Land availability still concerns young farmers, ranchers

Securing adequate land to grow crops and raise livestock, government regulations and red tape, availability of farm labor and related regulations, water availability and urbanization of farm land are among the top concerns of young farmers and ranchers.
Securing adequate land to grow crops and raise livestock was the top challenge identified in the American Farm Bureau Federation's (AFBF) annual outlook survey of participants in the Young Farmers & Ranchers program, as reported by the AFBF. The issue was also the top challenge cited in last year's survey.
The challenge was identified by 22 percent of respondents, ages 18-35, followed by economic challenges, particularly profitability, which was identified by 15 percent of the respondents.
"For young people today, securing adequate land to begin farming or expand an established farm or ranch is a major challenge," said Jake Carter, AFBF's national Young Farmers & Ranchers committee chair and a farmer from Georgia. "Another major challenge is figuring out how to excel -- not just survive -- in today's economy," he added.
Optimism, despite concerns
Other issues that ranked as top concerns in the annual survey included government regulations and red tape (12 percent); availability of farm labor and related regulations (9 percent); water availability and urbanization of farm land (7 percent each); and health care availability and cost (6 percent).
The 2014 survey revealed that 91 percent of the nation's young farmers and ranchers are more optimistic about farming and ranching than they were five years ago. Last year, 90 percent of those surveyed said they were more optimistic about farming compared to five years ago.
The survey also showed that America's young farmers and ranchers are committed environmental caretakers, with 55 percent using conservation tillage to protect soil and reduce erosion on their farms.
The future of farming
In a new question on the survey this year, the young farmers and ranchers were asked about their rural entrepreneurship efforts, with 40 percent reporting they had started a new business in the last three years or plan to start one in the near future.
Additionally, more than 91 percent of respondents considered themselves lifetime farmers, with 88 percent hoping to see their children follow in their footsteps.
The survey results were compiled following the AFBF's 2014 Young Farmers & Ranchers Leadership Conference in Virginia Beach, Va., in February.

Biofuel production may not cause indirect land use change

The annual change in planted areas for cotton, corn/soybeans and oats in the U.S. correlate with the change in croplands for biofuel production, but only cotton seems to be negatively affected, calling into question the theory that biofuel production in the U.S. has induced indirect land use change.
A new study, "Indirect land use change for biofuels: Testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies," compiled historical data from 2002 to 2007 to take a look at the potential correlation between U.S. biofuel production and indirect land use change. The study found that "no arable land increases from the 1990s are observed in the U.S. Furthermore, no declines in natural ecosystem lands in the U.S. have been observed since 1998. Therefore, the U.S. historical data do not indicate that [indirect land use change] occurred within the 48 contiguous states as a result of U.S. biofuel production."
However, said study preparers Seungdo Kim and Bruce Dale of Michigan State University, the results can be interpreted two different ways: either biofuel production in the U.S. through the end of 2007 has not induced indirect land use change, or the test simply failed to detect ongoing indirect land use change from the historical data. The study suggests that more research be done, both with data after 2007 (which is not yet available) and with more sophisticated empirical approaches that might more accurately make use of the historical data.

National Resources Inventory: 23 million acres of US agricultural land lost between 1982 and 2007

The most recent National Resources Inventory, a survey of U.S. non-federal lands conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service, has revealed that every state lost agricultural land to development between 1982 and 2007 — more than 23 million acres in all.
According to the survey, the five states to lose the most land were Texas, California, Florida, Arizona and North Carolina. The states that developed the largest percentage of their land were New Jersey (26.8%), Rhode Island (22.5%), Massachusetts (18.1%), Delaware (14.3%) and New Hampshire (13.2%). Further, 44% more of the land converted was considered prime agricultural land than not, raising concerns among experts. "Many of the numbers from the NRI that we’ve analyzed are sobering,” said Jon Scholl, president of American Farmland Trust.
Still, said Scholl, there are a few bright spots, such as a decline in the nationwide rate of farmland loss over the 25-year reporting period, despite a booming housing market during portions of that timeframe. “This overall decline is likely due to smart growth policies that encourage more efficient development,” said Julia Freedgood, AFT's managing director of farmland protection. “The NRI data show that the threat to our agricultural resources is real. But we were heartened to find that policies to encourage more efficient development work — slowing farmland loss and buying time. Smart growth coupled with permanent farmland protection programs ensures that in the face of growth agricultural land will be available to produce food for our nation and a growing world population.”

Improved plant efficiency, not just yield, vital to crop sustainability

A second Green Revolution, focusing on plant efficiency rather than the yield goal of the first revolution, will be vital to managing sustainable crops that can be used to reduce world hunger, according to Jonathan Lynch, plant nutritionist for Pennsylvania State University.
The first revolution, according to Lynch, concentrated on soil inputs like fertilizers and irrigation. While the results worked for regions with good soil quality, many of the poorest nations also have to contend with poor soil — a situation that necessitates a different approach. "What we need, instead of plants that respond to fertilizers, are plants that can do well in low-input, low-fertility environments," said Lynch. Plants that can more efficiently acquire nutrients from the soil could save money, help the environment and result in more food for more people.
Efficient roots are the crux of the matter, according to Lynch, but finding the solution is complex. "To just say that you want more roots — that's the wrong answer," said Lynch. "Roots use up carbon and other resources. By having more roots, you have less yield. What you want somehow is a root system that's doing just the right thing at the right time in the right place."
Experiments in breeding for yield at low fertility has been successful where attempted, but many more studies need to be done. "The bottleneck right now is phenomics — identifying those root traits that are important and then, what's more difficult, understanding how they interact with one another," said Lynch. "There are very few people doing this kind of work. It's amazing to realize at this point how little we still know."

Auctioneer says market for cropland improving

Prices for high-quality farmland are rebounding, according to Rex Schrader, president of Schrader Real Estate and Auction Company in Columbia City, Ind., one of the largest auctioneers of agricultural land in the United States.
"The optimism is back in the market, especially for higher quality land. … Land in the top one-third in terms of quality is up a good 10% during this quarter, and we are seeing new records for land prices in many counties," he said. “The evidence of the uptrend in the market for good cropland today is very clear."