Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 286
CASE STUDY 4 A Mixed Crop and Livestock Farm in Pennsylvania: The Kutz~own Farm THE KUTZTOWN FARM is a 305-acre mixed crop and livestock farm located near Kutztown in east-central Pennsylvania. The farm is located in Berks County, which has some large cash grain farms and many family- operated crop and livestock farms and is among the top five counties in the state for crop production and agricultural cash receipts. The principal source of income on the case farm is a beef-feeding operation; most of the crops grown on the farm are used to support this enterprise. The farmland consists of rolling hills with some bottomland broken down into 98 fields averaging about 3.4 acres (Figure 1~. Most of these fields are laid out on the contour, commonly in strips 100 to 200 feet wide. Soil pH, nutrient levels, and physical conditions are measured prior to selecting the crops each year. The 98 individual fields give the farmer great flexibility in fitting the crops to the conditions of each field (Culik et al., 1983~. The family owns 72 acres and has rented about another 173 acres from the Rodale Research Center since 1973; the family also rents 60 acres from neighbors. In comparison, the average cropland harvested per farm in Berks County during 1982 was 105 acres. GENERAL DATA Rodale Research Center scientists (Culik et al., 1983) studied the Kutz- town Farm over a 5-year period, presenting their work in such a way as to protect the privacy of the Mennonite family that operates *. This farm is probably the most thoroughly studied alternative farming operation in the country. Reports on it have appeared in numerous publications, and it has been the subject of extensive comparisons with state and county average production. One Ph.D. dissertation in agronomy (Wegrzyn, 1984) and two 286

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM 287 Brubaker Home ,, `' I\ Farm69acre~ \ \ \ \ \\ <~°°~ ~ \\\\\ ~ (~ ~~ \ \ m_ ~ ~ — \< ,,\\ A \ _`—' O\ \ \ \\ Se~'~~ \ If\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I\ Rodale Research -\ ~ / // {~ Center 222 acres 3O (rented) ~J~: ~ //O ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~\5~ ~ 31 \ ~~ ~ \~ / / ~ ~ 1~ DIG /~==\ it\ 6'~ :~ )~~BergerFarrn ~~ \~o \\ \ \~\ \~ FIGURE 1 Farming operation including home farm and rented land near Kutztown, Pennsylvania, in 1978, 1979, and 1980. SOURCE: Wegrzyn, V. A. 1984. Nitrogen Fertility Management in Corn—A Case Study on a Mixed Crop-Livestock Farm in Pennsylvania. Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park. S M.S. theses in agricultural economics (Dabbert, 1986; Domanico, 1985) have been completed at The Pennsylvania State University using data obtained from this farm. This case study draws heavily on past research and recent interviews with the director of the Rodale Research Center at the time. The family raises all the grain, hay, and silage used on the farm. Most of the farm's crops are used for feed and bedding, although the farmer sells some alfalfa and red clover hay. In addition to providing income, these crops are grown to balance rotations and enhance soil fertility. In recent years the family has increased the acreage of grains and reduced hay acre- age. The livestock operation mainly involves finishing purchased beef cattle, but the family also raises hogs and laying hens. All livestock and other products of the farm are sold through conventional market channels (Table 1~. Acreages were distributed as shown in Table 2 from 1978 to 1982 and in

OCR for page 286
288 TABLE 1 Summary of Enterprise Data for the Kutztown Farm Category ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE Description Farm size 305 acres, 250-290 beef cattle Labor and This is a family-operated farm with one full-time hired man and management occasional help from relatives. There are complex management practices duties because of the diversity of the enterprise. The father manages the beef enterprise; his son manages crop production and machinery maintenance. The variety of crops grown on the farm results in a relatively even distribution of labor needs throughout the year. Livestock management Feeder cattle are purchased from Virginia. They are fed corn, practices silage, hay, roasted soybeans, and small grain supplements. The size of the hog herd varies from 50 to 250, depending on the prices of feeder and finished hogs. Marketing strategies Beef and hay are sold through conventional markets; no premium prices are obtained for alternative farming methods. Weed control practices Crop rotations and multiple cultivations of row crops are used. Imported chicken manure (not composted) is a suspected source of weed seeds. Rain at cultivation time often results in poor weed control. Herbicides are applied to approximately 45 percent of the land. Insect and nematode Pest build-up is avoided in field crops by rotation. There are no control reported insect problems in animal operation. Disease control The farmer uses prophylactic application of sulfa-type drugs to practices purchased beef feeders while in quarantine immediately after purchase. Soil fertility A variable rotation with corn, soybeans, small grains, and hay is management used. Manure (10 tons/acre) is applied twice in a 5-year rotation; on-farm beef manure and imported chicken manure are used. Starter fertilizer is applied to corn in proportions of 3.6 pounds N. 7.2 pounds P. and 3.6 pounds K per acre once in a 5-year rotation. Irrigation practices None Crop and livestock Crop yields exceed county averages for soybeans, hay, wheat, and yields corn grain; yields are lower for corn silage and rye. Financial performance Expenditures for fertilizers and agricultural chemicals per acre are substantially below county averages. Investment in machinery is very low because of the age of the equipment; repair costs are high (mostly for parts). Economic analysis indicates the Kutztown Farm is somewhat less profitable than a comparable conventional farm. 1986. Corn silage is the most prevalent crop, currently occupying 29.5 per- cent of the land; another 26.2 percent is used for hay production. Climate The county has a fairly moderate, humid continental climate. Average annual precipitation is 42.5 inches (Table 31; it is normally well distributed throughout the year (2.S to 4.4 inches per month) with the most monthly

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM TABLE 2 Kutztown Farm 289 Acreages, 1978-1982 and 1986 Acreage, 1978-1982 Percentage of Total Crop Range Mean Acreage, 1986 1978-1982 1986 Hay Alfalfa 30 - 63 51.7 40 17.6 13.1 Red clovera 32-70 45.9 40 15.6 13.1 Subtotal 97.6 80 33.3 26.2 Small grains Barley 9- 36 18.1 20 6.2 6.6 Oatsb 13 - 29 20.9 20 7.1 6.6 Rye 17- 26 23.4 30 8.0 9.8 Wheat 8- 34 23.2 20 7.9 6.6 Subtotal 85.6 90 29.2 29.5 Row crops Com, grain 14-30 25.0 20 8.5 6.6 Corn, silage 52-78 63.9 9Oc 21.7 29.5 Soybeans 14-42 21.8 25 7.4 8.2 Subtotal 110.7 135 37.5 44.3 Total 293.9 305 100.0 100.0 aRed clover hay includes other hay. bOats includes spring barley and oat mix. C60 acres high-moisture ear corn plus 30 acres regular silage. SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. precipitation occurring in July and August. During the summer, precipita- tion of 0.1 inch or more occurs on an average of 10 days per month. Maximum daily temperatures in nearby Allentown range from 35.7°F in January to about 85.4°F in July. Minimum mean daily temperatures range from 19.~°F in January to 62.7°F in July. Culik et al. (1983) report that the average growing season is 194 frost-free days. PHYSICAL AND CAPITAL RESOURCES Soil Most of the farm's cropland is on steep, shaley hills, with slopes of up to 25 percent that are somewhat eroded from past cropping. The surface of the soil is covered with flat, shaley pebbles. The soils are of shale, silt loam, sandstone, gneiss, and limestone origins (Table 4~. The Berks and Weikert soil series are inceptisols, and the Fogelsville and Ryder soils are alfisols. Their productive capacity depends on their age and weathering status. The predominant soil type (on nearly two-thirds of the farm) is Berks shaTey silt loam soil described as moderately deep, well-drained, medium- textured, shaley soils that have formed in material weathered from gray

OCR for page 286
290 C (15 ·~ ~ .~ U' a U) o JO lo, Al CD ,_ .= c a ~ e z .= o ._ .= - ~0 CO . o lo Cal o a ~ z it. o ~ 0 3 8= ~ ~ 6.C ~ o =.m ~ ~= To ~ o ~ `. it_ o O O O O ~ ~D ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ O =- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e E ,, ~ e c e `=, ~ y =~ c ·' ~ L ~ ~ L ~ L, j ~ ~ ~ e ' ~ c 0 ~ 00 ~ ~ ao ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ L~ d4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ~ 0 ~ L~ ~ ~ C~ u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a, di oO ~ C~ oO d4 ~ Cn ~ O oo L~ - b: ¢ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ oO ~ O ~ d4 ~ ~ di ~ O C~ ~ ~ d4 ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ d. ~ u~ oo ~ ~ Lo . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ o oo oo ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ o N1 C~1 ~ ~ 4 ~) ~D ~ 1O ~ ~ C~l =4 t~ e') ~ 0 =4 00 ~ =) ~ ~ C~) 10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LO ~i 10 L~ ~ 00 ~i C~)d4~000000~\DIt)~= C Ct ~ ~ ~ ~= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o Z ~ ~ 7; o o . o U) - ~a . . ._ o

OCR for page 286
THE KUT~TOWN FARM TABLE 4 Soil Types on Kutztown Farma 291 Number Percentage Soil Type of Fields Acres of Total Berks shaley silt loam Fogelsville silt loam Ryder silt loam Weikert-Berks shaley silt loam 4 Otherb Total 61 25 5 3 98 193.4 76.0 17.1 9.5 9.2 305.2 63.4 24.9 5.6 3.1 3.0 100.0 aNumber of fields and total acreage vary slightly from year to year. bother includes 5.5 acres of Litz shaley silt loam and 4.2 acres of Melvin silt loam. SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. shale and siltstone. These soils are gently sloping to very hilly (Culik et al., 1983~. The soils are easily tillable, with a topsoil horizon usually about 9 inches thick and a subsoil extending to about 24 inches. They have a low available moisture capacity and are very prone to drought. Soil erosion is a moderate hazard, and crop rotations that feature frequent row crops (corn or soybeans) are not recommended. The Fogelsville soil series (on about 25 percent of the farm) is described as "deep, weD-drained, nearly level to sloping silty soils that have formed in material weathered from shaTey limestone or cement rock" (Culik et al., 19831. These soils are easily tilled and also easily eroded, with topsoil about inches thick and a substratum extending to about 38 inches. The farm contains 17.6 acres of highly erodible land with over 11 tons of potential soil erosion per acre. At the other extreme, 31.7 acres have an erosion potential of less than 3 tons of soil erosion per year (Table 5 and Figure 2~. The average soil erosion for the entire farm is estimated as 4.5 tons per acre per year (CuTik et al., 19831. Buildings and Facilities One large barn houses the farm's cattle and hogs. The beef barn includes a quarantine area in which purchaser! feeder stock are kept for 3 to 4 weeks before they are housed with the other beef animals. Chickens are kept in a small chicken house. There is also a machine shed and a shop where the farmer repairs the machinery. Machinery The farm uses conventional tilIage and frequent cultivation, averaging eight machinery operations per field per year. Because the farmer is so expert mechanically, he is able to use older equipment and keep it repaired.

OCR for page 286
292 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE TABLE 5 Kutztown Farm Estimated Soil Erosion, Based on Segments of the Farm, 1978-1982 Number Segments of Acres Estimated Soil Loss (tonslacrelyear) 1 8.8 11.27 2 18.0 4.00 3 8.8 13.84 4 8.2 6.61 5 44.3 3.64 6 11.2 0.77 7 12.6 6.79 8 46.3 4.00 9 32.0 3.32 10 12.2 3.19 11 28.9 4.94 12 44.1 4.77 13 20.5 2.67 Total 295.9 ~ SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input CroplLivestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. He is also able to adapt or fabricate parts of equipment, a talent shared by many other successful alternative farmers (see the Ferrari and Coleman case studies). The farm's 1982 machinery inventory included six tractors and a combine, plus equipment for planting, cultivating, haying, making silage, and spreading manure, with a total market value of about $67,000. (Purchased new, an inventory like this which would not ordinarily be found on a farm of this size would have cost more than $286,000 in 1982.) Because of the age of the equipment, depreciation and other costs of ownership are lower. However, this cost saving is somewhat offset by repair costs (replacement parts, engines, and so forth) and losses that result from a lack of timeliness of operations when the aging machinery breaks down. Although available data do not permit direct comparisons of the machinery inventory on the Kutztown Farm with that of a comparable farm using conventional prac- tices, it is clear that this farmer is substituting his mechanical craftsmanship (in repairing old machinery) for the capital that would be needed to pur- chase newer equipment. The timeliness of field operations is critical on farms. Equipment age and other factors influence the timely completion of operations. Machinery breakdowns occur on the Kutztown Farm. Usually, however, the farmer can quickly fix the problem. Back-up tractors are available when needed. Equip- ment and labor needs are divided among eight crops produced during a 9-month period (March through November); consequently, the demand on equipment is spread out. This means that, when a certain piece of equip-

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM \ 1 ~ \~ Rodale Research Center DOW ~ 4 \ = ma\ / - 5 - - 13 ~ \ mu\ 12 \ 11 \ - 293 FIGURE 2 Kutztown Farm segments for erosion calculations. Segmented according to relatively uniform sod type and slopes. SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. P. 30 in The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/ Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. ment breaks down, it can be repaired while minimizing production Tosses (CuTik et al., 1983~. The machinery inventory is much the same in 1986 as it was in 1982. MANAGEMENT FEATURES Labor The farm is operated primarily by the farmer with one fur-time hired man and occasional help from his wife and other family members or other relatives as necessary. Since 197S, and particularly in recent years as the father's health has declined, the son in the family has taken on the primary role of managing and producing the crops and repairing and operating the farm equipment and machinery. For the purposes of this report, the son is considered the farmer; his father now focuses primarily on managing the beef fee~ot. Culik et al. (1983) measured crop labor input during the 1982 season (Table 6~. These data may or may not represent average labor input in other years. Nevertheless, labor is distributed much more evenly throughout the year, largely because of the variety of crops grown.

OCR for page 286
294 TABLE 6 Kutztown Farm Labor Requirements, 1982 Hours/Acre/Season ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE March- June- September- December- Crop May August November February Total Alfalfa hay 0.0 8.0 3.0 0.0 11.0 Barley 0.0 7.2 2.8 0.0 10.0 Corn, grain 1.6 1.1 3.0 0.0 5.7 Corn, silage 1.6 1.1 3.0 0.0 5.7 Red clover hay 0.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 Ryea 0.0 7.2 2.8 0.0 10.0 Soybeans 1.6 1.1 1.5 0.0 4.2 Spring barley/oats 1.8 7.2 1.0 0.0 10.0 Wheat 0.0 7.2 2.8 0.0 10.0 aNo budget for rye is given (sum et al., 1977). Labor requirements for rye are assumed to be the same as those for barley. SOURCES: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center; Dum, S. A., F. A. Hughes, J. G. Cooper, B. W. Kelly, and V. E. Crowley. 1977. The Penn State Farm Management Handbook. University Park, Pa.: College of Agriculture, The Pennsylvania State University. CuTik et al. (1983) estimated that the Kutztown Farm's labor requirements exceeded those of conventional farms by 10 to 30 percent. Comparable data for conventional farms are not available, however. The labor requirements in Dum et al. (1977), which have been used for such estimates, are known to be obsolete and inaccurate (V. Crowley, Penn State University Farm Man- agement Extension Director, interview, 1987~. Tillage and Crop Rotations When the family first began farming the Rodale land in 1973 (on a special lease requiring that agricultural chemicals not be used and other manage- ment provisions), the yields were described by the farmer's father as disas- trous for several years (interview, 1982~. No crop yield data are available from that phase of the operation. Beginning in 197S, however, detailed yield information was collected by the staff of the RodaTe Research Center for 5 years. The farmer recalls that crop yields were "very Tow until after the first plow-down of a legume," when yields increased substantially. He observed another increase in yields following the second plow-down of a legume (the second rotation), but since then yields have not increased with subsequent plow-downs. Crop production on the Kutztown Farm includes alfalfa and red clover hays, barley, oats, rye and wheat, corn for grain and silage, and soybeans. The acreages planted in each of these crops varied during the study period, but the cropland usually was apportioned into about one-third hay, one- third small grains, and one-third row crops (corn and soybeans) (see Table

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM 295 2~. Currently, the farmer has increased the farm's corn acreage to about 36 percent ant! decreased its hay acreage in part because he became aware that nitrogen availability was more than adequate (Wegrzyn, 1984) and in part because of the declining price of hay. (Hay prices were reported to be $70.00 per ton in 1935, compared with $110.00 per ton during the period from 1978 to 1982 covered by the Culik study.) With the exception of the hay crops, all of the crops are used for the livestock raised on the farm. From 1978 to 1982, approximately two-thirds of the hay was sold off the farm; today, that proportion has dropped to one-half. The farmer uses certified seed for most crops, although occasionally he uses some home-grown red clover, timothy, small grains, or soybean seeds. CuTik et al. (1933) report that during their study a complex crop rotation was used throughout the farm that involved the consideration of many factors before a crop was selected for an individual field. The standard cropping sequence included small grains used for establishing leguminous hay crops, followed by corn, soybeans, or more corn, and, again, small grains. The hay crops included alfalfa, alfalfa-timothy, red clover, or mixed species. The farmer generally keeps hillsides in alfalfa hay in longer rotations, with shorter rotations used on the less sloping fields. During the Culik study, the species used for hay included pure alfalfa, pure clover, and alfalfa or clover seeded either with timothy or bromegrass. Currently, only alfalfa or a mix of red clover and timothy is used. The farm's use of different hay crops has been a deliberate management strategy to spread out the harvest dates, thus avoiding the need to hire additional labor or purchase additional machinery. Each year the alfalfa is cut first, followed by the clover and the clover mixes, thus spreading the haying time and its accompanying labor and machinery requirements- over about a month in the spring. Spreading the timing of the hay harvest also reduces the risk of rain damage, although every spring some hay is lessened in quality by rain. In the establishment year of the hay rotation the crops are seeded with a small grain. At the first hay harvest the residual straw from the small grain is mowed and baled with the hay; a second cutting is normally obtained late in the summer. After the establishment year the alfalfa or alfalfa-timothy hay is usually cut three times; red clover and timothy are only cut twice. The clover hay stanc! is sometimes plowed down after just 1 full year of production. Currently, the farmer reports that he is still using a rather flexible ap- proach to his rotation, depending on weather and other conditions. He says his typical rotation is as follows. After plowing down a legume, he plants corn for 1 or 2 years (occasionally 3), followed by 3 years of small grain (usually rye, then barley, then wheat). He may underseed the wheat with a legume mixture (timothy and clover) if conditions permit or wait until the next spring to plant oats and alfalfa together. Timothy is always combined with the red clover.

OCR for page 286
296 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE The alfalfa is grown for about 3 years. The farmer says the alfalfa crop in the mix is nearly depleted in 3 years and must be plowed down. A former director of the Rodale Research Center observed that the stand is typically 50 to 75 percent alfalfa when it is plowed down (correspondence, 19861. The farmer observed that if he were to use chemicals it would be possible to slow the stand depletion caused by diseases and insects. The conventional practice in the area is to apply carbofuran in the spring to control alfalfa weevils and dimethoate later in the season to control potato leafhopper, which tends to do severe damage. In this way an alfalfa stand will produce heavier yields and can be maintained for as long as 6 years. Conventional farmers often still plow down their alfalfa after 3 years, however, because of their rotation or other farm management considerations. During the study period monitored by Culik et al. (1983), another third of the farm was in row crops (corn or soybeans). Currently, corn is grown on about 44 percent of the land. Corn is always grown on plowed-down hay fields, usually for 2 and occasionally for up to 3 years. Animal manures (from poultry or cattle) are usually applied to the second- or third-year corn. The farmer considers weather, weed, insect, and nutrient factors when deciding the number of years of corn production. Normally, corn is grown for 1 or 2 years, making use of the residual nitrogen from the leguminous hay plow-down and the animal manure. On the farm's more fertile soils, however, corn is occasionally grown for 3 years. The production practices used for both the corn grain and the silage fields are similar. The corn is grown in 38-inch-wide rows with populations aver- aging about 17,000 plants per acre; typical corn plant populations in the area are 1S,000 to 20,000 plants per acre for corn grain and 20,000 to 24,000 plants per acre for silage. Wegrzyn (1984) attributes the relatively low plant population on the farm to the fact that an old, well-worn, 4-row planter was used. Although higher plant populations are considered a standard agro- nomic practice for weed control (because they provide a heavy canopy early in the season, shading the emerging weeds), the Kutztown Farm achieves above-average yields with below-average plant populations. The farmer plants hybrid corn seed, usually of several varieties and some- times mixed in the same field. The corn is rotary hoed at least once to control the early weeds and then cultivated two or three times. Because rainfall of 0.01 inch or more occurs on the average every third day (see Table 3), however, sometimes the farmer is unable to cultivate at the optimum time for weed control. In 1986, the corn was harvested by chopping two rows for silage in the normal manner and then picking eight rows. The picked ears were ground in the field with a picker-grinder before being blown into the wagon with the silage. The benefit of this method is that, by alternating silage chopping with the ear picking, the feed value of the silage is increased, and about 80 percent of the corn residue is left in the field, providing abundant organic matter and preventing soil erosion. Compared with the erosion that occurs when all corn stalks are cut for silage, a method that leaves virtually no

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM 297 ground cover, the farmer's practice of alternating two rows of silage and eight rows of grain is estimated to reduce soil erosion by 36 percent on the more erosive category of soils and 30 percent on the less erosive soils. (These estimates are based on data in Domanico, [19851.) Adding the extra ear corn at silage harvest time also reduces expenses later when grain corn would normally be added to the feed ration. The addition of wet ear corn also seems to help with silage packing and subse- quent preservation. Currently, only about 20 of the farm's 110 acres of corn are harvested (in the faD) as grain and stored for feeding. Of the remaining 90 acres, about 22.5 acres are harvested as regular silage and about 67.5 acres are harvested as high-moisture ear corn and combined with the silage to increase its feeding value. Soybeans, which are grown on about 20 acres, are roasted (by custom hire) and used as feed for the cattle, hogs, and chickens. Prior to 1985, soybeans planted on the non-Rodale land were drilled on a 7-inch row spacing, and herbicides were used for weed control. On the Rodale land, soybeans were planted in 38-inch rows and cultivated 2 or 3 times for weed control. Since 1985, aD soybeans are planted in 30-inch rows, and the farmer reports that yields are similar on both lands. Scientific comparisons are impossible, however, because of varying cropping histories and soil types. Soybeans are never grown in any field 2 years in succession because of the farmer's concern about the risk of disease or excessive erosion. Roughly 29 percent of the land is typically planted in small grains (wheat, rye, barley, and oats). The farmer grows barley and rye as much for the straw (for livestock bedding) as for grain. Yields from these grains are generally lower than yields from wheat, but production of straw is greater. The farm uses oats, the first crop planted in the spring, as a backup crop when untimely rains prevent a fall planting of winter wheat. About 90 percent of the oats are underseeded with alfalfa or clover (correspondence with the farmer, 19864. The farmer reports that small grains are grown for 1 to 3 years before returning to a leguminous hay. The economic implications of including this combination of four small grains in the rotations are discussed later in this case study. Soil Fertility The farmer views the management of soil nutrients over the whole farm as particularly important. During the period of the CuTik study (1978-1982), the staff of the RodaTe Research Center frequently performed soil tests and plant tissue tests for each of the farm's 98 fields. The farmer had access to the test results (Table 7~. During the transition from chemical to nonchemi- cal farming methods on the RodaTe-rented land beginning in 1973, the farmer grew a higher-than-normal percentage of alfalfa or clover hay. By 1978 some fields had higher-than-optimal levels of nitrogen, according to nitrogen response trials conducted by Wegrzyn (19841. When the farmer

OCR for page 286
298 TABLE 7 Trends in Soil Sample Test Results, 1978-1982a ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE Item 1977 1978 1980 1981 1982 Soil pH 6.8 6.7 Phosphorus (pounds/ 181 276 acres Potassium (poundslacre) Magnesium (pounds/acre) Calcium (pounds/acre) Cation exchange capacity Organic matter (percent) NOTE: A dash indicates that data were not reported. 6.9 6.6 191 213 188 296 2,085 8.0 211 321 2,967 10.6 227 364 2,927 9.4 2.2 2.3 313 406 3,048 11.8 6.7 230 274 496 3,048 aData are averages for selected fields. bLevels over 101 pounds of phosphorus per acre are considered high in this area. SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. saw the results of those tests (Table S), he increased his grain plantings and reduced the legumes in the rotations. A more serious challenge than the level of nitrogen is the regulation of all nutrients. The major vehicle for such regulation is the application of ma- nure. The farmer applies about 10 tons of manure (including bedding ma- terial) per acre twice during the 5-year rotation, causing a bimodal fluctua- tion of potassium and nitrogen in the fields over the 5 years. A former director of the Rodale Research Center observes that after a manure appli- TABLE 8 Generalized Nitrogen (N) Budget for Corn on Kutztown Farm Major N Supplies Percentage of (available N) N/poundslacre/year Total N Forage legume residue 2,800 0.36 Soil N pool 2,207 0.28 Steer manure 1,526 0.19 Poultry manure 1,457 0.17 Total available N suppliesa 7,635 1.00 Crop requirementsb 6,449 Measured crop uptakes 6,530 N balanced + 1,104 aDoes not include contributions from soybean residue, precipitation, autotrophic N fixation, crop residues older than 1 year, or manure residue older than 2 years. bBased on 1978 Pennsylvania State University Soil Testing Service calculations for 40 acres of corn on 28 separate fields. CBased on 1978 Kjeldahl analyses of whole plant samples from 28 separate corn fields. Total N supplies minus measured crop uptake equals the N balance. SOURCE: Wegrzyn, V. A. 1984. Nitrogen fertility management in corn—A case study on a mixed crop-livestock farm in Pennsylvania. Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University.

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM TABLE 9 Comparison of Fertilizer and Other Agricultural Chemical Expenditures, Kutztown Farm Versus Berks County Estimated Average - 299 Expenditures per Acre (dollars) Kutztown Farm, Berks County, Item 1978-1982 1982 Fertilizers 13.85a 47.17b Other agricultural chemicals 4.28' 17.49b aFrom U.S. Department of Commerce. 1982. 1982 Census of Agriculture, Vol. 1. Geographic Area Series, Pt. 38, Pennsylvania State and County Data, Table 6. Washington, D.C. A mean of 599 gallons of starter fertilizer at $3.15/gallon plus 181 tons of chicken manure at $12.00/ton, divided by 293 acres. bCalculated from Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm, Tables 20 and 23. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. Mean expenditures per farm were divided by mean acreage of cropland harvested per farm. This procedure ignores fertilizers added to land not harvested and may overstate mean expenditures for the county. CEstimated by dividing total expenditures for chemicals on this farm by the number of non- Rodale acres. This procedure slightly overstates the cost per acre to which chemicals were applied. cation there is a gradual drawdown of available potassium, especially dur- ing the alfalfa portions of the hay rotation, and then a jump in potassium as manure is applied to the hay. This jump is followed by another gradual reduction until the small grain is planted, with another jump as manure is applied again. A somewhat similar pattern occurs with nitrogen. The farmer supplements the nutrients provided by legume rotations and beef manure produced on the farm with imported nutrients: chicken ma- nure purchased under a contract with a local egg producer and a small quantity (4 gallons per acre) of liquid starter fertilizer (9-18-9) for use on the corn. These materials provide a total of 3.6 pounds of nitrogen (N), 7.2 pounds of phosphorus (P), and 3.6 pounds of potassium (K) per acre. Culik et al. (1983) reported that from 1978 to 1982, the mean quantities of manure and fertilizer purchased were as follows: chicken manure with wood shavings, 181 tons at $12.00 per ton ($2,172), and liquid starter, 599 gallons at $3.15 per gallon ($1,887) a total of $4,059 per year or $13.85 per acre compared with a county average of $47.17 per acre (Table 91. Currently, 40 tons of chicken manure are delivered to the farm every 6 weeks (320 tons per year). Most of this manure is stockpiled (uncovered) until spring, when it is applied to certain fields. Culik and his coworkers reported that the chicken manure supplied 30 pounds N. 14 pounds P. and 7 pounds K per ton of fresh manure (that is, an analysis of 1.5-0.7-0.35~. However, from 30 to 90 percent of the nitrogen in manure can be lost through ammonia volatilization when the manure is left exposed (Vanderholm, 1975~. Nearly 50 percent may be lost in the first 24 hours (D. Pimentel, correspondence, 1987~.

OCR for page 286
300 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE To maintain a soil pH of 6.5 to 7.0, lime was applied to many fields in 1978; the use of legumes in the rotation requires that soil pH be maintained at or near neutral. During the Culik study, soil tests and plant tissue tests were performed for each of the 93 fields of the farm. Soil magnesium, calcium, and cation exchange capacity remained fairly constant during the study. Soil organic matter, measured in 1980 and 1981, was about 2.2 to 2.3 percent, a level similar to that in other fields in the area (Culik et al., 1983~. Available phosphorus, calcium, and potassium in the top 6 inches of the soil profile remained high enough so as not to limit crop production. In fact, the levels of these nutrients tended to increase from year to year, an increase that cannot be explained by the amounts of these nutrients applied in the ma- nure. Although this phenomenon is not well understood, the Rodale Re- search Center scientists speculate that deep-rooted sod crops in the rotation may be drawing nutrients upward from deep in the soil profile. Wegrzyn (1984) estimated the nitrogen budget for corn in a typical year on the Kutztown Farm. The largest source of nitrogen was found to be forage legume residuals (see Table S). Weed and Insect Control The Kutztown Farm largely avoids weed and insect problems by using intensive, yet flexible, crop rotations. Corn, in particular, is rarely grown in a given field for more than one or two seasons in succession as a means of breaking the reproductive cycle of corn root worm. Weed control on the Rodale land is accomplished primarily through cul- tivation and rotations. The corn, for example, is rotary hoed at least once for early weeds and then cultivated two or three times. From 1978 to 1982, the farmer used herbicides (atrazine, alachlor, butylate, and linuron) on corn and soybeans on the non-Rodale land. Currently, the farmer applies a mixture of atrazine and metolachlor to control yellow nutsedge on the non- Rodale land. The farmer has reported an increasing problem with control of velvetleaf in fields in which herbicides are used: "Velvetleaf weeds don't seem to be a problem in organic fields, but we do have weed problems that change from year to year. If we have wet weather during critical cultivating time, weeds can take over" (correspondence, 1986~. The total cost of chemicals during the period studied by Culik and col- leagues ranged from $354.00 to $1,029.00 (the mean was $565.00~; these costs were primarily for herbicides applied to the non-Rodale land (132 acres) and work out to an average of $4.28 per acre of non-Rodale land. A small and unknown fraction of the $565.00 average chemical cost was used to purchase sprays for barn insects. The comparable expenditure for other farms in Berks County in 1982 was $17.49 per acre (see Table 91. No weed control of any kind neither cultivation nor herbicides—is used on the small grains, and very few weeds are observed in these fields. Culik

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZ7OWN FARM TABLE to Livestock Sales, 1978-1982a 301 Commodity 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Beef cattle (heady 164 173 204 248 276 Eggs (dozens 3,100 3,634 4,531 4,967 5,235 Hogs (heady 168 150 139 39 55 aData do not include two to four cattle, several hogs, and eggs consumed annually on the farm. breeder cattle (of many breeds) are purchased at 650-700 pounds. Finished weight is 1,100- 1,150 pounds. In 1985, about 290 head were sold. CNumber of laying hens in 1978 was about 200, increasing to almost 300 in 1982. Hens are kept for an egg-laying period of 14 months, after which they are butchered for consumption by the families of the three men operating the farm (the farmer, his father, and the hired men). The flock size is currently 20 hens. Hogs are purchased at 45-50 pounds and sold when finished, usually after 90 days. The hog herd is now 50 head. SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. et al. (1983) reported that during the 5 years of the study crop rotations controlled weeds, insects, and diseases. In 1936 weed control in the corn fields was excellent. However, because weather conditions interfered with the timing of cultivations, the soybean fields had severe weed problems in 1986 despite rotary hoeing and cultivat- ing. Weeds are sometimes a serious problem when untimely rain prevents cultivation, while in other years cultivation controls weeds better than her- bicides do. The farmer suspects that the chicken manure he uses contained weed seeds (telephone interview, 1986~. Animal Enterprises The farm gave increasing emphasis to its beef cattle finishing operation from 1978 to 1982. Cattle sales increased 68 percent (Table 10) at the same time hog production declined by 67 percent. Egg production also increased 69 percent. Since 1982, the chicken and hog enterprises on the farm have been reduced. Currently, the farm has 20 laying hens (for family use) and 50 hogs. The farmer reported that he increases the number of hogs in production when the price of feeder hogs declines. The number of cattle sold increased slightly to about 290 in 1985. Animals are confined but have small exercise yards; they are occasionally grazed in the fall on one field that is fenced. Antibiotics are used only to treat acute disease problems as they arise. Newly purchased feeder cattle are isolated until they have stabilized and are fed antibiotics (sulfa and chiortetracycline) for the first 3 to 4 weeks after shipping. Otherwise, drugs are not used prophylactically or as subtherapeutic growth promoters. The farmer reports that feeder cattle purchased in Virginia seem to have fewer

OCR for page 286
302 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE disease problems than locally purchased animals. The decline in the size of the hog herd noted above was partly due to disease problems in animals purchased at a local livestock auction. The cattle are confined in the barn, and urine and droppings are caught in the bedding, which helps to keep the barn somewhat ctry underfoot. The farmer mentioned that poor ventilation in the barn in which the cattle are fed sometimes causes health problems (telephone interview, 1986~. There is essentially no runoff or effluent from the barn, and except for ammonia volatilization, virtually all the nutrients excreted by the animals are caught in the bedding. The straw bedding is a high-carbon material, and it is reasonable to assume that losses of nitrogen are reduced. There is little smell of ammonia, even when the manure is dug out, but some nitrogen Tosses are inevitable. With a high carbon-nitrogen ratio in the bedding and manure, it is reasonable to expect that when they are applied to the field, some soil nitrogen is temporarily immobilized by soil bacteria while they are breaking down the cellulose in the straw. Cattle are fed approximately the following amounts per head per day, for 200 to 240 days: corn silage, 15 pounds; a barley, oats, wheat, and rye mix (processed in a roller mill), 5 pounds; roasted soybeans, 1 pound; and ground, high-moisture ear corn, 7 pounds (wet basis). In addition, the cattle are fed leguminous hay, vitamins, and minerals. Younger stock receive more hay than do animals near finishing. The average weight gain is about 2.3 pounds per head per day, with some animals gaining up to 2.5 pounds. When they reach 1,100 to 1,150 pounds the cattle (often 2 to 4 head per week) are sold to local butchers or meat packers. Hogs and chickens are fed the same feed ration: corn, oats, barley, wheat, and rye (in proportions of about 75 percent corn to 25 percent small grains); vitamins and minerals; and roasted soybeans mixed with the grains (in a ratio of 1:51. The hogs are allowed in the barn with the cattle but are fee! (ad libitum) separately from the beef cattle. When finished, the hogs are sold to local butchers; local markets buy the eggs, except for the meat and eggs used by the two families on the farm and the hired man, who receives room and board in addition to a wage. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Soil Conservation Culik et al. (1983) estimated that the soil erosion on the Kutztown Farm (based on the Universal Soil Loss Equation) ranged from a Tow of 0.8 tons per acre per year in one 11-acre area to 13.S tons per acre per year on the most erodible S.~-acre area. The Soil Conservation Service, which has esti- mated that soil erosion on some farms in Berks County is as high as 18 to 40 tons per acre per year, put the tolerable soil loss levels on the Kutztown Farm between 3 and 5 tons per acre per year. Pimentel et al. (1987) estimated that this tolerable level exceeds the rate of soil formation by a factor of 10

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM 303 times. The average soil erosion on the Kutztown Farm was estimated at 4.5 tons per acre per year when moldboard plowing in combination with con- tour and strip cropping was used. (If moldboard plowing was used without contour and strip cropping, however, it was estimated that the average soil erosion on the Kutztown Farm would more than triple to 14.7 tons per acre per year.) As discussed earlier, the levels of various soil nutrients on the Kutztown Farm increased from 1977 to 1982. Yield Performance Crop yields on the Kutztown Farm are generally equal to or slightly higher than state or county averages (Table 11~. The notable exceptions are barley and rye yields. These grains have been substantially below average most years because the farm uses Tong-stemmed varieties to provide ample straw for bedding, not dwarf varieties, which are typically grown for higher yields. v , ~ , v In addition to the Tower yield effect of selecting long-stemmed cultivars, the farm sometimes has a peculiar problem with small grains, especially rye: excess nitrogen in the soil can cause lower grain yields but even higher yields of straw. For example, 1981 was a year with normal rainfall following a very dry year; alternative systems are very responsive to moisture, and in a dry year the nitrogen in the soil is not completely used but instead accumulates in a mineralized form. In 1981 the farmer reported that he applied the usual manure before rye, not realizing that there had been considerable mineralization of the nitrogen released from the organic matter that had been applied during the previous dry summer. In 1981 excess nitrogen was released not only from the manure applied that year but also from the mineralized nitrogen left from the year before; the rye grew 6 to ~ feet tall with such heavy stems that they lodged (bent to the ground); and very little of the grain was recovered at harvest. In 1981 the farm averaged less than half of the average state and county yields of barley. The farmer observed, "l think the poor barley yield was mostly due to winter kill. This problem seems to be worse with the early fall seeding and weather patterns such as heavy freezing with bare ground" (correspondence, 1986~. William Liebharcit (correspondence, 1986) has sug- gested that the early fall-seeded barley may also have had disease problems. Corn yields on the Kutztown Farm averaged 28 percent higher than the county average and 17 percent higher than the state average from 1978 through 1982. In 1980, a very dry year, the farm's corn yield was 47 percent higher than the county average. This result is consistent with the findings of several studies (see, for example, Lockeretz et al. [19841) indicating that, under dry weather conditions, farming systems based on crop rotations have relatively higher yields than conventional farms. The likely cause for the better dry weather performance is better soil filth and moisture-holding capacity. For other crops, yields for Kutztown Farm corn silage equaled

OCR for page 286
304 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE TABLE 11 Kutztown Farm Crop Yields per Acre Compared With County and State Averages Crop 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Mean Alfalfa hay (tons/acre) County 3.2 3.1 2.4 3.3 3.2 3.0 Kutztown — — 2.4 3.8 3.8 3.3 Corn grain (bushels/acre) County 95.7 95.0 52.0 92.0 92.0 85.3 Kutztown 121.3 124.4 76.6 121.3 96.6 108.0 State 95.0 95.0 75.0 96.0 97.0 91.6 Corn silage (tons/acre) County 17.0 13.8 10.6 15.4 14.9 14.3 Kutztown 17.6 — 9.3 15.3 15.0 14.3 State 15.5 15.0 12.6 16.2 15.2 14.9 Other hay (tons/acre) Countya 2.0 1.6 1.9 1.8 2.2 1.9 Kutztownb — - 1.3 3.6 3.1 2.7 Statea 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.9 Rye (bushels/acre)' Kutztown 23.6 24.0 39.6 30.3 27.3 29.0 State 32.0 27.0 31.0 33.0 34.0 31.4 Soybean (bushels/acre)' Kutztown 38.8 36.8 27.9 44.0 42.8 38.1 State 31.5 32.0 24.5 31.0 32.0 30.2 Wheat (bushels/acre) County 35.0 33.0 41.0 41.0 39.0 37.8 Kutztown — 33.1 37.0 41.8 34.6 36.6 State 33.0 31.0 37.0 36.0 36.0 34.6 NOTE: Oats could not be compared directly because the Kutztown Farm grew a spring barley and oats mix. A dash indicates that data are not available. aIncludes red clover and mixed hays. bIncludes red clover and timothy hay. CCounty average data are not available. SOURCE: Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-Input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center. county and state averages, and soybean yields averaged 26 percent above the state mean. Financial Performance Any assessment of the financial performance of the Kutztown Farm is complicated by a lack of comparable data for conventional farms. Culik et al. (1983) used a number of simplifying procedures to facilitate an economic comparison of the Kutztown Farm with a conventional comparison farm. One of their key procedures was substituting certain Kutztown Farm data for the comparable items in the Penn State Farm Management Handbook (sum

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM 305 et al., 1977) in calculating the costs for the comparison farm in particular, variable machine costs, which ignores labor cost, depreciation, ant! other overhead and fixed costs. Culik et al. (1983) estimated that the Kutztown Farm incurred a somewhat lower cost for producing various crops for example, 1 percent lower costs per acre for producing corn and 20 percent lower costs for alfalfa. As a result, they estimated that the Kutztown Farm earned a 5 percent higher net cash income than a comparison farm ($69,430 versus $65,987~. When the Culik team's assumption of equal variable machine costs is relaxed, however, and the Penn State Farm Management Handbook costs are used without that adjustment, and when differences in yields are taken into account, the cost comparisons are drastically different. The cash operating cost per bushel (or the variable cost) of producing corn grain was found to be 6 percent higher, and alfalfa costs 45 percent higher, on the Kutztown Farm than on the comparison farm; the costs of producing all other crops were also significantly higher on the Kutztown Farm; some were more than double the comparison values. The farm's variable costs per bushel of small grains were found to be particularly high relative to those of the conven- tional comparison farm (because its grain yields are quite low, for reasons explained earlier). There are some problems with the assumptions in this comparison, how- ever. A conventional farm probably would not produce the same combina- tion of crops as the Kutztown Farm. For example, farmers might choose the more profitable option of purchasing straw rather than committing such a high proportion of their land to the production of small grains, especially rye and barley, that typically produce low grain yields. To provide a more direct comparison, researchers at The Pennsylvania State University (Dabbert, 1986; Dabbert and Madden, 1986; Domanico, 1985; Domanico et al., 1986) used economic simulation in conjunction with linear programming, relying on the Culik team's descriptions of the physi- cal characteristics of the Kutztown Farm and its resource requirements and yields, together with comparable data from the Penn State Farm Management Handbook and elsewhere. Studies that compare actual operating farms using alternative methods of production with other standards (such as county averages) or matched nearby farms have been criticized for their lack of statistical controls and for uncontrollable differences among ostensibly com- parable farms (Lockeretz et al., 1984~. The economic simulation approach also has inherent limitations, includ- ing the risk that the mathematical combination of management practices may appear to be reasonable but in realty may be unworkable. (In addition, in this particular case the analysis conducted by the Penn State researchers assumed that the farm could be operated with about the same complement of equipment under either conventional management or the mixed conven- tional-alternative procedures employed on the Kutztown Farm, a question- able assumption.) Consequently, the findings of this type of analysis must always be interpreted cautiously. A strength of this approach, however, is

OCR for page 286
306 ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURE that it has the advantage of holding constant the resource base and certain other factors that would otherwise tent! to confound! the comparisons. The Penn State analysis calculated income in terms of net return over cash operating (variable) costs, ignoring energy utilization and most of the externalities (except soil erosion). The conventional comparison farm was not assumed to produce the same combination of crops as the Kutztown Farm. Instead, it was assumed that both the Kutztown Farm and the con- ventional comparison farm would be optimally organized; that is, they would produce the most profitable combination of enterprises, subject to the limitations of the resources available and the technologies used. Specif- ically, the analysis was designed to provide directly comparable results from the Kutztown Farm versus alternative scenarios featuring the use of other technologies (including conventional practices, overseeding, no-till, and other options) in the context of specific assumptions regarding the level of soil erosion permitted, the rotations appropriate for alternative farming systems, and the use or nonuse of chemical pesticides and fertilizers. The economic analysis postulated both a single-year planning horizon (see Domanico et al., 1986) and a multiple-year transition from conventional to organic farming, defined as a farming system compatible with the U.S. Department of Agriculture definition of organic farming (see Dabbert, 1986~. Only Domanico et al.'s (1986) findings are discussed here. Domanico et al. (1986) found that when soil erosion is not limited, the profit-maximizing conventional farm plan is 3 percent more profitable (in terms of net return over cash operating costs) as compared with an opti- mally organized alternative farm plan with the same resources. Soil erosion was estimated to be 9.7 tons per acre per year for the optimally organized conventional comparison farm compared with 5 tons per acre per year for the Kutztown Farm (Domanico et al., 1986~. But when soil erosion is limited to a 5-ton-per-acre average across the farm, the conventional option is 1 percent less profitable than the alternative option. When soil erosion is limited to 3 tons per acre, the alternative option is estimated to yield a $3,200 (10.S percent) higher profit than a conventionally operated farm. (Of course, the comparative financial performance of the Kutztown Farm under conventional and alternative management would also vary with different prices of farm commodities and inputs.) The management and labor requirements of the Kutztown Farm would be likely to exceed those of a conventional alternative because of the farm's reliance on cultivation for weed control (on the Rodale land) as well as the complexity of the crop rotations and the large number (98) of small fields necessitated by the contour strip-cropping system. The magnitude of differ- ence in management and labor requirements cannot be determined at pres- ent, however, because of data limitations. REFERENCES Culik, M. N., J. C. McAllister, M. C. Palada, and S. L. Rieger. 1983. The Kutztown Farm Report: A Study of a Low-input Crop/Livestock Farm. Regenerative Agriculture Library Technical Bulletin. Kutztown, Pa.: Rodale Research Center.

OCR for page 286
THE KUTZTOWN FARM 307 Dabbert, S. 1986. A Dynamic Simulation Model of the Transition from Conventional to Organic Farming. M.S. thesis, The Pennsylvania State University. Dabbert, S., and P. Madden. 1986. The transition to organic agriculture: A multi-year model of a Pennsylvania farm. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1~3~:99-107. Domanico, I. L. 1985. Income Effects of Limiting Soil Erosion Under Alternative Farm Man- agement Systems: A Simulation and Optimization Analysis of a Pennsylvania Crop and Livestock Farm. M.S. thesis, The Pennsylvania State University. Domanico, J. L., P. Madden, and E. l. Partenheimer. 1986. Income effects of limiting soil erosion under organic, conventional, and no-till systems in eastern Pennsylvania. Amer- ican Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1~2~:75-82. Dum, S. A., F. A. Hughes, I. G. Cooper, B. W. Kelly, and V. E. Crowley. 1977. The Penn State Farm Management Handbook. University Park, Pa.: College of Agriculture, The Pennsyl- vania State University. Lockeretz, W., G. Shearer, D. H. Kohl, and R. W. Klepper. 1984. Comparison of organic and conventional farming in the corn belt. In Organic Farming: Current Technology and Its Role in a Sustainable Agriculture, D. F. Bezdicek, and I. F. Power, eds. Madison, Wis.: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America. Pimentel, D., l. Allen, A. Beers, L. Guinand, R. Linder, P. McLaughlin, B. Meer, D. Musonda, D. Perdue, S. Poisson, S. Siebert, K. Stoner, R. Salazar, and A. Hawkins. 1987. World agriculture and soil erosion. Bioscience 37~4~: 277-283. Vanderholm, D. H. 1975. Nutrient losses from livestock waste during storage, treatment, and handling. Pp. 282-285 in Managing Livestock Waste. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Livestock Wastes. St. Joseph, Mich.: American Society of Agricultural . . . ~ngmeers. Wegrzyn, V. A. 1984. Nitrogen Fertility Management in Corn—A Case Study on a Mixed Crop-Livestock Farm in Pennsylvania. Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State Univer- sity.