labeling, in the belief that consumers deserve to

know where their food is coming from and can make better choices for themselves with that information.

Perhaps the most distinctive feature of Stahlbush Island Farms is its tight integration of production, processing, and marketing within the operation. The Chambers see their model of “vertical integration” as a strategy for better managing the risks inherent in agricultural operations. The stability allows Stahlbush Island Farms to produce a consistent quality product for distinct sets of valued customers. It also allows for continual innovation on the production side to increase the farm’s efficiency and profitability. Ultimately, Bill thinks of their sustainable farm operation as a farm that does processing and not as a processor that happens to farm.

This vertical integration strategy distinguishes Stahlbush Island Farms to some degree from other sustainable farming enterprises in the region. It certainly reflects the vision and evolving business plan of Bill and Karla Chambers. At the same time, their vertically integrated enterprise has been facilitated by particular circumstances of time and place. For example, the site of the original Corvallis Farm was subject to an exception in land use rules that allowed them to locate a plant for processing their own product. Without that provision, it might have been more challenging to start, develop, and expand their complex “vertical integration” model.

The strength of the company and the key to its business sustainability lie in having carved out a very stable market in which they are a contract supplier of high-quality products. The company’s strategy enables the Chambers to ensure a price and market for their crops as they are planted, helps them know how to modify their production to meet a specific market, and provides them the security and flexibility to carry out environmentally sound production practices and long-term improvements to the farm.

From his experience, Bill has distilled three pieces of advice for others who want to build on the lessons of Stahlbush Island Farms:

• Know your real customer.

• Grow what your customer wants.

• Understand costs.

Owned and operated by Jack Erisman, his wife Jeannie, and their sons, Goldmine Farm is located in Shelby and Christian counties in central Illinois. Much of the 2,200 acres of land that the Erismans farm in their integrated crop and livestock operation is located in the southernmost, transitional zone of the Shelbyville Moraine. The soils are not the heaviest or deepest in the state, but they are very productive, on the southern edge of the guaranteed Corn Belt. The area remains highly oriented to the agricultural sector and farming (for example, nearby Assumption is home to GSI, the largest grain storage bin manufacturer in the country, and home to a large, long-established John Deere dealer). However, farm population in that area, as elsewhere in the Midwest, has dramatically declined in recent decades. For example, when Jack started farming in the 1960s, each township averaged roughly 30 farmers. He guesses that there are presently fewer than 10 farmers per township.

Jack followed his father into farming in this area of Illinois. His father didn’t finish seventh grade, but “he was a smart man, a go-getter. People came to him to plant their land.” Over time, his father acquired farm properties, sometimes worn-out farms that no one wanted that he gradually improved. His father was concerned about soil conservation and bought a Graham-Hoeme chisel plow in 1942. Noting that the terrain had historically been somewhat wet, Jack recalls, “Dad was also a great drainage guy” who invested so much into tiling their farmland in the 1950s that Jack’s mother complained. The farm prospered under Jack’s father ’s management approach, and he became one of the largest acreage farmers in the area.

Jack attended a Jesuit boarding school in Wisconsin during high school. This was followed by stints in college (for liberal arts study), the Army, and back in college (studying agricultural engineering at Colorado State University). Before finishing, he returned home in 1963 to farm with his father. The operation then involved hogs, a small herd of beef cattle, and crops. His father quit farming actively in 1964. Jack was able to buy four or five pieces of his father ’s farm machinery at the resulting auction and took over the farm. During a period of about four years starting around 1966, Jack also farmed in Macon County, Mississippi (cotton, corn, and soybean). The Erismans invested in land in the black prairie of eastern Mississippi because farmland in Illinois in that period had become “untouchable.” Jack found being away from his home state and facing solo farming responsibilities in a different social context invigorating: “You can’t go to school and learn what I learned there.” He married during his Mississippi farming years. Despite his success and the freedom he felt farming in Mississippi, the commute between Mississippi and Illinois made the arrange-

ment difficult to sustain. When he finally divested of the farmland in Mississippi around 1973, he was able to invest in additional land for the operation in Illinois.

In Illinois, during the 1980s, Jack was also a small fertilizer and farm chemical dealer in partnership with a neighbor. The Illinois farm included a farrow-to-finish hog operation (producing about 1,000 hogs/year) up until the late 1970s. Faced with challenges of finding labor to tend the hogs and his own misgivings about the growing trend toward total confinement operations, Jack quit raising hogs to focus on crops and cattle. It was in those years that his farming began to depart from “conventional” models. Beginning in the 1970s and through the 1980s farm-crisis years, he worked on reducing expensive chemical inputs to the farm and experimented with other ways to improve soil quality, including conservation tillage. In the late 1980s, he began transitioning his farm to organic production.

Of the 2,200 acres that Jack farms, about half is rented and half is owned. About 300 of those acres (200 of which are tillable) is land that he custom manages for his sister ’s five children (including doing the organic certification). Another 160 acres have been put back in permanent pasture (for the past 15 years) at the “home place.” An additional 80 acres is also in permanent pasture. Certified-organic production is central to the current farm operation. When the Erismans began the transition to organic in 1988, few large-scale cropping operations were organic.

Typical annual rainfall on the farm is 37 inches, although it was already over that level at the time of the interview in October 2008. The land on Goldmine Farm is fairly drought tolerant due to its good water-holding capacity. Wet years prove more problematic for the organic production than drought years.

The soils at Goldmine Farm are generally silty clay loams—moderately fine textured and somewhat poorly drained. Most are Herrick, Virden, and Harrison association.

The goal on Goldmine Farm is to enhance fertility by orchestrating the potential of components and processes inherent to the soil system. Attention to nitrogen fixation and the contribution of cover crops are important. Jack annually runs both soil and tissue analysis and aims to balance micronutrients such as manganese sulfate, zinc sulfate, sulfur, and boron, not just nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. In developing his fertility program, he has looked carefully at what limits the uptake of nutrients and at the level of nutrients. He worked with a private consultant to index those factors and has developed a fertility program that can vary annually, rather than a set system. For example, the calcium program applies lime that varies by the crop that is grown on that land and by the base saturation for the soil in a particular field. Jack observed that understanding and improving fertility on the farm has been a “constant learning process…. We used to assess only soil chemistry. We also need the biochemistry.”

The farm has a nutrient management plan on file with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, but the focus of the farm’s plan is more on erosion and erosion control (consistent with the “T by 2000” emphasis at the time the plan was created).³² Given the movement of the beef cattle from field to field, the animals generally self-spread their

manure. Jack builds some compost piles, typically after accumulations resulting from the cattle feeding in one place during the winter.

Goldmine Farm produces about 1,100–1,300 acres of row crops annually, focusing on corn, soybean, some small grains, and hay. When he still farmed conventionally, he had a five-year rotation (such as corn–beans–corn–beans–wheat/clover), so moving to a longer seven-year rotation was not a big departure. Soybean, then, often served as a “cash cow” (“you had to do them”), so they would sometimes even raise two years of beans and one year of corn in that seven-year rotation. Over the years, Jack has developed an increasingly complex rotation system, which itself could vary from cycle to cycle. The current typical rotation plants corn followed by a rye cover crop followed by soybean and a small grain. Then a grass–legume mix is overseeded to create pasture that they could continue for one to three years, or be followed by a year of corn, followed by a year of beans. Every seven years, a given piece of land is left essentially idle, sometimes with cattle on it.

The Erismans have stopped growing wheat, partly because of problems with the millers who became pickier about crop quality or began to insist that the farmer store the grain for extended periods. In addition, they were growing rye for seed, and it proved too difficult to clean out the equipment as completely as needed between the two crops. They now concentrate on rye and oats. In 2008, they raised 450 acres of oats. Jack notes that his oat yields (see below) look low compared to conventional production, but the quality is very good. The farm often sells small grains to organic seed suppliers, as those markets have recently been good. Annual per acre yields for the farm are as follows:

• Soybean, between 15–55 bushels (bu), with an average of 35.

• Blue corn, between 50–100 bu, with an average of 65–70.

• Rye, between 20–35 bu, with an average of 30.

• Oats, between 40–80 bu, with an average of 65–70.

• Corn, between 100–150 bu, with an average of 140.

Now committed to the extended seven-year rotation system, Jack continues to try a variety of new crops and practices. The Erismans have experimented with continuous corn (with hairy vetch or with kura clover, the latter of which they are still actively working on), or they might try continuous soybean (with winter rye). Jack thinks those rotations might be possible, if weed problems can be handled. The purpose of his experiments in cropping systems is to simplify the system but remain productive. They have solid seeded beans, but the results are a toss-up because of weed problems. They recently conducted a small one-third-acre experiment with a red-corn hybrid. They harvest about 65 acres/year of hay, taking one hay crop per year from any given field.

Jack adapts tillage to specific field conditions in each field and also tests for compaction. Although he strives not to plow on the farm, he will use a moldboard plow to break up clumps and root balls in orchard grass stands, if necessary. Otherwise he will disc and V-chisel, disc-chisel, or just disc as necessary. He is also experimenting with a rototiller on sod and has no-tilled into spring-planted winter rye. Generally, however, he does not do much no-till, because of concerns about weed control within the organic system. He relies

on an air drill for all seeding other than corn. He might rotary-hoe corn as many as three times, depending on conditions. He strives to cultivate corn twice, with the first cultivation when the plants have reached six to eight inches in height.

The organic harvest has proven more challenging than conventional farming. Because he plants two to three weeks later than conventional growers to prevent cross-pollination and contamination by GMOs, Jack also harvests his organic crops later than conventional growers in the area. He thinks organic soybean stalks might retain more moisture, which could result in a healthier plant, but could also contribute to slow drying of the plants. The actual moisture content of crops does not always seem to suit the harvesting equipment, and that mismatch can delay harvests.³³ For soybean, issues in timing the harvest can result in beans too discolored for food grade and perhaps lost yield. He recently had 140 acres of beans that went through the winter, but, when finally harvested in April, had to be sold as feed grade. Specialty corn can also pose problems in harvest; for example, the hybrid blue corn sometimes does not stand up well.

Jack noted that pest management should ideally be a “symphony, but sometimes it’s a cacophony.” That comment captures his sense of the challenge of coordinating management decisions related to pests and disease. He quit using synthetic insecticides in 1969, and, in the subsequent 39 years, he has honed his concern about the short-term view and potential long-term losses with constant applications of synthetic insecticides. That has led him to approaches based on crop diversity, encouragement of natural enemies, and mechanical measures. For corn borers, he has used strips of buckwheat as a harbor for lacewings, which will eat the corn borer larvae. He might try buckwheat on the edges of fields (to reduce the problem of subsequent weeds by being able to mow around the edges of fields), but he is unsure if that planting strategy would be as effective for pest management as strips within the larger fields. Rootworm has not been a serious problem on the farm, probably because of their long (seven-year) rotation. When leafhoppers become a problem in alfalfa (within a mixed hay field), Jack’s solution is to cut the hay. He has experimented with planting and interseeding turnips for nematode suppression, but he has found that a clean field is necessary for establishing a stand. He finds that Canada thistle and bull nettle seem worse in organic production. Alluding to the social desirability in this part of the country regarding clean farm fields, he says, “We just don’t look as good [as conventional farm fields].”

Controlling storage pests can be a problem with organic crops, and solutions acceptable under organic certification can be limited. The Erismans gave up growing wheat partly because of this difficulty. They have used PyGanic PRO (a pyrethrum-containing product certified for organic use). Given the importance of crop storage to the operation, storage-pest management approaches that comply with organic regulations are essential.

Goldmine Farm now has about 260 head of beef cattle, and they play an important part in Jack’s extended rotation, noted above. The Erismans breed roughly 115–120 cows per year. In the 1970s, Jack started with Black Angus, and in the 1980s he worked with breeds

such as Red Brangus, Black Simmental, and Polled Herefords. All his cattle were initially grain-finished. Now he pasture-finishes his cattle and is trying to develop a phenotype for smaller frame animals that are better adapted to his operation and more efficient. At the moment, the transition involves some line breeding, with six lines of females on the farm breeding (AI) with seed stock from a top Murray Grey bull from New Zealand. The intention is locally adapted genetics that will include desired traits—specifically being able to finish well on grass, because it has proven too costly to feed his cattle organic grain, from his farm or elsewhere.

The cattle might be divided into several herds (three to five) that rotate among the pastures, depending on water and on pasture availability and quality. The majority of the animals are rarely brought in from the pasture. Supplemental hay is fed as necessary in the winter months, but pastures are managed for winter grazing.

Jack normally calves in June, which he sees as optimal. The cattle-raising cycle has generally lengthened “more in keeping with nature’s cycles,” according to Jack. For example, he does not tend to wean calves until the following spring when they can be put on fresh grass. That schedule gives the calf 9–10 months with its mother, which Jack believes is more healthful for the animals. With a forage-finished system, the calf then goes another year. The system is flexible year-to-year, gradually harmonizing across phenotype of cattle, season, and mineralization in pastures.

The Erismans provide kelp and Redmond salt plus a little selenium as a free-choice supplement for their cattle. If an animal develops an infection or presents a disease that they are unable to resolve homeopathically, they will treat it with an antibiotic. Such animals then come out of organic certification. They are generally taken to the sale barn. Sometimes a local beef customer is happy to buy such an animal. They do not seem to care about antibiotic treatment in the context of what they know about the overall quality of Jack’s animals and his beef cattle system.

Adequate shade is an issue for the beef cattle. Therefore, Jack is considering planting trees or building shelters for the cattle in the newer permanent pasture areas. Although he notes that good veterinary services are available in the area and address most of the needs for their livestock, he observed that large animal veterinary services are not as prominent or available as they were in the past.

Jack owns an extensive assortment of large farm equipment particularly for crop production, management, and harvest. He said, “I’m a machinery buff, but I do have some pink elephants around.” Much of the equipment used on the farm is adapted to its specific conditions and needs.³⁴ He has equipped an older tractor with flotation tires to reduce compaction for harrowing and rotary-hoeing solid seeded soybean. The air drill can plant grain at a desired depth while also incorporating micronutrients or overseeding a grass–legume mix. Jack noted that the machine has 144 monitoring points to ensure precise delivery of the seeds and materials. Such equipment can present not only mechanical but also electronic problems, but he notes, “We thrive on the challenge of what can we use or adapt to make things work better.” A driving concern is improving precision of application and minimiz-

ing trips over the field. Given his own considerable range of equipment, he does not hire custom operations.

Soils on the farm can sometimes be wet, although flooding seems to be controlled, probably because of the drainage system and benefits from the rotation system. Jack sees some resilience from his organic farming system: “I’ll do better than my [nonorganic] neighbors in a droughty year.” The resilience is a result of the water-holding capacity of his soils. However, he notes that the reverse is also true: “Wet years become harder for us.”

Jack believes that increasing no-till on the farm would help reduce its carbon footprint, but no-till presents challenges in an organic system. Because of high fuel costs in 2008, he has made some changes that include making fewer passes with equipment, less mowing of roadsides, and less cutting of some pasture. He has looked into wind energy and has explored its possibilities on his land. He pays more attention now to farm-related travel and tries to consolidate trips into town.

The farm business includes three different business structures: one property is a limited partnership of Jack, his wife, and sons; another property is a sole proprietorship; and the rest of the farm operates as a C corporation. The different fiscal year closing for the C corporation provides a helpful way to manage some income and tax liabilities, although it has potential negatives, for example, with estate planning.

All marketing is done through the corporation, which is a certified-organic entity. The operation keeps meticulous records on production and income, which Jack sees as useful for finetuning and adjustment that ensures success. For example, the Erismans receive numbers from their buyer on the “cut-outs” when their animals are slaughtered. That data help to inform decisions on herd genetics and selecting animals.

The Erismans received their organic crop certification before USDA set and administered federal organic standards. Organic certification has been important for Goldmine Farm’s access to profitable national and international organic grain markets (for example, much of its white corn has recently gone to the European market). Although the market premium for organic certification is important to the bottom line, the decision to transition to organic was initially also about reducing production costs. “In the first year of transition [to organic], I saved $100,000 in fertilizers and chemicals,” Jack said, “but I didn’t get good yields.” Over time, his yields in organic production have, of course, improved. Non-GMO verification, however, is becoming a new area of concern. Even with his longstanding organic production system, he sees a risk that there might be “no zero anymore,” given more widespread cultivation in the region and country of transgenic crops.

Jack did not organic-certify the cattle operation until 2003. He noted, “You can be successfully organic without the beef line. For us, the organic beef is a complement, a supplement. Most of our income is in the organic commodities.” There is only one organic-certified kill floor in Illinois. The majority of finished animals (roughly 20 head annually) are sold through a grass-finished market. A few head are sold into the Chicago organic market (about two to four head annually) and into the St. Louis organic market (about six

to nine head annually). Some of his beef (perhaps six head annually) is marketed locally, more as a community courtesy than a focused market niche.

Jack has been willing to try new varieties targeted for new markets. He is trying an experiment with red corn in addition to his production of blue corn. One critical issue with the development of new crops, in addition to getting the production system right, is the uncertainty of working with a buyer who is unfamiliar with the dimensions of the new market. Those challenges often increase the risk to a producer and can cause vexing delays in delivery and payment.

Although he had a contract for his first blue corn production, Jack views contracts cautiously, noting “I’ve been burned.” Now, when he is setting up a contract, he tries to sit down with the other party, and ideally they write it together. He cites the importance of having trust and being trusted but emphasizes that he tells them, “Here’s what I want.” Ultimately, however, he said, “My preference is no contract. I’m a gambler.” Therefore, he plans each year with the idea of storing all his grain, which allows him the flexibility of not having to sell his crop on the market at a specific and perhaps unprofitable time. Such storage capability is, in his view, essential for a farmer to be successful in organics. Over the years, he has shipped corn and beans directly to international markets.

Goldmine Farm’s income derives overwhelmingly from crops and commodities rather than from the beef. Jack was able to pay off the debt on his farm, even before he started the farm’s transition to organic around 1990. He has now reached a stage of financial comfort and success in farming. In 2008–2009, his financial concerns paralleled those of other Americans, whether or not they were farming, who have questions about how best to invest and protect their financial resources.

For personal and philosophical reasons, the Erismans had for a long time chosen not to buy medical or life insurance. At Jack’s wife’s request, they now carry supplemental medical insurance. Although Jack had crop insurance on 320 acres farmed the first year he farmed with his father, he has not taken out crop insurance since then. As he said, “I don’t believe in it [crop insurance]. What am I going to do? Sit around and pray for hail? I just never take it.”

Despite farming more than 2,000 acres and managing livestock, Goldmine Farm operates with a minimal amount of hired labor. Jack currently has one full-time employee, who helps in all areas and is “as good with a wrench as he is with a sick animal.” This employee grew up about an hour away and has a background in construction. He began working on the farm in 1999. The employee has been building equity in the operation by taking ownership of one cow in the herd each year plus her offspring. (In late 2008, the employee was up to 26 head total.) Jack developed similar arrangements with previous workers that helped to retain them for extended periods of time and that also recognized and rewarded the importance of hired labor as a resource contributing to the farm’s success. In 1987, at

the end of 10 years work at the farm, one worker went away with a $10,000 bonus. Jack described his full-time workers: “All those people have value. I don’t want to be a user. I’m not talking about altruism. It’s good logic for making systems work.” Aside from having a full-time, year-round employee, he also hires college students to help on the farm intermittently in the summer.

Jack has been active in his local community (for example, he has served as a volunteer fireman for some 30 years, and he has served on the board for his local conservation district). Particularly within his state and region, he has been a leader and spokesperson for what many describe as “sustainable agriculture.” Although Jack started “doing” sustainable agriculture in the 1970s, it was in the mid-1980s that he became involved with efforts in Illinois to “bring those concepts into the mainstream.” To that end, he played a part in the Illinois Sustainable Agriculture Society, an organization that is now mostly defunct because, as Jack puts it, “We’ve done what we set out to do, bringing the concepts into the mainstream.” He continues to speak to groups of farmers and others on his approach to organic production of crops and beef cattle. Although few of his immediate neighbors farm organically, he has supported or informally advised other people in his region as they have transitioned about 1,500 acres to organic production.

Jack sees the farmers’ need to develop strong organic markets as linked through production innovation to the consumer ’s ability to access those markets. He says, “If you want the organic market to grow, you need to make it more affordable for more people. With forage-finished [beef], you can maybe compete.” He has had the opportunity to work on these issues as a member of the Illinois Local and Organic Food and Farm Task Force, which was established by the Illinois Food, Farm and Jobs Act of 2007.

Jack serves on the board of the Organic Trade Association (OTA). He has assiduously avoided the use of federal farm programs or crop insurance. His aversion is based on personal experience in the failure of insurance and a belief, borne out by the success of his farm, that he can thrive economically without those programs. He firmly believes, “You don’t have to have a government program to survive.” The farm has received some technical assistance with conservation measures, such as terraces and waterways, but not financial assistance.

Jack served on the original elected board of the Illinois Council on Food and Agricultural Research (C-FAR), an entity with a broad base of stakeholders that in the past 15 years has directed more than $100 million of state money for needed research at four public Illinois universities in such disciplines as agricultural production systems, water quality and

conservation, rural development, and food safety. For organic production in particular, he believes that research is best done at the farm level.

In terms of research needs, he is concerned about development of and access to good organic varieties. He believes that the organic seed supply system has become too proprietary and sees a need for more public plant breeding targeting organics. More work by land-grant universities on organic soybean is especially needed. Not many companies supply good lines of non-GMO seed, and some have unilaterally dropped lines that Jack considers good. Growing organic on contract is a way to get organic seed, but contracts have drawbacks, in his view. He feels that contracting should not be the only way to farm organically. He sees a need for farmers to adapt varieties to local conditions over time. More research at the farm level could help develop new organic varieties that are appropriate for specific sites, regions, and markets. He also sees a need for additional research investigation into the federal organic standard, its implementation, impact, and problems of compliance.

The challenge to the gradual accomplishment of sustainability on this farm has been understanding and optimizing the system: “The most important thing we do here is understanding compatibilities and synergisms of different crops and plants in the system. It’s knowing what crop do I need to follow with.” He stresses the need to work with and reinforce the natural order of things, creating the lightest carbon footprint, achieving the greatest return from nature “without having to do much,” and making the best use of the natural topography and soil resource.

Jack believes that his system is transferable because it is flexible. It involves knowing the site’s soils and the topography, having good drainage, and understanding what steps nature will take in combination with a realistic sense of markets. A realistic sense of the market requires, he said, knowing what you are good at and what markets you can afford to supply.

The question of farm transition has become more salient lately. His two sons have gone away for college and for military service, and he is unsure whether either would be interested in the farm, given interests and obligations in their adult lives as they marry and start families. Jack muses, “The biggest question for me: How do we transcend my presence, if it’s my presence that has been important. The farm may be more my personality than it should be.” He recognizes that for someone to take on this farm requires a special combination of will and skill. He notes the depletion of young people from central rural Illinois, especially compared to generations past, but he also insists that he is “open to some bright young person who might come in.”

Jack identifies labor as a factor that could constrain what activities or enterprises can be taken on and developed at the farm. For example, value-added initiatives (such as packaging some of their specialty grains) could be considered if additional qualified labor is available. In that sense, limited access to sufficient labor might circumscribe some entrepreneurial options for his farm.

Two factors appear central to the success of Goldmine Farm. First, the incorporation of livestock into the cropping system not only adds an important income stream, but also figures centrally in establishing a sound, highly integrated rotation system. Keeping land in pasture helps restore soil health and minimizes weed problems when cash crops are planted. Second, the ability to access a premium (for organic crops and beef) and to reduce and even eliminate costly chemical inputs of conventional farming enhances economic profitability. Those factors contribute to the success of the enterprise overall.

As Jack Erisman reflects on his life’s work at Goldmine Farm, he is proudest of not having used government programs, educating his sons, and having created an organic agricultural system that has survived and thrived, even when at some junctures many people (including some family members) thought it was not possible.

The Rosmann Family Farm is deeply rooted in the rural Iowa community in which it is located. The original ancestor, George Rosmann, came to Westphalia around 1875, part of a wave of German Catholic immigrants brought to work and settle the area by the railroads. Present-day Westphalia is a small and still largely German Catholic hamlet located on a ridge a few miles north of the current Rosmann Farm. Westphalia remains an important community focus for the Rosmann family.³⁵ Ron Rosmann’s great grandfather began farming in the area in 1883, at the original farm and homestead that the family retains and where Ron’s middle son now lives. Ron’s grandfather acquired additional farmland in the area. Born in 1907, Ron’s father, as the eldest son, had to farm. He moved to Ron and Maria’s present farm, after this farm was lost by another family during the Depression. It was on this farm and in this farmhouse that Ron grew up.

Ron went to Iowa State University in 1968, beginning as a farm operations major, shifting to distributed studies, and finally graduating with a degree in biology. He began college with no particular intention of going back to the farm, and while there became influenced by the anti-Vietnam War movements and other social issues of the time. Upon graduating, he worked briefly in a youth home in Ames and considered going into psychiatric social work. Ron’s two older brothers were by then pursuing non-farm career paths. When Ron’s father said, “You’re the last one. Try it or I’ll have to rent the farm,” Ron decided to return to the farm, then 320 acres, for a year. He found he liked the independence of farming and the opportunity to be a leader in a small community. As he says, “I never looked back.”

When Ron returned in 1973, his father was raising cattle and hogs, doing crop rotations, and using pesticides and anhydrous. His father was locally regarded as an innovative farmer. He had the first combine and first corn dryer in the area. He also kept a team of Belgian draft horses (until 1969) to work on the farm, even though they had three tractors. Ron and his father worked together from 1973 to 1980, when his father passed away “far too young.” Ron regards those years of farming with his father as invaluable for their father-son relationship and crucial in his own development as a farmer.

The current farm of 600 acres (200 of which are rented) is in Shelby County, in a region of fertile rolling hills, roughly 35 miles from the Missouri River. All the land is classified as highly erodible, with slopes of 8 to 11 percent. The soils are loess soils that include Marshall silt loam on the high flats, Monona on the hillsides, and Judson in the bottoms, which were all tiled by hand by Ron’s father and grandfather. The tilth of the soils is, in Ron’s words, “incredible”—they dry out well but they also hold moisture. The farm has no ponds and no major streams, although Keg Creek starts on the Rosmann land. Ron and his wife Maria

have three sons. The eldest, David, works for an agriculture-focused nongovernmental organization in the Twin Cities. The middle son, Daniel, has returned to farm with Ron and Maria, after completing a B.S. in agronomy at Iowa State University. The youngest, Mark, just finished a double major in agronomy and history at Iowa State University. He works on the farm summers and vacations and is still determining his post-college plans.

Rosmann Family Farms is a diversified crop–livestock system, premised on internal cycling of nutrients, reduced purchased inputs, and organic certification, which provides formal recognition of its sustainable farming practices and a market premium.

The Rosmanns currently follow a six-year crop rotation of corn–beans–corn–oats or barley or succotash–alfalfa–alfalfa, with crops certified organic since 1994. The two years of corn represent a concession to economic reality, as corn is raised for feed and for cash; its production contributes to the profitability of the farm. The Rosmanns feed their barley and oats to their hogs and cattle. After harvest, cattle are run in the fields for gleaning; otherwise “we are throwing feed away.” It is hard to do more than two years of alfalfa in a field, before pocket gophers begin to damage roots and make the terrain more difficult for farm equipment.

Their seed corn is 50 percent Blue River and 50 percent an untreated and non-GMO Pioneer^® hybrid; their soybean for planting comes from Blue River. The Rosmanns also raise some soybean for Blue River. The farm is divided into 40 fields, between 5 and 40 acres each, depending on the slope.

They ridge-till corn and beans, planting the rows 38 inches apart. A key to their system is planting on time, which is roughly May 1 for corn and May 20 for beans, depending on the weather and soil. Ridge tillage works best for their system, which has four to seven times less weeds than other systems (for example, no-till) and provides them with the best yields. As required for organic certification, the Rosmanns keep a 30-foot buffer around their fields from plantings on neighboring farms of GM crops.

The Rosmanns’ crop yields are at the county averages, which are 135–145 bu/acre for corn, 45 bu/acre for soybean, 80 bu/acre for oats, 65 bu/acre for barley, and 5–6 tons/acre for hay. (In 2007, the farm averaged 55 bu/acre for beans and 160 bu/acre for corn.) The farm does not currently produce enough manure to get higher yields, and the Rosmanns do not haul any additional manure onto the farm.

Ron stopped using pesticides in 1983, but the farm did not become certified organic until 1994, when organic markets were strengthening. He notes that when he first moved toward organic farming practices, purchasing off-farm organic inputs was the emphasis.

The Rosmanns do not purchase nitrogen inputs for their farm and have never used fish meal. They have not applied potassium since 1983. They use soft rock phosphate every third year at 250–300#/acre; they also add micronutrients (zinc, copper, and sulphur) based on soil tests, which they conduct every third year. They often bring home from the mill the cleanings from processing of their organic soybeans into meal to feed their own hogs to maximize economic value from that crop.

The Rosmanns have 50 sows at any one time, and raise about 600–800 head a year. Their hogs are a Berkshire–Chester White–Duroc cross (Berkshire and Duroc for the meat quality). Organic Valley requires half-Berkshire for the red color of the meat and the marbling. The hogs are housed in small groups in barns with access to the outdoors for disease and parasite reduction. Indoors, Ron keeps the straw bedding sufficiently deep so the hogs stay dry, and he notes that bedding application levels need to be coordinated and agreed on among everyone working on the farm to achieve that. Pyrethrins are not added to the feed; a chrysanthemum-based spray is used on the pigs for lice and mange. The Rosmanns use vinegar in the feed rations to manage scours to keep the hogs’ guts somewhat acidic. Sick hogs are isolated, treated, and then sold as nonorganic (not through Organic Valley).

The hogs are raised in a farrowing house, which has individual units, for six weeks after they are born. They remain in the farrowing house for at least two additional weeks after they are weaned and the sows are removed. The Rosmanns no longer use farrowing crates for the hogs. When they reach 30 pounds, the hogs are moved to a small hog barn, where they are kept segregated. At 50 pounds, the hogs are moved to the grower unit where they are raised to 100–120 pounds. When the hogs reach 120 pounds, they are moved to a finishing barn. All of the barns are treated in the same way as hoop houses, with a constant cover of bedding and a cleaning once the hogs are removed. The Rosmanns try to allow the farrowing house to sit empty between groups of young, but find that they often cannot do so for very long. They rely on good sanitation practices, using a power and chlorine wash on the building after it is emptied.

They seed peas in with the barley and harvest them together as feed for their hogs, which the hogs love. Changes over time in the hog operation include discontinuing docking tails and taking out needle teeth. Those changes, which Ron supports, were his son Daniel’s choices as he assumed more control of the hog enterprise.

The Rosmanns raise 70 feeder steers and heifers and about 85 cows and calves, all a Red Angus breed for which they are continually try to select for individuals suited to their farm location. Ron notes that “every breed has good individuals, and it’s a matter of selecting within the breed” to improve their own internal system on the farm. They also raise their own bulls. Their cattle do not have as many health problems as their hogs. They have had only a few isolated outbreaks of pneumonia over the past 10 years, for which they isolate the cattle in the same way they do sick hogs. Per requirements of Organic Valley, their buyer, they feed corn to their cattle, because that helps them make “choice” rather than “select” grade.

The Rosmanns are considering a transition away from such heavy corn feeding, but they recognize the need to find the right genetics to get choice grade meat with grass-fed cattle. Their hope is to do some selection for individuals with the right characteristics for their farm and location that would thrive on a pasture regime with some grain. However, those considerations are tempered by their knowledge that it typically takes at least two to three months longer to raise a pasture-raised animal for market.

They rent a tub grinder to grind hay that they pile for the cattle when the snow is too deep (from December to February). They spread the manure out from the cattle feeding areas before they are ready to plow.

Maria manages another small enterprise of about 150 non-certified organic broilers once a year. She starts the birds in late summer and butchers them in the fall before the cold of winter, a system that is the reverse of many farmers, but more efficient in her view. The birds are used on-farm and sold informally to local extended family.

The Rosmanns now have minimal insect problems, although they stopped raising food-grade soybean (for the Japanese market) in part due to an infestation of bean leaf beetles that discolored the beans and downgraded their market value. They have since moved entirely to feed-grade organic beans that yield better and pose less risk. On occasion they have problems with corn borers for which they use Bt, but they have only used Bt once in 25 years.

Their weed problems include a variety of thistles, which they believe they are managing through hand-digging from their pastures. They have velvet leaf and giant ragweed in the crops. Velvet leaf was at one time much worse. Giant ragweed has become a more recent concern, spreading up into field areas adjacent to small creek bottoms. Their primary tools for dealing with weeds are ridge tilling and crop rotations.

Pocket gophers and deer are serious vertebrate problems. As mentioned, the gopher mounds damage crops and equipment and prevent the Rosmanns from going more than two years in alfalfa if they decided that was desirable. They also have to consider gopher infestations as they think through their rotations. The deer tear up fences and crops at the perimeter of fields.

The Rosmanns have 120 acres of pasture, which they like to keep for 7–10 years (one pasture has now been in place for 14 years). They do not rotate pasture as much as they used to, and they see a need for more nitrogen on their pasture lands. Ron notes, “There’s a weak link. We recognize we need more nitrogen [in the pastures] for optimal growth.” They fence their field with high tensile wire on the outside perimeter and move cattle from paddock to paddock every three to four days, based on a visual assessment of the condition of the forage in the pasture.

They have added shrubbery to some of their terraces even though doing so has not matched recommendations from NRCS. The shrubbery provides beneficial insect and bird habitat. Despite concerns from NRCS, the terraces have remained stable and intact.

The Rosmanns have a large diversity of equipment, including an old Case IH tractor. Most of their equipment is bought used, except for the manure spreader, which was bought new. Over the past five years or so, they have purchased about one new piece of machinery each year. They bought a new wheel rake in 2007 and a new manure spreader in 2008. They also purchased a new disc mower for cutting hay in 2007. They rarely get rid of machinery, noting that one never knows what might be needed. It has become harder to get parts for some of their older machinery, partly because it is old and partly because of the decline in nearby farm equipment dealerships. The Case IH dealership in nearby Harlan went out of business in 1983, so they go to Avoca for Case, which is 15 miles away, even though Ron acknowledged that 15 miles is not so far considering what many farmers now have to travel. Their ridge tillage and planting equipment is smaller than typical, which allowed them to get it used for less expense and then adapt it to their farm. They do some sharing of farm equipment with neighbors.

New technology, such as cell phones, has been useful for the farm, enabling Ron, Maria, their sons, and a hired man to check in with each other, answer questions, and reduce truck miles around the farm or into town.

The Rosmann Family Farms are very much a family operation, with Ron managing most of the production side until recently, Maria handling most of the marketing, and their sons providing critical labor and input. Daniel, in his mid-20s, plays a particularly important role and has joined the farm full-time, assuming greater responsibilities. Among other things, he has taken over feed management. With his younger brother, he has taken the lead on the hog enterprise. Currently, the Rosmanns also employ a nearby farming neighbor three days a week year-round. This worker has exceptional mechanical skills. He is critical for “making us more efficient for production” particularly given some of the ongoing challenges in operating, repairing, and maintaining equipment.

The Rosmanns have a Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan, which they completed with help from NRCS. They use composted manure from their cattle and swine. They compost the manure in windrows with the bedding—barley and oat straw—along with round and square bales of stubble hay that are used for farrowing. The compost is mechanically turned to achieve optimal temperatures and then applied to fields with a manure spreader.

The alfalfa in their rotation is also used to provide nitrogen for the soil. Being on a two-year rotation maximizes the tonnage of hay and the nitrogen, which peaks at the second year. Manure is also distributed in the field through the feeding system in the winter for the cows. The system uses a hay grinder to create feeding piles that are moved around the fields.

The farm’s water comes from wells and the rural water system. The wells frequently go dry because they are less than 100 feet deep. The typical rainfall is 28–30 inches/year. The farm is on the drier side of Iowa and was not adversely affected by the torrential rain and flooding in the spring and summer of 2008.

The Rosmanns have long been interested in alternative energy and in reducing their energy use. Ron and Maria organized an alternative energy conference in nearby Harlan some years ago, which was attended by 300 people. They built a solar nursery and farrowing house (from a design of Iowa State University Extension), which saves significantly on energy costs. They have focused on purchasing smaller, more efficient equipment appropriate to their size operation. They have also cut back on some operations, such as mowing. They are considering growing beans specifically to make biodiesel and would like to explore wind power. Alternative energy is something Ron says he would like to “key in on.”

They look at their system as an economically productive ecosystem in its use of carbon. The size of their operation allows for a rotation of crops to restore nitrogen and carbon to the system (without importation of nitrogen). The livestock provides a means to create a value-added product that also returns nutrients to the biological system.

The Rosmanns have been marketing organic beef for 10 years and organic pork for 4 years through Organic Valley. They thought it would be more difficult to meet Organic Valley’s requirements for pork than was the case. Organic Valley frequently shifts where it has the beef cattle sent for slaughter. The slaughter site for pork, which is in Sioux Center, Iowa, has not changed since they started. Ron would like to see Organic Valley move toward standards for more pasture-feeding of animals. His interest in how markets for grass-fed meat develop has been reinforced by emerging information about the potential human (heart) health benefits of grass-fed meat. Current debates about U.S. agriculture and the American diet resonate with him, considering his own personal and family health histories.

The Rosmanns also process some organic beef at the Amend plant in Des Moines, a longstanding arrangement that has worked well. They pay for the organic certification at the Amend plant. For 10 years, they have marketed that beef under their own Rosmann Family Farms label. Most of it goes to central Iowa retail establishments, notably Wheatsfield Cooperative in Ames and Campbell’s Nutrition, which has three stores in Des Moines. Those retail shops have been good outlets for their label. Maria has held cooking demonstrations and tastings at Wheatsfield.

They also process some organic pork at a different meat processor to sell under their own label. That pork is not certified organic (instead “natural”) because they are not sure they can get the processor certified. It is sold to the same shops as their beef.

They were the first to market organic meat in the area. For a brief time, they had a mini-CSA in Des Moines through the support of an interested acupuncturist. It involved

both Ron and Maria being in Des Moines once a month (12 days a year). As their children reached the more activity-laden years of middle school, they found the arrangement worked less well, and they focused on retail outlets. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, they frequently supplied meat for special events at Iowa State University that sought to serve “Iowa-sourced meals.” Although that arrangement provided good visibility for their farm and product, they have moved away from it. Ames is not close to their farm, and “we’ve streamlined now for our needs.”

They keep seven freezers on the farm to ensure sufficient supply of their farm-raised meat to service their central Iowa accounts and customers. Even with the economic downturn in 2008, sales remain steady. Although they might now be selling “less steak, it’s consistent for ground beef.”

They have never had to advertise their own label meats, as word-of-mouth recognition has spread. They recently bought their first advertisement, in the Wheatsfield Co-op newsletter, but this was more to support the cooperative than because they actually need to advertise.

They market the grain that they do not use on farm for their own animals to a variety of buyers. In general, they “can’t meet the demand” for organic grain and have no problem selling it. They have marketed their grain through Scoular Grain in Omaha, Grain Millers in Minnesota, and Heartland Organic Coop. They were involved with a marketing cooperative that focused on organic soybean for export to Japan. It went under five years ago, because, Ron asserts, it became a victim of poor timing and perhaps too narrow of a focus relying on Japanese sales. Everybody in it lost money.

The cropping operation has been certified organic since 1994. The Rosmanns’ beef operation has been certified organic since 1998.

The farm is organized as a sole proprietorship, although the Rosmanns have considered an LLC or another corporate structure. They carry production loans each year because of the crop cycle. Their accountant works with them to use the tax system effectively (paying attention to depreciation and timing of sales) for their farm. They continue to be comfortable with the debt load they carry and look at it as a management tool that is key to the success of their operation and their peace of mind. Ron noted that “debt is not a bad thing necessarily. You have to manage it.”

They carry catastrophic insurance. They do not carry revenue insurance even though they believe it is better than hail insurance. (It hails often in their area.) The primary reason is that they typically receive higher than average prices for their products so the insurance would not adequately compensate them. With Daniel joining the farm now, they feel greater concern about farm income to support both generations.

The Rosmanns’ orientation to farming is undergirded by a strong sense of social responsibility. Both Ron and Maria are active in church and local activities, and they have also been active in state and national policy debates. Both have provided testimony before Congress on agricultural issues, and Ron was running for a seat in the Iowa House of Rep-

resentatives at the time of the interview. He had been thinking of entering state politics for a while, and he saw the moment as a good time to launch a bid, given issues in the state and Daniel’s developing role on the farm.

The Rosmanns have long relied on and learned from a network of other Iowa farmers also interested in low-input and organic farming. They have been members since the beginning of the Practical Farmers of Iowa (PFI), and Ron has served as its president. Sustained connections with other PFI farmers over the years have allowed informal back-and-forth about ridge tilling, crop rotations, composting, animal rations, and other topics. The Rosmanns have held numerous field days for PFI farmers and others at their farm.

They have also participated in considerable research on their farm. Some of their participation has been through field and farm experiments coordinated and managed by PFI. The Rosmanns execute the trials and collect the data. Many Iowa State University researchers have also conducted research on the Rosmann farm.³⁶ When asked why they participate in research, Ron notes he is “enthralled with it,” and sees involvement with farming research as a way to be more involved with science. At the same time, he is bothered when he sees grants for sustainable agriculture research that budget little or no compensation to the participating farmers. Both Ron and Maria have served on various grant review panels related to sustainable agriculture, including for the USDA Cooperative State Research, Extension and Education Services’ organic program, Value-Added grants, USDA Sustainable Agriculture and Research Program, and the Organic Research Foundation.

More recently, Ron has become involved in and served as treasurer of the Iowa Organics Association, a group formed in part to provide a collective voice for the interest of Iowa organic farmers relative to issues of genetic drift from GM production. He has some concerns about the viability of another new organization and how it fits within the larger landscape of organizations addressing sustainable agricultural concerns.

Informally, the Rosmanns often confer and compare notes on farming or specific challenges with a neighboring farmer who also farms organically. He does not have livestock, but this connection is still an important source of information and support.

The Rosmanns receive commodity payments for corn and soybean (they also receive some small payments for oats and barley) but have a comparatively small base relative to their neighboring farmers.

They have been involved with Environmental Quality Incentive Program for their comprehensive nutrient management plan for windbreaks, pasture management, and buffer strips. They also have 2.5 acres of land along Keg Creek in the Conservation Reserve Program. They would have been glad to be involved in the Conservation Security Program, but their farm is not in a priority watershed. They hope to participate in the Conservation Stewardship Program coming out of the 2008 Farm Bill.

They will not put any more land into terraces because the terraces take too much out of production and are difficult to maintain. Instead they will rely on buffer strips that are more flexible. They currently make good use of their headlands, keeping them organic and cutting hay from them.

Ron stresses the importance of helping beginning farmers in the community. He notes his own father ’s approach, which involved renting out two 160-acre farms to young men wishing to get started, rather than his father farming that land himself. Daniel is participating in the USDA Beginning Farmer Program for a low-interest loan (a 30-year loan at an interest rate of 2 to 3 percent) for the purchase of an additional 70 acres (all in CRP), which will bring the Rosmann Family Farms to a total 670 acres. Daniel has spoken publicly in Washington about the importance of that program.

While diversity is a linchpin for the Rosmann Family Farms, it is also time consuming. Ron is quick to underscore the advantages of diversity on the farm—its beauty, productivity, associated ecosystem services, and energy processes. However, he and Maria quip about the possibility of being “overly diversified,” pointing to challenges in identifying “optimal diversification” on the farm, itself a condition that is different over time in response to the various elements of the system and needs and resources of the people farming. Nonetheless, they feel considerable pride and pleasure about the system they have developed.

The Rosmanns are beginning to think through transition issues, especially now that Daniel is farming full-time. Ron’s experience in working well with his father in that farm transition has provided a good model for involving his son’s ideas and energy in the farm. Although there is some day-to-day operational learning in the transition, there are also issues of calibrating the farm’s enterprises overall and ensuring they can support all family members who look to the farm for livelihood.

The keys to the success of the Rosmann Family Farms, as they see it, have been their longstanding commitment to crop rotation, finding a ridge-till system that works well for them, including ruminants to recycle nutrients, growing a diversity of crops, and pursuing value-added (organic) meat production. Having an excellent location for farming, including good soils, provided a good base. The involvement by all their sons and a commitment to farming as an occupation by at least one of them have also been critical to the vitality and prospects of their farm.

Sheer zest for farming is also important for understanding Rosmann Family Farms. Ron says of farming: “I love it. There is always something to learn.” They see research as an ongoing and pressing need to ensure the future of their type of farming, particularly for development of more and better organic crop varieties (for example, barley). Although they have been very involved with sustainable and organic farming research, they see the need for much more in this area.