Shaping Forests from the Bottom Up: It’s All About Root Disease

Root disease tree failure

Root disease tree failure resulted in the loss of this car.

The old proverb: “You can’t see the forest for the trees” should have continued with a line saying that it’s even harder to see below the trees. Because seeing under trees, their root system to be exact, is how scientists understand and appreciate the things that will determine what we all see in our future forests. A new publication just released by the US Forest Service seeks to help forest managers recognize important root diseases and provide the best management strategies.

Ordinarily, we depend on decay organisms to break down wood to recycle enormous amounts of above ground materials such as leaves, limbs, and tree trunks. Without these subterranean decomposers, we would find ourselves buried in forest debris. But what makes beneficial decay organisms go bad and attack the root systems of living trees?  In a word, disease.

Tree disease is any harmful deviation, caused by a persistent agent (like a fungus), impacting the normal function of the tree. Root diseases occur when trees respond to the lingering effects of these persistent agents as they prevent key root functions such as water uptake or alter structural integrity of the tree.

Boxelder in park that has succumbed to root disease

Boxelder in park that has succumbed to root disease crushing two picnic tables.

Even after the tree dies, these fungi can live on, waiting for new trees to emerge, re-infecting generations over and over. In fact, today’s forests likely reflect millennia of influence and damage by root disease. Disease pockets may first go unnoticed, but as time marches on their impacts can be seen as slow and reduced growth.

Urban communities look to landscape trees for their ability to reduce air and noise pollution, provide energy-saving shade, furnish habitat for wildlife, improve aesthetics, add property value, and contribute to community wellness. Root disease damage becomes increasingly more important where people live because gravity works. Eventually infected trees die becoming hazards where people live and recreate, ultimately becoming a danger to the community and leaving us with less resilient forests.

Tree failure due to root disease

Tree failure due to root disease on a golf course.

While we may not be able to entirely remove undesirable diseases, it is possible to utilize integrated treatments to minimize their impact and keep the future of our forests safe and healthy. The recent report is a useful tool to do just that.

Root disease pocket mortality in a forest

Root disease pocket mortality in a forest.

Environmental Markets Help Improve Water Quality

Environmental Markets graphic

Environmental trading markets are springing up across the nation.

Environmental trading markets are springing up across the nation with goals of facilitating the buying and selling of ecosystem services and helping more private landowners get conservation on the ground.

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy joined Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe in December 2014 to announce the state’s first trade under its nutrient trading program for stormwater.

Through the transaction, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) purchased phosphorous credits generated on farms to offset phosphorous runoff from a road construction project. By purchasing the credits, VDOT saved approximately 50 percent of the cost of installing traditional engineered structures and paved the way for similar transactions.

Since then, Virginia’s stormwater trading program has blossomed—the state has approved almost 30 nutrient banks that can sell credits.

Recently, the National Network on Water Quality Trading—a forum for advancing the policy and practice of water quality trading—met to set the stage for development of a road map for innovative approaches to stormwater mitigation. Through these new approaches, cities and rural communities across the Nation would have access to online tools and models to help address stormwater challenges through market-based approaches and green infrastructure incentives.

“We want to make sure that our rural communities and agricultural producers are part of the stormwater conversation,” said USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Chief Jason Weller.

The Willamette Partnership administers the National Network on Water Quality Trading through a Conservation Innovation Grant from USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Conservation Innovation Grants are funded through the NRCS’ Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which is part of the Farm Bill. “I like to call the Farm Bill the Nation’s largest green infrastructure program,” said Weller.

USDA is seeking new proposals for cutting-edge projects, like environmental markets, that will provide new conservation opportunities through its Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG) program. Through USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the department will invest up to $25 million for projects that spark the development and adoption of innovative conservation technologies and approaches in areas like conservation finance, data analytics, and precision conservation to benefit producers on private agricultural and forest lands.

The next National Network on Water Quality Trading meeting is tentatively scheduled for the spring of 2017, and will focus on water quality trading challenges and opportunities for agricultural producers. Producers or organizations interested in participating in this meeting, should contact Kari Cohen, the National Leader for Environmental Markets and Conservation Finance at NRCS.

High-Tech Agriculture Continues to Reap Rewards for Farmers and Society

A team of researchers with an unmanned aerial system

With a new view from above, diverse teams of researchers help deliver information to farmers using useful, inexpensive unmanned aerial systems (UAS).

This post is part of the Science Tuesday feature series on the USDA blog. Check back each week as we showcase stories and news from USDA’s rich science and research portfolio.

Just like a smart phone helps users learn, communicate and make important decisions, smart technology—known as precision agriculture—helps farmers know and apply critical information about the right investments in fertilizer, seed, pesticide and water needed to produce their crops. Through new technologies, farmers produce more efficiently and see an increase in profits while improving stewardship of ecosystems and local communities.

To talk about precision agriculture is to talk about mapping the amount of a crop grown per acre (yield) or the types of soils in a given area. It also includes the technology that automatically guides farm machines and controls variables like the rates of seeds, fertilizers or chemicals.

Known as “VRT,” variable rate technology is one of the most important components of precision agriculture simply because fertilizer or chemicals are applied only where and in the amount they are needed. Without VRT, a farmer fertilizes at an average rate across a field, so some areas of the field get too little fertilizer reducing yield, while other parts of the field get too much fertilizer, wasting money and potentially polluting nearby waterways.

While soil and yield mapping have been a standard method for determining the amount of fertilizer needed, new sensing systems are providing an alternative and more flexible method for determining inputs. Back in the 1990’s, USDA-funded researchers at Oklahoma State University studied the problem of how to measure the amount of the common fertilizer nitrogen needed in a field.

The scientists knew that the answer depended on crop biomass – or the vegetation within the crop area– and that could vary throughout a field. So they developed light sensors to measure certain reflections and recognize the “greenness” of the crop, indicating the amount of biomass. The resulting data was then used to calculate the amount of nitrogen needed. This success led to widely-used commercial systems and a significant reduction in over application of nitrogen that could contaminate local environments and waterways.

The Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) is one of the newest technologies being studied for improvements in agricultural precision. Though the potential value of using UAS in agriculture has received a lot of attention and systems are available at a reasonable cost, there are few examples of farmers actually using a UAS to make key decisions and take direct action. The technology can be more complicated than expected and it takes time extract usable information.  Substantial research still needs to be done.

One recent project by USDA-funded researchers at the University of Minnesota is using UAS to locate pests and diseases that reduce soybean yield. Like the nitrogen fertilizer VRT, UAS could allow producers to reduce pesticide use, spraying only the areas within each field showing the disease. Because it can more quickly and thoroughly scan a field than a person can scout it, UAS could provide more timely detection with less labor costs.

In recognition of the many challenges to using UAS in agriculture, a USDA multi-state project committee recently began to coordinate this work. The project includes objectives for research and objectives for providing extension information, helping farmers evaluate the various UAS technologies and offer strategies to make it profitable.

How to Use Plants and Trees to Make Your Home Sustainable

November 8th, 2016|Tags: |0 Comments

.fusion-fullwidth-1 {
padding-left: px !important;
padding-right: px !important;
}

By Doyle Irvin, American Forests

Dogwood.

Dogwood. Credit: Dale McNeill via Flickr.

The movement to convert pre-existing houses into more sustainable versions of themselves is gaining steam. Most of the focus is on what kind of windows, doors or solar panels to choose, or what kind of laundry apparatus you should install, and not enough people realize that you can have a large impact on your house’s sustainability with trees and plants! That being said, there is still a huge amount of information out there, so American Forests is here to give you the quick take.

Shading is more complex than it seems

Where you want to produce shade for your house is reliant on where you happen to live. The U.S. Department of Energy helpfully split the United States into five distinct areas: marine, hot-dry, hot-humid, mixed-humid and cold.

Climate Map

Credit: Energy.gov.

For the cold, hot-humid and mixed-humid regions, you will want to plant deciduous trees that block the summer heat yet allow light through during the winter, after the leaves have fallen. Trees can also be used as wind breaks or funnels — you will want to plant a wind break north of your house, to block south-headed winter winds, and you’ll want to plant a funnel south of your house, to channel cool breezes during the summer. If over-heating during the summer is over-working your air conditioning unit, you will want to shade the roof, all windows, the walls that face east and west and anything darkly-colored that attracts and absorbs sunlight.

People who live in hot areas will want to provide shade for their air conditioning units, especially. The roof and the windows are of equal importance. If you don’t have enough time to wait for an entire tree to grow (who does?), you can use vines grown along a lattice to cover important areas. The more you plant, the cooler your area will be: the evapotranspiration of plants and trees reduces temperatures considerably.

For more information about strategic shading and windbreaks, reference this amazing guide by Landscape For Life. You can also use this free i-Tree Design tool to calculate energy savings on real or hypothetical trees and buildings.

Make sure to avoid invasive species

Whether it’s the Kudzu in the south or the Eucalyptus in the West, invasive species are wreaking havoc across the United States. Seeds travel! Carefully selecting which species to plant on your property is an important contribution to preserving your local area’s sustainability for future generations. Native species are also adapted to the climate of your region, so they will cut down watering costs.

To find out what species are native to your region, consult eNature.

Purify the air in your neighborhood

It’s widely reported that indoor house plants can help you keep your air clean and toxin-free. Ferns, palms, lilies and orchids are some of the best air scrubbers around, removing such toxins as formaldehyde, xylene, carbon monoxide, benzene and ammonia, among many other pollutants. These plants also release lots of oxygen for a double-bonus! For more information about indoor plants, you can access a helpfully organized report on the NASA Guide to Air-Filtering Houseplants.

What’s less recognized is the work that trees do to clean the air in our neighborhoods. American Forests is working hard to spread the word. Here are the important things to know:

  • Trees filter particulate matter from the atmosphere, keeping it out of our lungs.
  • Air pollution causes more deaths per year than AIDS and Malaria combined.
  • Forty-two percent of Americans live in areas with dangerous pollution levels.
  • The evapotranspiration and shading of trees cools surrounding neighborhoods, reducing air conditioner use.
  • Over the course of its lifetime, one average tree provides $62,000 of pollution control.
  • Trees have been shown to increase property value and reduce crime.

Some of the trees that are best at purifying the air around you are the oak, horse chestnut, yellow poplar, red mulberry, silver maple, London plane, dogwood and pine trees. A tree’s effectiveness varies depending on your region, so make sure to research which species are native to your region.

Hungry? Grow your own food!

Apples

Credit: Kelly Garbato via Flickr.

One of the easiest ways to live more sustainably is to eat locally grown food; you cut out all the energy costs involved in transporting the food to your doorstep. There’s nothing more local than your own home! Fruits, nuts, berries and vegetables can all come from your backyard. The scope of your project here can vary from one simple apple tree to an entire ecosystem. Carefully planned horticulture can sometimes be left entirely on its own as a self-managing system.

The best place to start is your local nursery, but we have collected some guides here for you to peruse:

The post How to Use Plants and Trees to Make Your Home Sustainable appeared first on American Forests.

Don’t make a choice that your children will regret

Dear US voters,

the world is holding its breath. The stakes are high in the upcoming US elections. At stake is a million times more than which email server one candidate used, or how another treated women. The future of humanity will be profoundly affected by your choice, for many generations to come.

The coming four years is the last term during which a US government still has the chance, jointly with the rest of the world, to do what is needed to stop global warming well below 2°C and closer to 1.5°C, as was unanimously decided by 195 nations in the Paris Agreement last December. The total amount of carbon dioxide the world can still emit in order to have at least a 50% chance to stop warming at 1.5 °C will, at the current rate of emissions, be all used up in under ten years! This time can only be stretched out by making emissions fall rapidly.

Even 2°C of global warming is very likely to spell the end of most coral reefs on Earth. 2°C would mean a largely ice-free Arctic ocean in summer, right up to the North Pole. Even 2°C of warming is likely to destabilize continental ice sheets and commit the world to many meters of sea-level rise, lasting for millennia. Further global warming will likely lead to increasing extreme weather, droughts, harvest failures, and the risk of armed conflict and mass migration.

greenland00037small

Meltwater on the Greenland Ice Sheet. Photo with kind permission by Ragnar Axelsson.

In case you have any doubts about the science: in the scientific community there is a long-standing consensus that humans are causing dangerous global warming, reflected in the clear statements of many scientific academies and societies from around the world. None of the 195 governments that signed the Paris Agreement saw any reasons for doubting the underlying scientific facts; doubts about the science that you see in some media are largely manufactured by interest groups trying to fool you.

You have a fateful choice to make. The policies of candidates and parties on climate change could hardly be more different. Hillary Clinton would continue to work with the international community to tackle the global warming crisis and help the transition to modern clean and renewable energies. Donald Trump denies that the problem even exists and has promised to go back to coal and to undo the Paris Agreement, which comes into force today, the 4th of November 2016, as culmination of over twenty years of negotiations.

Please consider this carefully. This is not an election about personalities, it is about policies that will determine our future for a long time to come. While the presidential race has gotten the most attention, voters should consider climate not just at the ‘top of the ticket’, but all the way down the ballot. Don’t make a choice that you, your children and your children’s children will regret forever.

David Archer, Rasmus Benestad, Ray Bradley, Michael Mann, Ray Pierrehumbert, Stefan Rahmstorf and Eric Steig

USDA Helps Eastern North Carolina Recover after Matthew

Under Secretary Michael Scuse, North Carolina FSA State Executive Director Bob Etheridge, and FSA County Executive Director Kenny Johnson standing with farmer Kent Smith

Under Secretary Michael Scuse, North Carolina FSA State Executive Director Bob Etheridge, and FSA County Executive Director Kenny Johnson stand with farmer Kent Smith to assess flood damage to his sweet potato crop in Tarboro, North Carolina.

When Hurricane Matthew hit last month, disaster struck as high flood waters devastated communities up and down the East Coast. Agricultural producers in Eastern North Carolina were hit especially hard and suffered devastating losses to crops, livestock, and property.

Secretary Vilsack recently designated 39 counties in North Carolina as primary natural disaster areas, in addition to 15 contiguous counties. This week, I traveled to the state to visit some of the communities that were affected. I saw a peanut farm littered with uprooted plants and cracked shells. I met with an organic tobacco producer whose top soil had completely washed away. I visited a sweet potato and soybean farm that suffered hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses. We drove by washed out roads and gutted homes with waterlogged furniture piled high on the side of the road.

It was heartbreaking to see the impact of the damage and the destruction of people’s lives. Now, three weeks after the storm, communities are starting to rebuild – and I want them to know that we are here to help. USDA has a wide range of programs available to those affected by natural disasters.

All qualified farm operators in disaster declared counties are eligible for low interest emergency loans. There are also many safety-net programs to help producers recover from eligible losses, including the Livestock Indemnity Program, the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program, Emergency Forest Restoration Program and the Tree Assistance Program.

Producers with crops insured under the Federal crop insurance program should immediately contact their local crop insurance agent to report any damage to insured crops. Compensation also is available to producers who purchased coverage through the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program, which protects non-insurable crops against natural disasters.

Additionally, USDA helps communities rebuild through rural housing programs, distributing food safety information, and ensuring food security by distributing food and administering the Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. There are USDA Service Centers located all across the state to help producers with agricultural damage and support communities as they recover.

As a farmer myself, I know weather poses significant risks to our family and livelihood. What Eastern North Carolina has experienced is any farmer’s worst nightmare. I empathize with what they’ve been through and sincerely want them to know that USDA is here to help them recover and thrive once again.

Under Secretary Michael Scuse visiting a washout on an organic farm

Under Secretary Michael Scuse visits a washout on an organic farm caused by Hurricane Matthew.

Carbon storage in WA state forests is too small and too risky to play a serious role as a climate change mitigation tool

guest post by John Crusius, Richard Gammon, and Steve Emerson

The scientific community is almost universally in agreement that climate change (and ocean acidification) are severe threats that demand a rapid response, with putting a price on fossil fuel CO2 emissions being a top priority. Far and away the single biggest contributor to climate change is CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Indeed, global CO2 emissions from fossil fuel emissions in recent years have been roughly ten times higher than emissions from the next largest global source, land use change, including deforestation (Le Quéré et al., 2015). Despite the small size of carbon fluxes from forests, enhancing carbon storage in forests is often discussed in WA state as a tool to fight climate change. There was one such claim in the Seattle Times OpEd from October 21 by Mathew Randazzo. We challenge these claims that forest carbon sequestration in WA state can significantly help solve climate change. Randazzo does not spell out in any detail what he means. As always, details matter in such discussions, as the science is complex. We focus here on some of the best available science on the climate and carbon storage impacts of forests, and provide references at the bottom of this article from some of the premier scientific journals in the world.

It is easy to understand why many wish carbon storage in WA state forests to be a viable tool to fight climate change, as forestry is an important industry in WA state. Such a solution, at first glance, seems like it could support the local forestry industry and create local jobs. However, mitigating climate change requires responses that make scientific sense. Devoting resources to forest carbon sequestration is largely a distraction from the real work needed to mitigate climate change, which is to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, most importantly of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion. But before we explain the counterintuitive science, we wish to acknowledge at the start that there are many excellent reasons to support planting trees in WA state and to support the local forestry industry. However, mitigating the threat of climate change is not among those reasons, based on the available science.

In temperate parts of the world (mid to high latitudes), such as the Pacific northwest, the impacts of forests on climate are complex. Forest growth does take up CO2 from the atmosphere, which is the impact on climate many think of. However, forests have other, lesser known impacts on climate as well, including trapping moisture below the forest canopy and altering the way sunlight is reflected off the landscape (termed albedo). In temperate regions such as WA state, forests can actually warm the climate via these impacts on trapping moisture and reflectivity (albedo) more than they cool the climate by taking up CO2. This has been pointed out in a recent article on reforestation and forest management in Europe over the last 250 years that caused a net warming, not a net cooling (Naudts et al, 2016).

It is in the tropical and subtropical latitudes, far south of WA state, where science indicates carbon storage in forests could have the most beneficial effect on the world’s climate and could possibly help to buy time until society reduces fossil fuel emissions substantially (Houghton et al, 2015). Even in the tropics, relying on forest carbon storage is risky. Carbon stores could be re-released back into the atmosphere at any point in response to fire or disease, each of which can be made worse by climate change. Indeed, one recent study of forests in the Amazon region concluded that forests there went from taking up CO2 to releasing it during one dry year (Gatti et al, 2014). Furthermore, there have been suggestions that tropical forest may become a source of CO2, even in the tropics, in response to greater extremes of rainfall (Gatti et al, 2014). In order for carbon storage even in tropical forests to be beneficial, it must remain stored essentially permanently (for many hundreds to thousands of years). No one can guarantee that future climate change, disease, and/or land use change won’t cause release of this forest carbon back into the atmosphere, which would bring us back to the starting point, before any forest carbon storage efforts were even attempted.

It is urgent that society act quickly to minimize the risks posed by both climate change and ocean acidification. However, any solution must stand up to the rigorous test of the best available science. We quote from some journals cited below. “Considering carbon storage on land as a means to ‘offset’ CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels (an idea with wide currency) is scientifically flawed” (Mackey et al, 2013). “Today’s forest management is more of a gamble than a scientific debate” (Bellassen and Luyssaert, 2014). “Above-ground carbon in forests represents a vulnerable pool of carbon, subject to droughts, fires, insects and other disturbances. Thus, the management of forests to accumulate carbon must not delay or dilute the phasing-out fossil fuel use. On the contrary, the deliberate accumulation of carbon on land may be of little long-term benefit” (Houghton et al, 2015). “Relying on biospheric sequestration is not without risk, because such sequestration is reversible from either climate changes, direct human actions, or a combination of both” (Pan et al, 2011). The best science tells us that relying on storage of carbon in WA state forests is risky at best, and quite possibly counterproductive. It is also in many ways a distraction from the essential efforts to reduce emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels.

John Crusius, Ph.D.
Richard Gammon, Emeritus Professor, UW Department of Chemistry, UW School of Oceanography
Steven Emerson, Professor, UW School of Oceanography

References

Bellassen, V., and S. Luyssaert (2014), Managing forests in uncertain times, Nature, 506(7487), 153-155.

Brienen, R. J. W., et al. (2015), Long-term decline of the Amazon carbon sink, Nature, 519(7543), 344-+, doi:10.1038/nature14283.

Gatti, L. V., et al. (2014), Drought sensitivity of Amazonian carbon balance revealed by atmospheric measurements, Nature, 506(7486), 76-+, doi:10.1038/nature12957.

Houghton, R. A., B. Byers, and A. A. Nassikas (2015), COMMENTARY: A role for tropical forests in stabilizing atmospheric CO2, NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 5, 1022-1023.

Le Quéré, C., et al. (2015), Global Carbon Budget 2014, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 47-85,
771 doi: 10.5194/essd-7-47-2015.

Mackey, B., I. C. Prentice, W. Steffen, J. I. House, D. Lindenmayer, H. Keith, and S. Berry (2013), Untangling the confusion around land carbon science and climate change mitigation policy, Nature Climate Change, 3(6), 552-557, doi:10.1038/nclimate1804.

Naudts, K., Y. Chen, M. J. McGrath, J. Ryder, A. Valade, J. Otto, and S. Luyssaert (2016), Europe’s forest management did not mitigate climate warming, Science, 351(6273), 597-600, doi:10.1126/science.aad7270.

Pan, Y. D., et al. (2011), A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests, Science, 333(6045), 988-993, doi:10.1126/science.1201609.

Forest Digest — Week of October 31, 2016

November 4th, 2016|Tags: |0 Comments

.fusion-fullwidth-1 {
padding-left: px !important;
padding-right: px !important;
}

Find out the latest in forest news in this week’s Forest Digest!

Forest

Credit: Peter Prehn.

The post Forest Digest — Week of October 31, 2016 appeared first on American Forests.

People behind Scientific Innovation at USDA

Dr. Woteki working with 4-H members

Dr. Woteki works with 4-H members.

The past eight years have been an extraordinary time for agricultural science, and for the application of new insights from other fields to enhance agricultural productivity and the overall agricultural economy. As the final days of this administration are approaching, it gives me a great deal of pride to look back at what USDA has accomplished in the areas of research and innovation.

Scientific research is a fundamental part of our mission at USDA. But, ultimately, what’s behind all the science is people – people who do the research and people who are affected by it. As USDA’s Chief Scientist and Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics, I’ve met and worked with both as I’ve traveled across the country and around the world.

I’ve seen the dedication and innovation of researchers at a USDA laboratory in California as they developed uses for drones and laser-guided sprayers as part of a “precision agriculture” movement. Their work allows the wise, efficient application of water and chemicals – as well as increased crop yields – in drought-ridden areas.

I’ve seen the confident, solitary efforts of a Cornell University professor in the field of urban aquaponics who, with USDA funding, proved that he can not only raise 10,000 tilapia in fish tanks housed in the unlikely location of a high school basement in midtown Manhattan, but could then recirculate the fish tank water to nourish a thriving edible garden a few floors up in the school building.

And I’ve seen the eagerness reflected in the faces of two young girls taking part in 4-H National Science Day activities in the nation’s capital, applying science and technology skills and equipping themselves to possibly become part of the next generation of leaders in agricultural science.

These people, and so many before them, embody the commitment to scientific innovation that is a major reason why Americans have not had to worry about food security since the Dust Bowl days of the 1930s. To learn more about USDA’s important scientific work, I invite you to take a few minutes to take a look at our results over the past eight years in our USDA Medium Chapter 11: Food and Ag Science Will Shape Our Future.

The 21st Century has been referred to as the “Century for Biology,” and we are witnessing the applications of our heightened understanding of genes and gene traits to enhance crops and livestock. These applications, in turn, have been integral to USDA efforts like the transfer of germplasm and new plant varieties to the private sector here in the U.S.

We are helping, through USDA’s partnership with the Agency for International Development and the “Feed the Future” initiative, in delivering UG99-resistant wheat varieties and improving the nutritional content of legumes—two examples of how our research and innovation are being applied to help improve food security around the world.

Our work has been informed by projections that our global population will reach over 9.5 billion people by the year 2050. To adequately feed that number of people would require an almost doubling of the world’s current level of agricultural production and a reduction in food loss and waste, at the same time the amount of farmable land is decreasing. As we continue to learn about the effects of a changing climate, our focus is on sustainably intensifying agricultural production to deliver the array of foods to provide for good health and foods that are free of disease-causing pathogens and toxins.

We have developed a vision of a bioeconomy that by the year 2030 will produce a billion tons of biomass – agricultural residues, grasses, energy crops, forestry trimmings, algae and other sources – that will provide alternative sources of fuel, energy and other bioproducts. We have also focused research on developing agricultural systems that will be able to provide all of these services and be resilient in the face of climate change.

Over the last eight years. We have faced numerous challenges and the results have been remarkable. There is still much to do, but we have left a solid foundation for continuing USDA’s work to support the American agricultural economy, to strengthen rural communities, to protect and conserve our natural resources, and to provide a safe, sufficient, and nutritious food supply for the American people.