Sustainable Horticulture

Final Focus…Neighborhood Farms Can Create Health, Community and Growth

Posted by sustainable_hort on June 17, 2013  |  No Comments

Well Patient Readers, if there are any of you left, one more try at this blog.

So many changes since the last post (10 months ago!), but it all seems to be gaining focus. Our farm, with addition of a 20,000 sq. ft. hoop house, is now profitable, expanding and finding a new, local customer.

Much of my time had been taken up managing a community farmers market, which, while successful as a market, never generated significant sales for our farm booth. It was time to re-work that model, which we did, and are now finding success. It is now the third leg of our sales, along with a year-around restaurant business and our active CSA program [much more in later posts on these and other marketing topics].

Meanwhile, 19th St. Farms continues to test and use innovative technologies for growing organic produce. Our home half-acre lot is becoming a showcase for personal food production techniques. The farm has expanded, while 2013 is the best growing season in many years. We are adding “found” fruit to our regular products, since there is essentially a huge, abandoned orchard spread throughout the local landscape. The fruit is not perfect, but still of good quality. Obviously these found fruits are organic since no one has taken care of them for years. No reason for cherries, pears and apples to go to waste.

It is now clear that the urban/suburban farm movement is serious, and in Oregon, the land-use structure has created numerous opportunities for growing fresh vegetables and fruit locally. This, in turn, provides inputs for added-value producers to establish a “second wave” of healthy foods. We now see many local jams, pickles, gluten-free breads, nut butters and more, with new products being developed in home kitchens and garages. Backyard chickens now supply fresh eggs to tour customers, and they love it. Not only is the community eating better, but jobs are being created.

Happily, there seems to have been a tipping point in people’s views about their relation to food, and they are looking for alternatives. The combination of a growing awareness of the direct link between healthy food and human health, plus Monsanto’s disturbing behavior over GMO foods and controlling food seed production, the consumer has taken a step back. The latest example, here in Oregon, is the mysterious appearance of GMO wheat in a field where it was never grown. In fact, that wheat strain was tested over a decade ago in the Northwest before Monsanto dropped the project. It was never a commercial release.

Even the medical community is looking closer at our relationship with food. Recent books cover this topic, including Farmacology by Dr. Daphne Miller and Why We Get Fat by Gary Taubes (who also wrote the important book, Good Calories, Bad Calories). Healthy food is a key preventative wall against many common modern illnesses.

New research shows that individual diets can be complex and need careful clarification. Yet, solving many serious food related problems, such as diabetes, is fairly simple. Micheal Pollen, in his book In Defense of Food, summed it up…”Eat food, not too much, mostly plants.” When Pollen says “eat food,” the food is simple, fresh produce, fruits, berries and nuts.

Finally, an early goal was to review new books on food, agriculture and health, and I made a serious attempt. But, I found that I was also regularly returning to older works. These older books, sometimes with almost forgotten knowledge, are what Steward Brand calls “old knowledge” in his decade-old slim volume, The Clock of the Long Now. So, while newer books will be reviewed, I will bet that the longest reviews will be on these older works.

That’s enough rambling on. If you are willing to take one more chance, or start following me now, I promise more posts with even more relevant information on urban, localized farming and how it can improve our health, our environment, and, best of all, provide great eating.
I’ll be back soon.
Miles

Food Prices Rising…Only the Start

Posted by sustainable_hort on May 23, 2011  |  No Comments

With all the recent headlines, the story of rising food prices has been on the news back burner. But, for many people, both here in the US and in most under-developed countries, these climbing costs are much more important than a royal wedding, the Trump comedy series about birth certificates, and, even, the elimination of Mr. Bin Laden. Hunger tends to trump (no pun intended) most other concerns.

Yet, for whatever reason(s), we are seeing food prices rise quickly. We have to go back to the 1970’s to find a similar situation. Then, oil prices and availability were not the key issue they are today. The increases in food prices then were driven mainly by Russian wheat crop failures. But, the pressures on food prices now are coming from rising energy and commodity prices, plus several weather related crop issues. As I have written on this blog, petroleum is more than gas for our cars…it is literally is the foundation material for much of the modern world. The majority of consumer products depend on these substrates at some level. Think plastic!

Food is no exception! The earth’s oil and natural gas are used to produce fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and plastics; they are used to power the tractors, sprayers, harvesters, and generate heat; and obviously they are the fuel for the trucks, trains and planes that move our food around the world. Whether it is speculation, increasing demand from the China and India, or peak oil’s decreasing output, oil prices will rise in the long term…and food prices can only follow.

I recently attended a talk by Gary Paul Nabhan, author of Coming Home to Eat: The Pleasures and Politics of Local Foods, whose main message was the importance of local “food sheds.” While this is not a new concept, it seems to gain importance as we watch drought, floods, tornados and rising production prices wreck havoc with US agriculture. It is the old cliché “don’t put all your eggs in one basket.” It is in the interest of regions, at least, to be able to produce all the key components of a healthy diet. This idea is catching on.

For instance, here in Oregon’s Willamette Valley, we are seeing a return of wheat, and an organized effort to grow a wide range of beans, now all shipped in from great distances. It is an expansion of the local food movement, one that consumer consider more important than “organic.”

But, for many consumers, price is and will remain the primary consideration. This, I feel as a produce grower, is a misaligned focus. Food “quality” should equal nutrition, not cost. But, there is good news. Recent research indicates local foods, not necessarily organic, can cost less at your local farmers market than the national chain supermarket. And, even at a few cents more, local produce, especially the more delicate “greens” categories, will literally be a week fresher. Turn over those plastic tubs of greens at your local supermarket. While the “use by” date may be days off, I will bet you can see some early deterioration of the produce, particularly the red lettuces. If you store the package a few days, you are eating greens that are ten to two weeks old. Just how nutritious, let alone tasty, can this limp product be? Not much. If you want to read more, check out: www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/05/the-farmers-market-myth/238661.

Natural Alternatives to Turf

Posted by sustainable_hort on February 25, 2011  |  No Comments

My recent post on replacing turf with an edible landscape attracted many comments, especially through Linkin. While I prefer the use of edibles, I certainly realize not everyone wants to tend a food garden.

Grasses and many natives are perfect replacements for the turf in a normal yard. This alternative uses grasses, both native and introduced, and other native flowers and shrubs, to create landscapes that mirror the natural surroundings.

Timber Press recently released three books that address the use and design features of grasses, native flowers, and other plants. The most direct is Designing with Grasses by Englishman Neil Lucas, an up-to-date look at how modern landscapes are using grasses in many situations. He introduces grasses as key landscaping choices to the general gardening audience, suggesting choices for wetland, prairie, desert, woodland and meadow designs. It also offers a plant profile section, and many other reference lists. While not an in-depth look at grasses, it provides a perfect starting point for those interested in native and natural landscapes.

A better known, US expert on grasses, John Greenlee (with Saxon Holt) has written a new book on his specialty, The American Meadow Garden. He started Greenlee Nursery in the early 1980’s, becoming one of the first recognized experts on grasses and their use in design. In 1992, he wrote one of the seminal early works on grasses, The Encyclopedia of Ornamental Grasses. Now, here he focuses on the grasses that create meadow gardens, discussing details of design, site preparation and many examples of finished designs. The plant selections are covered in a long section complete with design suggestions.

Finally, Lynn Steiner took a similar approach in her Prairie-Style Gardens, with an emphasis on the plants that work in a prairie setting. It also includes plant lists for specific site conditions, and plant profiles for many prairie-adapted species. While her designs are based on four major climate areas of the mid-US, the design approaches can be duplicated in many regions. She also moves well beyond the grasses, and includes many trees, small trees and shrubs, vines and flowers. These gardens seem to have more emphasis on attracting wildlife, and include xeriscaping designs. But, more important, like edible gardens, they replace high input turf with a much sustainable landscape.

Nursery Industry Explores Biodegradable Containers

Posted by sustainable_hort on May 31, 2010  |  No Comments

Plastic containers revolutionized plant production. Now a significant percentage of plants are grown in some type of container. At the retail level, containers not only hold plants and soil, but they have become a visual part of the marketing.

Yet, environmental concerns increased with plastic products, both in how they are made and how they become a waste stream. So, container manufacturers began to look at other materials. The challenge was to find materials that could contain the soil and plants as they moved through the production and marketing system, yet breakdown after they were used, usually in composting systems.

Numerous substrates are being used and tested to create a range of biodegradable pots including waste paper, peat, coir, cornstarch resins, wheat, bamboo, and even cow manure.

Finding plastic replacements for containers has become an important research topic, with the American Nursery and Landscape Association (ANLA) starting research several years ago to identify useful container substrates (see below). The key challenge is finding compounds and resins that, when combined, will stand up to normal environmental pressures.

“We need materials that will stand up to the south’s warmer temperatures, heavy irrigation schedules, and high levels of nitrogen,” explained Agricultural Research Service horticulturist Donna Fare. She said these environmental factors work together to break down non-plastic pots in the field. Fare is heading up the ANLA-sponsored research project in McMinnville, Tennessee, which will finally test a chicken-feather based container during this year’s growing season.

Recycled Plastic a First Option
Many nursery container producers have morphed from using virgin plastic to using recycled materials. This is a major step toward sustainability, since it at least recovers the plastic already in use in the nursery industry, plus absorbing some of the consumer waste stream.
For instance, ITML Horticultural Products Inc. has a line of recycled containers, called Elite and Euro System Nursery Containers, made with “100% recycled, indestructible polyethylene material.”

Another example is the Root Pouch containers from Averna and Associates. These pouches are made from polyethylene terephthalate (PETE), which comes from recycled plastic beverage bottles, which are turned into non-woven fabric. It is used to manufacture a full line of nursery containers including propagation liners and various sizes of plantable pouches, available in different densities and degradable life spans.

Finally there are oxo-biodegradable products, which I have not found yet in the industry. Wikipedia defined the plastic as follows:

“Oxo Biodegradable (OBD) plastic is polyolefin plastic to which has been added very small (catalytic) amounts of metal salts. These catalyze the natural degradation process to speed it up so that the OBD plastic will degrade when subject to environmental conditions to produce to water, carbon dioxide and biomass. The process is shortened from hundreds of years to months for degradation and thereafter biodegradation depends on the micro-organisms in the environment.” I am going to look into this more, so keep reading.

What are Biodegradable Containers?

While there are differences between aerobic and anaerobic degradation, “biodegradable” is usually considered as a material can be broken down into its organic components. Essentially, biodegradable materials avoid increasing landfills by eventually returning them to the soil through effective composting.

As a note, the “effective composting” is a key step to making any of these containers actually biodegradable. In fact, some national and international standards have stricter criteria, defining compostable as having three requirements:

• First, again they must “biodegrade” which is defined as “breaking down into carbon dioxide, water and bio mass.”
• Secondly, they must “disintegrate,” so after three months of composting and subsequent sifting through a 2 mm sieve, there is no more than 10% residue remaining.
• Finally, no “eco toxicity,” so the bio-degradation does not produce any toxic material and the compost can sustain plant growth.

Unfortunately, these global standards exist to certify compostable plastics (ASTM D6400) and compostable packaging (ASTM D6868), under controlled composting conditions typically found only at industrial composting facilities. It is uncertain whether many of these new “plastics” will degrade quickly and effectively in standard landfills or backyard compost bins.

Molded Fiber Early Option

But, many decades ago, molded pulp or fiber first found uses in the horticulture industry. Molded pulp products are made from natural cellulose fibers, including waste papers and peat, and are biodegradable breaking down in compost systems and most landfills. These molded fiber products, were often used in early propagation stages in combination with rigid plastic trays.

But, as plants moved into gallon sizes, most growers continue to use plastic pots, especially if they are shipping plants. The early fiber pots were just not rigid enough to withstand damage during handling.

One of the earlier producers of non-plastic containers was active here in Oregon…Western Pulp Products. The company has more than a 50-year history of making containers using waste paper, collected by charitable organizations (“post-consumer”), while other sources are “pre-consumer,” including Kraft, waxed, and other waste paper. Only the metal rings and hanging wires are not decomposable.

“Even the wax paraffin used to bind the pulp will degrade during composting or in the soil,” said sales manager Jim Lee

While their products are not considered “organic,” they can be used to grow organic plants, according to Lee. He said their growers received approval from Oregon Tilth that organic vegetable transplants can be grown in their molded fiber containers but the plant must be removed from the container before it is planted in the soil. 


Jiffy pots are another decade-old name in nursery containers, entering the market in the mid-1950’s. The George Ball Company bought the U.S. rights from the Norwegian firm that developed the technology. They found numerous uses in nursery propagation, becoming a standard tool for growing plants. But, again, they tended to be too fragile for field and shipping uses.

Wide Range of Substrates Now Available
Many of the newer biodegradable containers are actually manufactured by processes similar to the Western Pulp method…a plant based substrate held together with a binding agent. The choice for substrates continues to expand.

One example are the Fertil biodegradable plant pots, made from 100% natural biodegradable wood fibers, composing 80% of the substrate, plus 20% peat moss. Meanwhile, Summit Plastics Company has a biodegradable line, “Eco 360,” that features containers made of corn, wheat and wood fibers.

Another company, T & R, Woodburn, Oregon, is offering a new line of containers called Ecotainable®. Manufactured by Kelmar’s Creations, the products use ‘patented’ bioresin materials, made from wheat, tapioca, potato starches and corn, to form pots and other products.

CoCo Coir Pot, made by Green Neem, is a biodegradable cultivation pot made of coconut fibers, which have exceptionally high permeability to water, air and roots. Coir products are now available through several companies.

Cow Pots is taking a different approach, using “odor-free, 100% composted cow manure” as the substrate. They claim the manure also adds more nutrition when the plant is growing or transplanted.

Fungi Grows Containers
A radically different approach is the EcoCradle products.
The new product is made from agricultural byproducts including cottonseed hulls, buckwheat hulls and rice husk that are mixed with a filamentous fungi — mycelium — as a bonding agent — and allowed to grow inside molds. The mycelium secretes an enzyme that decomposes the organic waste as it grows. After seven days at room temperature in the dark, a compact, ultra light, malleable material is formed that can resist high temperatures, according to company literature.

Downsides?
While there is an increasing availability of alternative containers, most nurseries have been slow to switch from plastic. Even Northwoods Nursery, Molalla, Oregon, well known for its many sustainable efforts, is still using plastic pots.

“We are just not sure they will hold up over a longer time frame,” said Laura O’Leary, sustainable director for Northwoods. While the nursery has implemented other “sustainable practices,” including recycling plastic containers, they are still holding back on moving to these newer options, she said. Like many nurseries, they plan to test new products, hoping to find products that prove tough.

In addition to needing perfect conditions to decompose, some manufacturers are also cautioning consumers that the pots need to be handle correctly when planting to avoid problems.

For example, Bonnie Plants, uses biodegradable pots extensively, with the smaller versions made by Jiffy. They listed the following rules for using their pots:
• To ensure success, drench the pots thoroughly just before planting.
• Remove the shrink-wrap label from the rim of the pot by cutting it with scissors.
• Also tear away the top of the pot so that the rim is not exposed above ground after planting. If the pot dries out, it can rob moisture from the roots when capillary action pulls water up to the dry rim.
• Finally, tear away the bottom half of the pot before placing the plant in its hole to exposes some roots to direct contact with the soil.

Like any new technology, biodegradable containers will need further refinement and testing to create products that growers will use confidently, especially if plants are shipped.

While there are ongoing research projects (see above) testing how well plants grow in these non-plastic choices, work done over a decade ago showed that plants would grow as well, or better, in biodegradable pots. So, it seems that chief concern remains durability. Once that is solved, biodegradable products could have a bright future in the nursery industry.

You can continue to follow this topic here. I am convinced that we will find more and more organic “waste” products that can be turned into various compostable or plantable pots and containers. Ultimately, they will prove their economic advantage.

Show Me the Research – Glyphosate and GM Problems Expand

Posted by sustainable_hort on May 24, 2010  |  No Comments

Monsanto’s PR team must be up nights…since the good news just keeps coming up around GM technology and their popular herbicide product…Round-Up. We have discussed several resistance issues recently (see both earlier “Show Me the Research” posts), but the concerns and problems are expanding.

First, Round-Up’s affects on plant health.
Microbiologist Robert Kremer USDA-ARS (US Department of Agriculture- Agricultural Research Service) was interviewed recently in the online “The Organic & Non-GM Report,” where he explained his concerns with glyphosate’s (Round-Up) impact on plant health. He was quoted as saying the compound “This system is altering the whole soil biology.” He expanded the observations, noting that “glyphosate can have toxic effects on microorganisms and can stimulate them to germinate spores and colonize root systems. Other researchers are showing that glyphosate can immobilize manganese, an essential plant micronutrient.”

In this month’s issue, the editors interviewed retired Purdue University Emeritus Professor of Plant Pathology, Dr. Don Huber. He said that glyphosate can “significantly increase the severity of various plant diseases, impair plant defense to pathogens and diseases, and immobilize soil and plant nutrients rendering them unavailable for plant use.” And that glyphosate stimulates the growth of fungi and enhances the virulence of pathogens such as Fusarium and “can have serious consequences for sustainable production of a wide range of susceptible crops.”

This all builds on an important work I have written about before…”Healthy Crops, A New Agricultural Revolution” by Francis Chaboussou. In it, he looks at 75 years of similar research on not just glyphosate, but many pesticides, herbicides and nitrogen-heavy fertilizers, and their negative impacts on disease and pest problems. I felt he showed clearly that while the compounds might solve a problem, they usually created others. Others that then required spraying of toxic compounds, which have the same affect. And the circle goes ‘round and the grower pays. Less toxic approaches might actually reduce other input costs…it at least deserves a closer, open-minded look.

GM Bt Cotton Causes Pest Explosion
And then, from China comes a report about a recent disaster that resulted from planting Bt cotton. Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) is one of best know “natural” insecticides, with the organism successfully controlling several pest outbreaks (various caterpillars). Then, it was inserted genetically into crops, including cotton, where it offered bollworm control. And that part of the equation worked, so growers could stop spraying toxic chemicals. Looked like a win-win.

But then, the fields became infested with another pest, the Mirid Bug, causing serious damage. Scientists determined that the June spraying for bollworms had also knocked back the entire insect community, including other pest species and their natural predators. With no controls, in this case, the Mirid Bug won the race, finding a vast, rich food source, and quickly expanding its populations. It has even moved into other crops such as apples, strawberries, pears, peaches and vegetables, where it had never been a problem. All this started following the switch to Bt crops in 1997, showing up first in cotton in 2000, and moving to other crops by 2005. It seems their only short-term answer is go back to spraying, after paying more the Bt-cotton.

So, again unintended consequences. The GM technology still holds promise to help with world nutrition. The idea and reality of foods that create extra vitamins (improved rice variety) with the help of added genetic information could save lives. But, first it is caution with this new “tool.” It needs more study, more testing in the complexity of an environmental system, to understand those consequences. From these latest reports, it seems to solve single problems only to create others. Not a sustainable system.

For more:
• “Scientist warns of dire consequences with widespread use of glyphosate”, The Organic & Non-GMO Report, May 2010, @ http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may10/consequenceso_widespread_glyphosate_use.php

• “Scientist finding many negative impacts of Roundup Ready GM crops, USDA doesn’t want to publicize studies showing negative impact2, The Organic & Non-GMO Report, January 2010, @ http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/jan10/scientists_find_negative_impacts_of_GM_crops.php

Show Me the Research

Posted by sustainable_hort on April 4, 2010  |  No Comments

It seems that for decades the conventional agricultural community responded to organic claims with “ show me the scientific research.” That, in fact, was what led me back to Oregon State University many decades ago. I was growing food organically but did not feel I had my science in order. But, their response was valid in a sense. There was not recent research that could back it up. But, if one ventured back to before World War II, there was a body of work (see the earlier post titled Soil Health and Organic Fertilizers for a short list of key sources) that seemed to support organic agriculture strategies.

Time limits me to maybe one long article a week on this blog. But, as I do research for my writing, I come across many interesting and pertinent stories, articles, studies, and books. It is information I sense has a place on this blog. So, at least a few times a month, I will post “Show Me the Research” notes. As a visitor, this will help you identify the more in-depth pieces, from simpler informational pieces. Again, I want to thank everyone for their positive comments.
So, for the first “Show Me the Research.”

First, some more book recommendations. The first is the The Long Emergency, written by James Howard Kunstler. Though is was first published five years ago, its content and message remain topical, maybe even more so today. I first read it years ago, but recently found a used copy, bought it, and have been re-reading parts of it. It is not a diatribe against global warming, though it includes the topic as part of an overall discussion of our economy’s dangerous reliance on petroleum for much of our lifestyle, energy, food and industry. Kunstler clearly shows that petroleum is at the base of many products, and as the world economy moves to duplicate US and European models, it will become a limiting factor. His best-case scenario seems to be that everything will cost more, much more. The alternatives are less comfortable to imagine. Many other books cover some of the same ground, but none are as complete or so soundly based on solid research.

The other work is much newer. The End of Overeating by David A. Kessler, MD, jumps into the current discussion on diet with a slightly different approach. Kessler looks at how and why we eat, clearly showing how food manufacturers manipulate “sugar, fat and salt” to over stimulate our appetites. These “manipulations” work surprisingly well, leading us to both overeat and consume foods that are not as healthy. The dozens of books published on diet topics generally tell us what to eat, but don’t explain why it so difficult to control our eating. A fascinating work by the former commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration who successfully fought the tobacco industry. Now, with this book, takes a lead role in giving us tools to change what Michael Pollen describes as “the catastrophe that is the modern American diet.” Read it and then eat.

• Herbicide Resistance Identified…The Nebraska Rural Radio Association reported that “Kansas State University (KSU) scientists have completed long-term evaluations of a limited number of independent kochia (Kochia scoparia) populations on privately-owned land in western Kansas that are now confirmed to be glyphosate (Round-Up)-resistant.”

In the western U.S. and Canada, Kochia, or “fireweed,” is often found in arid and semi-arid croplands, rangelands, pastures, and non-agricultural sites. Very adaptable, Kochia even grows on saline and alkaline soils. It a serious “weed” and control will now be more complex and expensive. This resistance developed naturally, possibly due to growers using lower rates that left a few tougher plants, not through genetic modification. But, it points to why there is concern about this happening as “Round-Up resistant” crops are planted. I am not saying that genetic modification is all bad, but this type of natural resistance seems to require science to study this closely. This type of manipulation could actually lead to faster development of resistance in the environment.

• Since I also co-own an organic produce farm, I like to see people eat more vegetables. Now more proof fresh, nutritional produce is important…worth more of your food dollar.

1) Carolyn Lister, research leader at the New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research told www.newkerala.com that while fruit has tended to attract the greatest attention and the ‘super food’ label, there is a body of clinical research underlining the significant health benefits of vegetables in both raw and cooked form, with broccoli along with the other brassicas, tomatoes, onions and other alliums proving to be the vegetables with the strongest scientific evidence behind them.

“This evidence varies from in vitro studies through to human feeding studies,” she claims. “Although there is considerable variation in the results of different studies…looking at the summation of results, there is quite strong evidence for benefits to human health of a number of vegetables.”

Lister is a key scientists with the Vital Vegetables program, working to develop vegetables with increased health benefits, using traditional breeding techniques.

This is similar to a new study by researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham has released a study indicating that anti-oxidants – plant-based substances in foods such as broccoli, berries, tomatoes, spinach, carrots, grapes and garlic, are a key in preventing the flu.

“The recent outbreak of H1N1 influenza and the rapid spread of this strain across the world highlights the need to better understand how this virus damages the lungs and to find new treatments. Additionally, our research shows that anti-oxidants may prove beneficial in the treatment of flu,” said study co-author Sadis Matalon.

2) Other work shows “flavonols” might reduce women’s stroke risk. This has been reported by Dutch researchers in the Journal of Nutrition.

“We showed for the first time, to our knowledge, that flavonol intake was inversely associated with stroke incidence,” wrote the researchers. “We conclude that evidence is accumulating that flavonol intake is inversely related to different cardiovascular disease outcomes,” they added.

Despite reporting a potential risk reducing effect of compounds from tea, onions, apples, and broccoli the results should be “interpreted with caution.” The study followed over 110,000 people, noting higher consumption of flavonols, mostly tea in the Dutch population; and from tea, onions, apples, and broccoli in US studies, accounted for the reduction in stroke risk.

Flavonols are “flavonoids,” which also include anthocyanins (berries), isoflavones (soy), flavones (parsley and thyme), flavanones (citrus), flavonols (tea) and proanthocyanidins (berries, wine and chocolate.) Boy I like those last two! An editorial in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (July 2008, Vol. 88, pp. 12-13), echoed that statement, saying the “contribution of flavonones to a person’s antioxidant capacity was significant.”

• Finally, good news for those of us guys who are night people and require multiple cups of coffee to survive the morning.

A recent US study indicates that coffee may boost prostate health. It said “increased intake of coffee may reduce the risk of lethal and advanced prostate cancers by 60 per cent.” The study followed almost 50,000 men for over four years and found that males with the highest intake of coffee had significantly lower risks of aggressive prostrate cancer. The study is said to be the first study of its kind to look at both overall risk of prostate cancer and risk of localized, advanced and lethal disease.

“Coffee has effects on insulin and glucose metabolism as well as sex hormone levels, all of which play a role in prostate cancer. It was plausible that there may be an association between coffee and prostate cancer,” said Kathryn Wilson, PhD, from Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health. The researchers presented their findings at the American Association for Cancer Research Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research Conference late last year.

Well…that’s enough for one reading. See you next week with the second “Show Me the Research.”

What Is Sustainable Horticulture?

Posted by sustainable_hort on March 24, 2010  |  No Comments

This is a quick thank you to all that have checked this blog and made so many positive comments. And more…a short view of where we are headed.

This blog was started to document, explain, revise, suggest and predict where the wide world of horticulture can honestly to create systems to grow plants that do not depend on petroleum based inputs (which at some point become scarce or at least much more expensive), but finds closed systems to supply those inputs. No one is saying it is easy, it still needs work and research, but natural systems are being identified. We just need to rethink some obvious biology, especially relating to soil, and how it has worked “sustainably” for millions of years.

Definitions are tricky…and “sustainability” is seems to be the rule in this case. There are many definitions, the majority of which tend to be bent to service those defining it. But, after reading numerous definitions, it seems to boil down creating ways to grow plants that will without harming workers or future generations later. Many include the definition of “environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity.” This must mean “we must meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” So, “stewardship” requires “maintaining or enhancing this vital resource base (soils, water and closed inputs) forever.”

Certain food and ornamental products have identified with this “sustainable” vision. More than identified, they have built businesses, created organic fertilizers and pesticides, established networks and distribution systems that are a first stage in creating a more sustainable horticulture. It might even lead to a more sustainable agriculture…a different conversation.

Even Miracle Grow, not the most organic product in the world, is now selling two soil amendment products. These miracle products, which the company promotes as containing “organic” components, promise healthy soils that “grow plants twice as large.” The company has recognized the concept, along with much of agriculture, that healthy soil is the literal and environmental foundation of sustainable horticulture, whether in farms or landscapes.

So, this blog first focuses on ornamental plant production. I am working with a wholesale grower in the wonderful Willamette Valley, Oregon, where plants like to grow. It is one of the main reasons I live here today. We are seeing if a grower of shrubs and trees can work towards a sustainable sustainability…one that works economically long term. A key phrase in this sentence is “long term.” And it may mean growing not the largest plant, but the healthiest plant. This is not just speculation, but has a background, starting with the works of Sir Alfred Howard and William Albrecht, and continuing today with the Rodale organization, the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, and ATTRA. I suggest reading New Opportunities in Sustainable Landscapes and Can Nurseries be Sustainable? on this blog, and investigating the references. Let’s keep the discussion going.

At the same time, this site will point to new uses of plants from green roofs and walls, to storm water control with green streets, to growing food on empty rooftops and in our neighborhoods. We find cities planting more trees, urban agriculture sneaking into backyards and along cities edges, plants being used to clean water and air, and cool our heat islands. This is all positive and needs to be recognized as an important environmental strategy, one that can also create jobs. Obviously, without plants, there is no food or air, there is no “us.” So, it becomes important to recognize and utilize plants at every level we can.

Finally, this discussion site will lead to the introduction and testing of organic input products here in the Northwest (with application nationally), and we will be providing some of those products through this site and with advertising support. This all works toward my focus, helping horticultural growers (both food and ornamental) move, step by step, to a sustainable future while still providing the planet with plants.

And, a main test site will be our organic produce operation, 19th Street Farms. Since the links on this template are not working right, just type in “www.19thstreetfarms.com/blog/” to get to the site. I will use this blog for other content, but the site will busy in summer. It is also our CAS/Farmers Market site where we are continually talking with our customers. So look under specific categories for your favorite topic.

MORE COMING SOON…

Plant Lists for Bioswales and Rain Gardens

Posted by sustainable_hort on March 18, 2010  |  No Comments

This post, as promised, presents a quick overview of the various plants used in bioswale and rain garden environments. It is not as simple as just throwing a few water tolerant plants in the ground. Careful plant choice and placement play key roles in successful “wet” landscapes.

Plant selection for these projects is driven by several key factors including the following:

Obviously, the basic site conditions play a huge role. Factors like sun exposure, soil depth, physical and chemical properties and moisture holding capacity can vary, so need to be understood for successful plantings.

What is the intended function of the project? For many projects, the landscape’s performance, including infiltration, pollutant removal and evapotranspiration rate will determine its success.
But, there can also be safety issues, which may require added protection such as surrounding hedges. Finally, aesthetics play a role since many working landscapes sit in neighborhoods and other public areas. While visible, they can seen as an amenity, and even provide some recreational opportunities.

No landscape is going to be maintenance free; so long term needs should be studied. This is one area where the plant material choice can have dramatically different cost impacts.
Finally, recognize each site’s natural water regime. Check the depth, frequency and duration of soil saturation, which will vary daily, seasonally or annually. For instance, Portland, Oregon, is considered a “wet” climate, but the summer is extremely dry. Plants in these urban, constructed wetland must survive extreme variations. A similar garden in Atlanta, Georgia, or Columbus, Ohio, would get significant summer rain.

Actually every rain garden or bioswale has its own “zones” that have different requirements, according to the Virginia Department of Forestry’s Rain Gardens Technical Guide. The guide points out that the center, and deepest, part of the garden best grows the very wet to wet-loving plants. Meanwhile, the middle of the garden’s side takes wet to dry plants, while the upper rim takes drier types of vegetation.

The guide lists other factors affecting the choice of the plants for rain gardens:
• Decide on objectives, such which wildlife you want to attract, then decide on the varieties you would plant to attract those species. [Refer to reference list below]
• The rain garden’s location affects use of fruit-bearing plants and trees, since if it is near the driveway or walkway, it could create messes and maintenance issues. Trees next to a power line or too close to a house are not good choices.
• If the bioswale are near enough to receive runoff from a road that gets chemical treatments for ice in winter, choose plants that tolerant salt.
And then there is actual selection of species and varieties…and a common question, should we plant natives compared to introduced, commercial varieties?

Why Native Plants?
The majority of the web sites that deal with bioswales or rain gardens are also now recommending using natives. So, why is this the accepted trend?

As Withrow-Robison and Johnson point out in the OSU publication Selecting Native Plant Materials for Restoration Projects, “selecting appropriate plant materials for restoration projects helps make any of these projects more successful. They state that, “‘appropriate’ means choosing species that are suitable for the site, are grown from locally adapted sources, and have a solid genetic composition.” In many cases, this leads to using native species.

So, what is a “native plant?” Most definitions say a “native plant” occurs naturally or has existed for many years in an area, and they can be trees, flowers, grasses or any other plants. “Local adapted sources” can mean those plants have adapted to a very limited range, living in unusual environments, under very harsh climates, or growing in unique soil conditions. Yet, while some had a very limited range, many others live in diverse areas or easily adapt to different surroundings.

So, to summarize the strengths of using natives in bioswales and rain gardens.
• First, native plants are better adapted to the local climate. Once planted and established, do tend not to need extra water or fertilizer.
• Secondly, many are deep rooted, allowing them to survive droughts. This is especially important in the Northwest, where the normal wet weather can disappear for several months during the summer months.
• Third, native plants provide habitat and food for native wildlife and, are thus very attractive to the diverse native bees, butterflies, beetles and birds, all important pollinators.

These plants, which include many wildflowers, sedges, rushes, ferns, shrubs and small trees, grow on the edges of natural wetland, also have root systems that enhance infiltration, moisture redistribution, and diverse microbial populations involved in biofiltration.

A key point to remember is that rain gardens, unlike a water garden, will be dry most of the time. Plant selection should include those that tolerate short periods of inundation, but not require constant standing water. In areas that will have moist, well-drained soil, select plants with moderate moisture requirements. For drier sites like the edge of your rain garden, plant species with low or moderate moisture requirements.
Meanwhile, any perennial plants need to be hardy in your growing zone.

Each region has growers of appropriate native and related plants for rain gardens and bioswales.

In fact, some successful growers will collect seed their own seed from the local area. For example, one Oregon native plant producer has collected seed for plants such as snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) and twinberry (Lonicera involucrate) in the immediate area, using on a couple of mother plants for each. Another grower collects all her Pacific dogwood (Cornus nuttallii) from two trees growing at a nearby park.
See references below for several recommendation lists.

These three urban plant technologies are just part of a wider set of alternative Best Management Practices (BMPs). Many are simple, practical designs, but provide effective storm water management. Some even add aesthetic enhancements to the urban, suburban, and rural landscapes. They can be cost effective to build while providing long-term sustainability for city infrastructure and conservation of a city’s water resources. These include filter strips, grassed swale, green roof, and infiltration basin, planters and trenches.

So, as the cost savings are identified, the demand for specific plant materials should increase. At this point, the trend seems to be moving toward regionalized, native plant materials. Since there are a number of operations already propagating this niche, they may have the best opportunity to benefit from this particular green movement.

References:

The following references are available online and have been updated relatively recently, so they contain more current research and data regarding various plant choices.

• Rain Gardens Technical Guide Virginia Department of Forestry
www.dof.virginia.gov/mgt/resources/pub-Rain-Garden-Tech-Guide_2008-05.pdf

• Selecting Native Plant Materials for Restoration Projects by B. Withrow-Robinson and R. Johnson, OSU publication EM 8885-E, November 2006.
extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog/pdf/em/em8885-e.pdf

• Plants for Stormwater Design
www.wildflower2.org
Native plant database and suppliers directory for North America.

• Rain Gardens Technical Guide – Virginia Department of Forestry
Central Office
900 Natural Resources Drive, Suite 800, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903
www.dof.virginia.gov
Phone: (434) 977-6555 – Fax: (434) 296-2369
VDOF P00127; 05/2008

• Brooklyn Botanic Gardens, Rain Garden Plants.
This web site offers regionalized lists of suggested plants for rain gardens. Not as extensive as other sites, its easy to use breakdown is a good starting place in identifying plants for an effective design palette. www.bbg.org/gar2/topics/design/2004sp_raingardens.html

• 10,000 Rain Gardens (www.rainkc.com) has an extensive site that features a diverse list of plants for rain garden situations. It also has a search feature that allows criteria selection from five categories, so a nursery could focus first on what it is already growing, expand to closely related varieties, and then look for new opportunities that would fit within existing production systems.

• Bluestem Services: (www.bluestemservices.com) Has numerous plants lists, but two feature nearly 100 plants for rain gardens and wetlands.

Make Sure Your Fresh Vegetables are Fresh

Posted by sustainable_hort on March 17, 2010  |  2 Comments

When we buy vegetables, we hope they are providing important nutrients for our health. Numerous research studies have confirmed that eating a diet rich in fresh vegetables and fruit can help deter certain diseases and other health problems.

A recent research report from England showed that “freshness” is a relative term and that some frozen vegetables can actually be more nutritious that grocery store “fresh” vegetables. This is not really a new fact since there has been other research indicating the same thing.

But, more interesting to me, as an organic produce grower, were the statistics on how “old” many vegetables are by the time they appear in your local grocery store.

The report stated, “80% of shoppers believe the fresh vegetables sold in supermarket are less than four days old.” Yet, the study found that “they can be up to nine days old when they arrive, and remain on the shelf for a further four days.” Then, unless they are used immediately, they can by stored and not eaten until they might be more than two weeks old.

So, how does this affect the nutritional value? The study showed green beans could lose up to 45% of their nutrients, while broccoli and cauliflower lose 25%. Some of the key nutrients lost include vitamin C and glucosinates, thought to block the development of cancer.

It quoted nutritionist Dr. Sarah Schenker who said, “‘the nutritional content of fresh vegetables begins to deteriorate from the minute they are picked.”

But, the process of freezing, storing, handling and transporting of a frozen product in energy intensive. And, freezing changes the vegetables textures and taste, not in a positive way.

So, how can the consumer overcome this situation?…By buying truly “fresh” vegetables through subscription (CSA) agriculture and visiting local farmers markets. Growers selling through these two avenues harvest their crops the day they are delivered or brought to market. Consumers can cut literally weeks off the holding time, making them much nutritional when they are eaten. Add to this the greater variety of produce available through these systems, the support of a safe, local food shed, and helping the local economy…it becomes a win-win-win for everyone involved.

[To readers...If these food and food production topics are of interest to you, please visit my other blog at www.19thstreetfarms.com. This is our farm site that also follows the seasonal progress on our organic farm. I will still occasionally post here, but most of my posts on these topics will appear on the other site.]

Green Streets/Bioswales/Rain Gardens

Posted by sustainable_hort on March 16, 2010  |  No Comments

After at least a century of hard engineering solutions for urban rain/storm water run-off, communities are turning more and more to using a plant-based technology that mimics nature’s wetlands and ponds.

Portland, Oregon, has played a leading role in supporting and developing this concept, with successful demonstration projects now helping control negative storm water events that included flooding and the overflow of sewage into local rivers.

Just holding back the flow of a major rain event is enough justification for continuing the development of green streets, or rain gardens. When the cost of “hard” infrastructure is considered, these plant-based technologies may be the perfect “green” technology to receive early installation.

All these variations…green streets and rain gardens…are built on the concept of bioswales. So, much of the information is based on bioswale research and the success of earlier projects.

A Decade of Development
One of the first scientifically designed, large-scale bioswales was built in 1996 for Willamette River Park in Portland, Oregon. This bioswale, at a total of 2330 lineal feet, was designed to capture pollutant runoff and prevent it from entering the Willamette River. Silt capture was improved by adding intermittent check dams. The dams reduced suspended solids entering the river system by 50 per cent.

Another example of a large, designed bioswale is at the Carneros Business Park, in Sonoma County, California. In 1997 the California Department of Fish and Game and County of Sonoma, working with an environmental design team, created a detailed design that took the surface runoff from the park’s large parking area. The runoff came from the building’s roof and parking lots. There was also an overland flow from properties located north of the project site. A two-mile bioswale was built to reduce runoff contaminants from entering Sonoma Creek. The grass-lined bioswale channel has an almost linear construction, with a down slope gradient of four percent and six percent cross-slope gradient.

Another early project, completed in 2001, is Seattle’s pilot Street Edge Alternatives Project (SEA Streets). Its drainage designs closely mimics the natural landscape compared to traditional piped systems. Impervious surfaces were reduced, now with 11 percent less than a traditional street while providing improved surface detention in swales. SEA also added over 100 evergreen trees and 1100 shrubs. Two years of monitoring show that SEA Street reduced the total volume of storm water leaving the street by 99 percent.

Meanwhile, back in Portland, the Bureau of Environmental Services has created a “green streets” program. In one project, the city retrofitted SW 12th Avenue, near Portland State University, to collect runoff from 8,000 sq ft and running it into a series of four planters. Up to 6 inches of water can be collected in each planter, then the water overflows down the street to the next planter. In 2006, the project won a General Design Award of Honor from the American Society of Landscape Architects.

There are even companies now that focus on the design, construction and promotion of rain gardens and related products, such as rain barrels. This is another great example of how the low-tech use of plants can solve serious environmental problems, instead of billion dollar “hard” solutions such as Portland’s two massive pipe system projects now under construction.

Definitions
But, despite many similarities, there are some differences between the bioswale variations.

A swale is a low tract of land, that usually exists in a moist or marshy situation and can be a natural landscape feature or one specifically built for environmental reasons. The later is often an open drain system is that manages water runoff.

Bioswales are landscape elements designed and built to remove silt and pollution from surface runoff water. These “swaled” drainage courses are, in a sense, gently sloped ditches that contain plants, compost and/or riprap. The sloped sides are usually less than six percent slope.

As water flows though the typically wide and shallow ditch, so the water spends enough time in the swale, to help trap of silt and pollutants, a bioswale can have a meandering or almost straight channel alignment, based on the lie of the land where it is built.

Bioswales are often built around parking lots due to auto pollution. Potential harmful compound end up being collected on the paving and then flushed by rain. The bioswale, acts as a biofilter, and surrounds the parking lot. As the runoff enters the bioswale, it is cleaned before entering a watershed or storm sewer.
The bioswales can also contain biological factors also contribute to the breakdown of certain pollutants.
Bio-retention ponds, commonly called “rain gardens,” are landscape features that help control rainwater runoff. The runoff comes from roofs, driveways, walkways, compacted lawn areas and other impervious urban surfaces, and cause problems, especially during the large storm events. Structures, low-lying depressions and other landscape constructions that slow and deter running water allow heavy rains to be absorbed into the soil. This prevents the urban situation where the rains flow into storm drains and cause secondary environmental problems. Or it becomes surface water that causes erosion, water pollution, flooding, and diminished groundwater. Some studies claim this can reduce the pollution reaching creeks and streams by up to 30 percent.

Rain garden plants also return water vapor into the atmosphere through the transpiration.

Thus, rain gardens are essentially all landscape features that capture, channel, and divert natural rain and snow that falls on a property. This diverted water may also find other uses, such as stored water returned as irrigation. If designed correctly, an entire landscape or garden can become a rain garden. Individual elements act as components or small-scale rain gardens.

Meanwhile, green streets use small-scale, vegetated bioswales, built along streets that again help control storm water events. These constructed elements create on-site infiltration, while providing attractive streetscapes. They also improve a neighborhood’s livability by adding park-like elements that serve as urban greenways. As mentioned earlier, the City of Portland has officially incorporated green street facilities into all its development, redevelopment or enhancement projects. Besides treating and infiltrating storm water, these projects can also increase tree shade canopy and support native habitat all in the parkways and medians.

It is important to note that these man-made water-control landscapes’ success depends on an adequate “infiltration rate.” This measures, in inches or millimeters per hour, the rate a particular soil absorbs rainfall or irrigation. As the soil becomes saturated, the infiltration rate decreases. When the precipitation rate exceeds the infiltration rate leads to “runoff.” So, the correct soils are also crucial to the overall functioning of all these bioswale variations.

In addition, most of these bioswale-based, water control landscapes are using at least some, if not all, native or related plant choices. This leads to both environmental and cost advantages.

Why Bioswales…Benefits of Water Control Landscapes
These wetland variations, working like their natural versions, have several key benefits that will increase their use as bioswale technology becomes adopted as an effective construction element in urban settings.

• Reduced expense for storm water management facilities
In many locations, natural landscaping, like bioswales or rain gardens, can handle and control storm and flood waters. This, in turn, can reduce the need for expensive, “highly engineered” pipes systems and detention facilities. More and more real world projects are showing that drainage swales can cost much less to install than storm sewers.

“Sustainable innovations can actually reduce costs,” explained landscape architect Paul Morris, speaking at an annual meeting of Oregon Landscape Contractor Association. Morris works on planning and sustainable issues for Cherokee Investment Services, Inc., an international development firm that has long recognized the many benefits of incorporating sustainable technologies into their projects.

He said these include storm water run-off (largest environmental problem in US) control using bioswales, rain gardens, green roofs, and capturing the water on site can be less expensive to construct than traditional solutions.

When curbs and gutters are eliminated and curbs are slotted, there can be substantial construction savings. When natural drainage measures increase infiltration of storm water into the local soil, runoff volume is reduced while the need for downstream conveyance and detention structures is reduced.

Other projects found that detention basins, designed with natural landscaping to resemble wetlands or natural lake systems, also reduce costs over conventional basins. These “natural” landscapes eliminate the need for expensive riprap stabilization and low flow channels paved with concrete. Natural vegetation in detention basin bottoms and on side slopes is less costly to maintain than conventional turf landscaping (see next section), and is a more reliable soil stabilizer.

• Removing Contaminants
As was indicated in the definition of a bioswale, one reason to slow water down is so it can react with the nearby plants, roots and soil. This has documented several benefits.

First, these plant-based technologies can help control several classes of water pollutants, including silt, inorganic contaminants, organic chemicals and pathogens. This falls under the definition (according to Wikipedia) of “biofiltration.” It is defined as “a pollution control technique using living material to capture and biologically degrade process pollutants.” These process include cleaning waste water, capture chemicals that are potentially harmful, micro biotic oxidation of contaminants in air, or collecting silt from surface water runoff.

This is similar to “bioremediation,” which is defined as “any process that uses microorganisms, fungi, green plants or their enzymes to return the natural environment altered by contaminants to its original condition.” Bioremediation may be employed to attack specific soil contaminants, such as degradation of chlorinated hydrocarbons by bacteria. An example of a more general approach is the cleanup of oil spills by the addition of nitrate and/or sulfate fertilizers to facilitate the decomposition of crude oil by indigenous or exogenous bacteria. (Wikipedia)

With silt, the bioswale or rain garden’s effect is to slow the moving water, reducing turbidity, and allowing the small soil particles to drop out of the water. Thus, the soil is returned to a place where it is beneficial instead of traveling downstream to become a problem.

Meanwhile, inorganic compounds, such as metallic compounds like lead, chromium, cadmium and other heavy metals, are common pollutants, especially in areas of heavy auto use. Lead, from automotive residue (e.g. surface spillage of leaded gasoline) is the most common example.

Other common inorganic polluting compounds include phosphates and nitrates, whose main source is excess fertilization. This often causes “eutrophication,” defined as “an increase in chemical nutrients — compounds containing nitrogen or phosphorus — in an ecosystem from the release of sewage effluent, urban storm water run-off, and run-off carrying excess fertilizers into natural waters. It may occur on land or in water.

However, the term is often used to describe the resultant increase, and thus excessive, plant growth and decay in aquatic environments. This results in a lack of oxygen and results in severe reductions in water quality, fish, and other animal populations, disrupting normal functioning of the ecosystem, In aquatic environments, this enhanced growth creates choking aquatic vegetation or phytoplankton, often known as “algal blooms.”

Meanwhile, common pesticides, frequently over-used in agricultural and urban landscaping, are also seriously detrimental organic chemicals. They can actually poison some organisms and often seriously disturb aquatic ecosystems.

Finally, there are human pathogens that usually come from animal waste in surface runoff water. In just the past few years, it has lead to a several serious diseases in humans, with outbreaks coming from spinach and peanut butter.

Less recognized, but still serious, are comparable diseases that have affected aquatic organisms.

• Reduced costs of landscape installation and maintenance
Studies have shown that these “bioremediation” technologies are less expensive than the some other landscaping options. For instance, conventional rolled-sod, turf lawns can have installation costs exceeding $12,000 per acre, while planting grass seeds may cost $4,000 to $8,000 per acre. But, seeding native prairie grasses and forbs costs only $2,000 to $4,000 per acre.
Several publications noted that planting native plants plugs increases installation costs significantly but does give plants a “head start” if desired.

Another plus is that sponsors and volunteers can help control native plant installation costs. Sponsors can even sometimes be a public or private entity with plant propagating capabilities. Volunteers can be recruited to install and maintain native landscapes.

And, natural landscaping just cost less to maintain. Over the first ten years, the combined costs of installation and maintenance for natural landscape can be as little as one fifth of the costs for conventional landscape maintenance. Many projects use a range of native plants already adapted to the region’s soil conditions and climate, including summer heat and drought. Natural landscaping lowers many normal costs including labor, water, fertilizer, herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, replanting annual flowers, and mowing. In drier climates, natural landscaping lowers the high irrigation costs.

The reduced use of lawn maintenance equipment lowers gas use, an additional benefit. Natural landscapes require simple maintenance, usually just annual mowing or burning, and some weed removal (mostly in the few years after installation)

This, like green roofs and green walls, is becoming a new market for both growers and landscape contractors. With Portland leading the way in this area, it will be one more topic this blog will continue to follow. If you are interested in more details, go to www.portlandonline.com/BES/, click on “Stormwater Solutions” under Library.

Watch for the upcoming post that discusses and provides references on the plant material being used in this newest version of sustainable horticulture.