| |

So why take
a plant that works perfectly well and make it perennial?
“I’ve
been trying to talk someone into developing perennial wheat since
the 1960s,” says Jim Moore, a Kahlotus farmer and former
head of the Washington Wheat Commission.
“Vogel
told me they couldn’t get enough yield out of it. I don’t
care about that. I want something to hold my soil in place.” The
dry, powdery soil of the Columbia Basin, composed of volcanic
ash and glacial silt, blows easily. The fine soil particles are
not simply annoying, but a possible health risk, exacerbated
by the fact that Spokane’s population is directly downwind
from the dryland wheat-growing region. Various means have addressed
the dust problem, the most effective to date being minimum tillage.
Planting directly in a previous year’s stubble without
tilling is an excellent conservation practice, but it still requires
annual planting and a substantial investment in specialized planting
equipment—and a lot of herbicides.
But perennial
wheat’s attractions are not limited to holding the soil
in place. Somewhat surprisingly, in an unrelated interview last
fall, pharmacy dean Bill Fassett told me that he thought perennial
wheat was the most important research being conducted on campus.
The largest new health threat that looms over the medical community
is global climate change, says Fassett. Carbon dioxide is a major
contributor to the increased greenhouse effect and resulting
global warming. And soil tillage is a major contributor to the
release of carbon into the atmosphere.
Conversely,
a permanent, or at least semi-permanent plant cover, such as
perennial wheat, greatly contributes to sequestering carbon in
the soil. As oceans and forests are gigantic “sinks” of
carbon, so is farmland planted in non-annual crops. Not only
could a perennial wheat crop greatly contribute to the sequestration
of carbon in eastern Washington soils, land owners could sell
carbon credits in what can only be a growth industry.
Perennial
buffers next to streams or on highly erodible land not only filter
water but are also attractive to birds and other wildlife, which
is a reason the state Department of Ecology has provided Jones
and Murray with funding.
But from
an economic point of view, there’s an even more fundamental
attraction.
“If
you look at planting costs annually,” says Ritzville farmer
(and state legislator) Mark Schoesler, “planting once instead
of four times starts looking really good.”
Earlier hopes
for perennial wheat generally dimmed, because in addition to
lower yields, there was little economic incentive regarding input.
Fuel, fertilizer, and labor were all cheap. But now, input costs
have greatly increased. Fertilizer costs have tripled over the
last few years, says Allan. Diesel fuel costs $1.37 a gallon
and is unlikely to fall in price. Fuel costs for a single tillage
of a 2,000-acre field can run to several thousand dollars, and
a new tractor can set you back a couple hundred grand.
The problem
with commodities is the price is set by the world market. Too
much wheat results in low prices. The only way to increase profit
is to cut costs.
“There’s
two things educated people have taught me,” says Schoesler,
who has experimental plots of perennial wheat on his land. “You
can be the low-cost producer, or you can sell quality. I don’t
know that you can do both.” Some large producers have chosen
the quality niche. For example, Karl Kupers of Harrington (Washington
State Magazine fall 2003) produces specialty grains and
bypasses commodity brokers to produce his own flour. On the world
commodity market, though, efficiency is everything. Anything
that can add to economy of scale, anything that can squeeze another
penny of profit out of a bushel of wheat, helps Washington stay
afloat.
Perennial
wheat is not a new idea. Russian scientists worked on perennial
wheat early in the 20th century. Unfortunately, the resulting
germplasm was lost during the Soviet era. “It’s a
shame all this stuff has been lost,” say Jones. “Multiple
lifetimes of work is just gone.”
Breeders
at University of California, Davis did extensive work on perennial
wheat in the 1950s and 1960s, and some of their breeding material
made its way to Pullman. Allan remembers perennial strains included
in wheat trials at Washington State College in the 1950s. Though
it’s unclear whether she had perennial wheat in mind, Washington
State College botanist Hannah Aase worked with many of the same
crosses between wheat and its wild relatives in the 1930s as
Jones and Murray.
Aase was known internationally for her work, says Jones. Aase’s work
seems to have been directed purely at understanding wheat’s ancestry.
Unfortunately, all of the genetic material that resulted from her pioneering
work has been lost. And more sadly, even though Aase was a major figure in
WSU’s scientific tradition, few on campus remember the significance of
her work.
But Schoesler remembers researcher Dick Nagamitsu, with the Lind Research Station,
talking about the problems faced by perennial wheat in the 1950s. One of the
main problems that Nagamitsu dwelt on, says Schoesler, was how difficult it
was to thresh.
Technology,
harvesting and otherwise, has changed dramatically over the last
50 years. So have a number of other factors, leading Schoesler
and others to think the time is finally ripe for perennial wheat.
When scientists
abandoned the idea in the 1960s, the yields simply couldn’t
compete, considering the low input costs, says Jones. But now,
in the dry parts of eastern Washington, yields wouldn’t
need to be even 50 percent of conventional varieties, as fields
are planted only every other year to conserve moisture. Then
figure in the potential savings in inputs, primarily tillage,
as well as the value of erosion control, and perennial wheat
starts to seem pretty attractive nowadays.
Murray points
to actual value placed on erosion control. Although payments
vary by area—and, some say, legislator—land in the
federally supported Conservation Reserve Program averages around
$55 an acre. The CRP pays farmers to put highly erodible land
into permanent grass cover, which cannot be harvested.
“ If you get 20 bushels an acre and average $3 a bushel, perennial wheat
competes pretty favorably,” says Murray.
Continued |
|
Page: 1 |
2 | 3 | 4
“I’ve
been trying to talk someone into developing perennial
wheat since the 1960s.”
|
| |