16.05.2015 Views

a four-fold rise - Center for Food Safety

a four-fold rise - Center for Food Safety

a four-fold rise - Center for Food Safety

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Center</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Food</strong> <strong>Safety</strong> – Science Comments – FG72 Soybean <br />

62 <br />

upon long-­‐term climate data, inherent soil and site characteristics, and cropping and management <br />

practices.” Tillage regimes are the primary component of “cropping and management practices,” and <br />

thus play a large role in determining soil erosion rates. It is well established that soil erosion <br />

increases with the intensity of tillage, and decreases as farmers adopt regimes that leave more plant <br />

residue on the soil (USDA ERS AREI 2002). Thus, the chart below reflects in large degree the tillage <br />

regimes used by farmers.<br />

From: NRCS <br />

(2010), p. 2. <br />

On a national <br />

basis, water and wind erosion on cropland declined sharply by 38% from 1982 to 1997, from 3.06 to <br />

1.89 billion tons. In the following decade, however, soil erosion almost leveled out, declining by just <br />

8%, from 1.89 to 1.73 billion tons. Herbicide-­‐resistant crops were first introduced in 1996, and the <br />

area planted to them (HR soybeans, corn and cotton) increased steadily from 16.0 million acres in <br />

1997 to 117.2 million acres in 2007 (Benbrook Supplemental 2009, Table 5). If HR crops promoted <br />

adoption of conservation tillage in any significant way, one would surely expect a much stronger <br />

decline in soil erosion over a period when their adoption increased by 100 million acres. <br />

However, NRCS’ survey offers still more compelling evidence at the regional level. The following map <br />

(from p. 3) breaks down average annual soil erosion rates, in tons per acre per year, by farm <br />

production region. For each region, rates <strong>for</strong> the six survey periods (1982, 1987, 1992, 1997, 2002 <br />

and 2007) are shown stacked from top (1982) to bottom (2007). The rates in this map are also listed <br />

in Table 36 of the report (pp. 12-­‐16).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!