"I’m still trying
rotational grazing because it is of low-input, and I think it will work the best."
Randy Jasper
Farmer
"Often people deal with environmental problems
by increasing capital costs. The strategy is to try to develop low cost capital
systems."
Rick Klemme
UW Madison Economist
"If we want to protect farmland, the
responsibility rests not just with the farmers but with the rest of the community. This is
happening in the town of Dunn with PDR."
Tom Quinn
Wisconsin Farmland Conservancy
"If we continue to lose milk production, we
will lose our milk processing plants. When we lose our processing plants, we don’t
have a dairy industry anymore."
Dwaine Sievers
Agribusiness Consultant
"Use-value assessment is not a farmland
preservation law. It does not cause the continuation of farming. I suggest we marry
use-value and the Farmland Preservation Program so we have a plan that adequately rewards
people for conservation. "
Bryce Luchterhand
USDA, Wisconsin Rural Development
"We’ve done a lot of things on our dairy
farm to help the environment without regulation. I prefer to do things without government
rules because I tend to think the government doesn’t know how to farm. That’s
why they’re the government."
Ray Diederich
Dairy Farmer
"We need a good price to remain viable. If I
had a good price, I could afford to be environmentally friendly. But when farmers
don’t have the money, they take short-cuts."
John Kiefer
CROPP Farmer
Roundtable Discussions
“If farming is not environmentally
sound, it cannot be profitable long-term.”
Table Five
“The government needs to provide
incentives for farmers to continue farming—not through subsidies, but by not
subsidizing development.”
Table Fifteen
“Fact: Cities will grow, and it’s
either up or out.”
Table One
“Profitability attracts new farmers. In
New Zealand farming is profitable, and 35% of new dairy farmers are from non-farm
backgrounds.”
Table Twelve
“Urban development does not conflict
with farming. Sprawl does.”
Table Three
“Even if farming is profitable, farming
may still be in jeopardy. Retiring farmers may not be able to deny the offer to sell for
development.”
Table Five
"We need more research on varieties that
will grow well in an organic setting.”
Table Four
“The Farmland Preservation Program gives
a higher tax credit the lower your income. Does this reward bad financial managers and
penalize good managers?”
Table Six
“PDR might solve the entry/exit problem.
PDR helps lower the costs of land and gives farmers a safe retirement.”
Table Thirteen
“How can we meet all these goals for a
viable agricultural system? We need a change in individual behavior. We can’t rely on
the government to do everything.”
Table Two
Agriculture and Land Use in
Wisconsin: Planning for Viable Agricultural Systems
Panel Discussions
On November 20, 1996, WEI hosted its second major
conference, Agriculture and Land-Use in Wisconsin: Planning for Viable Agricultural
Systems . This conference drew 150 people to the Wisconsin Dells to discuss farm
profitability, environmental issues and the pressures to develop farmland. Farmers,
planners, government officials, environmentalists, business managers, developers and other
interested citizens attended the event.
The problems facing Wisconsin agriculture could not be solved in
one day,needed to achieve a sustainable agriculture. Dan Poulson of the Wisconsin Farm
Bureau expressed his excitement, "Today is the first meeting where we’ve begun
to sit down and listen to each other." but WEI’s conference was the first
step toward creating the partnerships
Keynote Address
Alan Tracy, Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer
Protection, suggested that we all have a common vision for Wisconsin, a state where
agriculture thrives and is a vital part of our economy, our landscape and our culture. He
challenged the conference participants to recognize this common ground and work together
as partners to achieve sound development and a viable agricultural system.
Panel I: Farm Profitability
John Malchine summarized the feelings of all the panelists. He said, "The bottom line
is money." Farmers need to make a just return on their investment, and without that,
Wisconsin will not have a viable agricultural system. The ensuing debate focused on ways
to achieve profitability. Raising the price for agricultural products, lowering taxes and
lowering production costs through low-input farming were the popular solutions.
Panel II: Environmental Issues
George Meyer, Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, shared his
thoughts about how environmental regulations sustain agriculture. He stated that
environmental regulations are designed to protect our land and water, the two fundamental
inputs of production agriculture. He noted, however, that the management of natural
resources will fail if the farm economy is not improved. The other panelists agreed that
it is important to preserve our natural resources, but the viewpoints on how to accomplish
this varied. Preventing problems through alternative farming methods, paying farmers more
for their products so they can afford to be environmentally friendly and devising
goal-oriented regulations rather than prescriptive ones were the most salientsuggestions.
Panel III: Urban Pressures
The final panel produced a lively debate over farmland conversion. Bryce Luchterhand, the
State Director of USDA Rural Development, stated, "The development of agricultural
land is an oxymoron. You can’t improve it. Agricultural land is the primary use of
the land and ought to be treated as such." John Kassner of the Wisconsin
Builder’s Association disagreed. "If there’s a house here, the place for a
new house is next door. Even if the land to be developed is prime farmland, it’s next
to go." In addition, Kassner stated that planners try to force people to live in the
city while simultaneously ignoring market forces. "The cheapest you can buy an acre
in Madison is $40,000, but in the country you can buy the same amount of acreage for a lot
less money."
Agriculture and Land Use in
Wisconsin: Planning for Viable Agricultural Systems
Roundtable Discussions
The roundtable discussions were
truly the highlight of the conference. Sonnie Sonnenshein of the Wisconsin-Illinois Upper
Des Plaines River Ecosystem Partnership summarized the feelings of most attendees.
"Unlike most conferences which give groups a short time to engage in discussion, this
conference allowed people the time to listen to one another and give each issue thoughtful
consideration. The format was great!"
Roundtable I: Farm Profitability and Entry/Exit
Raising the price of agricultural products was a popular solution to the farm
profitability problem. Reducing the middleman’s share, limiting supply, reforming the
dairy price system, marketing products to add value and increasing consumer willingness to
pay more for food by educating the public about the need for a viable agricultural system
were the most prevalent suggestions. However, some tables disagreed with the belief that
raising prices would be a successful approach. These tables discussed the impact of a
national and international market on Wisconsin’s agricultural industry and questioned
the ability to increase consumer prices as lower priced products from other areas enter
Wisconsin markets.
Using conservation easements was the predominant
answer to the question of how to solve the entry/exit problem. Conservation easements
allow new farmers to buy land at agricultural prices while simultaneously allowing the
retiring farmer to receive retirement income. Conservation easements could be placed on
agricultural land through a purchase of development rights program or clustered
development or by land trusts and individual buyers. Other suggestions included creating
land-use plans that do not promote sprawl, increasing farm profitability and changing
taxation to encourage the retention of land for agricultural purposes.
Roundtable II: Environmental Issues
Every roundtable agreed that farming can be both profitable and environmentally sound.
Some tables suggested that higher prices for agricultural products would allow farmers to
pay for the equipment and infrastructure needed to be environmentally friendly. Other
tables called for increased research and education about environmentally sound yet
profitable farming methods. Rotational grazing, contour farming and natural or biological
control of pesticides were given as examples of effective, low-cost techniques.
Roundtable III: Development Pressures and Farmland
Retention
Nearly every roundtable agreed that land needs to be preserved for agriculture and that
urban development conflicts with farming when it forces the price of farmland up beyond
what local farmers can afford. To mitigate this conflict, most tables suggested that
Wisconsin create an incentive-based system that encourages redevelopment and infill and
discourages the conversion of farmland to urban uses. Specific components of this system
could include the purchase or transfer of development rights, the donation of conservation
easements, community tax-base sharing and impact statements to determine the long-term
costs and benefits of alternative development strategies. In addition, there was a strong
desire for more effective communication among stakeholders to create land-use plans that
control sprawling development.
