Wildlife and fish and sustainable agriculture

Excerpt

AN exciting dialogue has started across the country, as conservationists, organic food proponents, and average farmers find they have some concerns in common—concerns about groundwater, about health, and about net profits in agriculture.

The movement, if it can be called that, has been labelled low-input, sustainable, regenerative, or alternative agriculture. Whatever the name, the notion has been hailed by many as the best hope of reducing chemicals in water and food supplies and in the farmer's work environment. What is not so commonly recognized is the potential that this type of agriculture offers to improve the quality and quantity of habitat for fish and wildlife.

Conventional versus sustainable

To understand how a more sustainable way of farming could benefit wildlife, it helps to review the ways such a system differs from what has come to be known as “conventional.” On modern, conventional farms the scale of fields and equipment is large. Usually, one or two crops are grown every year. Fewer of these farms have livestock, and if they do, animals are frequently confined in factory-like conditions that necessitate regular doses of antiobiotics to keep them healthy. Soil erosion levels are often high …