[Carpenter Prairie Discussion] biomass

Tue Dec 15 10:05:03 CST 2009

CRP is a national program and the reasons it exists are complex.  There is not a lot of support at the national level (more broadly than conveyed below) to moving CRP away from the soil, water, wildlife and related purposes that have been legislated.  There is more support for the idea of CRP as a reservoir of biomass feedstocks if done as compatible use (i.e. harvest OK as long as the purposes of the program are preserved and in accordance with existing authorities which reflect negotiated position among many diverse groups) - there is less support as thinking moves CRP away from that paradigm.  Some of the USDA representatives receiving this message can correct me if wrong but biomass harvest from CRP has been possible since the 2002 Farm Bill.  It is also important to know that CRP has been an important emergency reservoir of forage that has benefited livestock producers in times of weather-related disaster (many, many times in just about every state with significant CRP) and that is only possible by way of CRP being what it is.  CRP has always been viewed as a reservoir of land that could quickly go back in crop production in the event of national emergency such as war (the Secretary of Agriculture has authority to make that call).  It won't be possible for CRP to be all of the above all the time and changing the magic of the formula that created and maintains CRP could erode flexibility for the land to be what the country needs when it is needed.

There is much uncertainty about the CRP and biofuel feedstock production but the following factors are very much at play:

·         Producing biofuel feedstocks on CRP or other land will accomplish little unless there is a processing or other facility to use it within a reasonable distance (50-75 miles is the distance usually discussed because to transport farther makes biofuel production uneconomical).

·         Industry (and often academia) continues to be focused on maximizing production from single-purpose monoculture production and that will drive things in the short term which could turn into the long term.

·         Funding and economics will be the overriding factors for some time to come (as in money from programs, tax or other incentives and bottom-line profitability).

·         Change to CRP that benefits wildlife in one part of the U.S. can result in harm to wildlife if applied in another place.

A final word on CRP is simply to be aware that the playing field is very complicated as is the biofuels playing field.  Put them together and you have a 3-D chess game in terms of complexity and that is loaded with potential for unintended consequence.  My only advice is to seek to understand all the issues before coming to very many conclusions.

Bill

From: Steve Flick [mailto:steveaflick at earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:46 AM
To: 'Scott Woodbury'; 'Hamilton Native Outpost'; 'Frank Oberle'; 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; John Hoskins; 'John Burk'; John Knudsen; 'Steve Mowry'; Dave Erickson; 'Denny Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner'; 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood'; 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; Andrew Forbes; 'James Trager'; 'Tim Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; 'Dave Murphy'; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen Brinkman'; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
Subject: RE: biomass

I have been growing miscanthus for years as a feedstock for the bio refinery- although there is a FSA program about to be launched for spring 2010 for dedicated energy crop production- you still need a organization to purchase that crop- and refine it

As it relates to CRP- I believe you will have to get through policy of NWF/EDL/Nature Conservancy- to make that happen- they are big policy makers in  D.C.- pretty tough assignment

Regards

Steve A Flick   Principal   Environmental Ecologist

Flick Seed Company

1764 N.W. 50 rd  P.O. Box 128

Kingsville, Mo. 64061

816-597-3822(o)

816-597-3663(f)

www.seedguys.com<http://www.seedguys.com/>

Think Green.  Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Woodbury [mailto:Scott.Woodbury at mobot.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:32 AM
To: Hamilton Native Outpost; Frank Oberle; Rudi Roeslein; Carol Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John Hoskins; John Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; David Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne Morton; George Seek; Kelly Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Alan Leary; Ted Cooper; Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James Trager; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph; staceyg at missouri.edu
Subject: RE: biomass

This sounds great as long as long as landowners opt for a diverse planting in CRP. Right now the research on biomass is showing that sterile hybrid miscanthus yields 2-3 times as much biomass as native switchgrass, and therefore could bring in more money. That's comparing a pure stand of switchgrass to a pure stand of miscanthus. Now days' CRP isn't a pure stand of switchgrass. My fear is that landowners will drop CRP when they see that they can make more money growing miscanthus? Of course this can't happen until Miscanthus production becomes mechanized. Please tell me otherwise. I don't like the idea of miscanthus replacing CRP.

Scott

________________________________
From: Hamilton Native Outpost [mailto:hamilton at train.missouri.org]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:56 PM
To: 'Frank Oberle'; 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; 'John Hoskins'; 'John Burk'; 'John Knudsen'; 'Steve Mowry'; 'David Erickson'; 'Denny Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner'; 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood'; 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; 'Andrew Forbes'; James Trager; Scott Woodbury; 'Tim Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; 'DeeCee Darrow'; 'John Murphy'; 'Dave Murphy'; 'Bill Bergh'; 'Bill McGuire'; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; 'Gene Gardner'; 'Tim Banek'; 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen Brinkman'; 'Brent Jamison'; 'Keith Jackson'; 'Aaron Jeffries'; 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Steve Flick'; 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
Subject: RE: biomass

CRP as we have known it in the past may have been a fescue field or a rank stand of native grasses with little diversity.  Conservation is ready to step up to the next level and create rare and declining habitat.  To marry biofuels with wildlife conservation has the added benefit of bringing disturbance into the picture.  Disturbance is important to grasslands; fire, herbivores, and climatic extremes once acted as disturbance factors.  The use of the mowing on the biofuel ¼ or 1/3 would be a forn of disturbance as would the burning on another ¼ or 1/3.  Some of the grassland wildlife is even dependent on this disturbance.  I think this has lots of potential.

Amy Hamilton
Hamilton Native Outpost

________________________________
From: Frank Oberle [mailto:foberle at nemr.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 2:00 PM
To: Rudi Roeslein; Carol Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Hamilton; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John Hoskins; John Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; Amy Buechler; David Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne Morton; George Seek; John Burk; Kelly Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Steve Mowry; Alan Leary; Ted Cooper; Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James Trager; Scott Woodbury; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Dwaine Gelnar; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph; Andrew Forbes; staceyg at missouri.edu
Subject: Fw: biomass

Policy and Policymakers

In Washington, the popularity of the USDA's Biomass Crop Assistance Program has soared, with the number of qualifying facilities now exceeding 280<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102878250501&s=2761&e=001GCQRvDWWio9VqdgKxH5ka5XkUUSUmFWBbXSArjKjhTtaDOpWohH_PRRKv98bxvAubhTlGoXmbGveN7sRWa6GEz4ju1VmK5fz7-OqpEpiZsRNmEHUh-ZPKMJQ_9Lmsi62vUvUvzcSOTrOW1QTo1XQ0tfM52QbPr-asoVf5UQ5iEb8wjfsZ3fSYNt0wbMkB-ANWdUk6lb7IMctDHv-k97r1T8NzZddbx0Uo1mq8IRZa-emZtr0p6VBCbXhd-zPjLC9>. The Biomass Crop Assistance Program assists agricultural and forest land owners and operators with matching payments for the amount paid for the collection, harvest, storage and transportation of eligible material by a qualified Biomass Conversion Facility.

Conservationist,
       I believe the time has come here in Missouri to begin a very strategic plan
on how we can become not only serious players in the biomass industry, but how can
we improve wildlife habitat at the same time. I will emphatically state there is
known scientific evidence that will validate this claim--especially all CRP lands that
currently--and maybe futuristically--are enrolled in a plant material--like fescue and
brome--that has very little environmental benefits.
     In order to move an idea forward there has to be action. And there is no action
until there is movement. My passion and cause for our state is to add wildlife,
environmental and green energy benefits for Northern Missouri. How do we add
value to an economically depressed area? Firstly, like a Doctor's oath of promise
for receiving his degree: "Never to do Harm."  We need to emulate nature's blueprint
and follow a path of least resistance. It is always more difficult to bend mother
nature to our wants, than it is to assimilate to an ideology that heeds to bending
with her.
      One known truth evident here in N. Missouri is that we can grow native grass and
broadleaf legumes. Cellulosic's greatest asset is that indigenous plant material suited to the soil and climate adds to the success of the project. We have the potential of
rebuilding CRP with an ecologically sound plant material that will boost biodiversity
and reviving rural economies.
     Please do not take my word for any of this, use the science at hand. There
are entrepreneurs willing and hoping for such an opportunity. Does anyone
out there have any suggestions on where or how to begin this endeavor? We have
nearly 1.5 million acres of CRP here in Missouri. One plan could be that once
the re-established CRP acres of any single tract of ground was deemed ready
to be engaged into a regime of biomass/wildlife management rotation, one forth to one
third of the tract would be allowed to be harvested in the months of October
through January. There would be no rental penalty for the landowner to pay if the plant material was used in some biomass project. The next designated portion to be
harvested--rather it be one third to one forth--would be eligible for a late spring burn
to encourage both forb growth and grass development. When there is plenty of
thatch build-up, there are less forbs that will have vigorous growth. We have
experienced this fact in our production fields. It works like this. Plants store starches
and sugars in their roots systems. In early spring, if there is a canopy of thatch which
creates enormous shade, when the emerging plant sends it first two basal leaves
for light scouting, perennial and long lived native plants will not take the risk of
expending large amounts of root reserves to overtake the canopy--just too risky.
    There are many possibilities that could be worked out. Currently, though, I believe
we could be passing on a great opportunity to rebuild our landscape to a vegetation that is suited to attract and sustain our rare and declining wildlife, but too, the biomass entrepreneurs. It also would be good for pollinators, producers and weaning our
nation's dependency on imported fossil fuels. I'm not saying the above is the perfect set of blueprints for a run away success story, however, I can say with wisdom and discernment that CRP could use a make-over that gives the customer--our hard working American taxpayers--real dividends for their investment.
     In the beginning of the Conservation Reserve Program, the goals of preventing soil erosion and cleaning up our streams was an industrious and very successful
conservation accomplishment. We have progressed immensely in the field of understanding and implementing native plant communities and the adverse affects of toxic and invasive fescue. The research going on at NRCS's Plant Material Center and
MU's Bradford Farm will yield much to the enhancement of a myriad of wildlife and biomass concerns. Thanks to all those partners supporting these exigencies.   fo

________________________________
I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter<http://www.spamfighter.com/len>.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 3630 of my spam emails to date.
The Professional version does not have this message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.seaplace.org/pipermail/carpenter/attachments/20091215/ffd81b41/attachment-0001.html>