eTrader Portal

It has happened! The cotton industry has taken a 90-degree turn away from the main highway and is currently speeding pedal-to-the-metal toward Beantown and Cornville.

Meanwhile, even though effects of this course change can be observed all across Ag-land, to me they seem no more severe than at the local cotton gin. Simply put, you can’t gin beans or corn.

For the 2007 season, decreases in cotton acreage of 30 to 50 percent were common. This was drastic for many gins, but many others were able to weather the storm with above-average yields and good cottonseed prices. But what about 2008 or 2009? How long before Soybean highway leads back to King Cotton’s interstate? Perhaps the best analyst to believe is the one who says, “I don’t know.”

Regardless of the length of this cotton vacation, we’ve got to plan for the trip. A safe precaution, however, would be to pull out the big suitcases. In my case, as it probably is for many others in similar circumstances, I will have a job this year because favorable cottonseed sales went a long way in making up for lost acreage. Unless we must rebate it away, we should have capital to fund the ‘08 season. However, based on cotton acreage predictions, I worry about 2009.

Even though my producers are planting everything but cotton, I am the person most affecting the terms of my own fate. Given the alternatives, these are terms I can work with because I am the gin manager. And since a manager’s chief responsibility is to ensure a gin’s profitability, I’ll focus on that as if my very job depends on it. Unfortunately, it probably does.

The numbers aren’t in yet for acres this year. We won’t know the worst of it until May or June. But, if I’m to improve the profit margin for 2008 to the point of protecting my job, I’ve got to start managing right now! We ginners tend to appreciate a more relaxed lifestyle once the last bale gets hauled away. But, for the next little while, we must be vigilant in eliminating inefficiencies whenever the gin doors are open.

Off-season electricity, tools, services and parts purchasing, fuel, waste disposal fees and man hours are all areas for improving repair season expenses. Attention to these details is probably more obvious to my ginner friends who manage smaller operations, but for me, our large volume has always justified focusing on production efficiency. This year will be different, so I plan to seek pointers from ginners accustomed to working with smaller budgets.

This year will also require a more maintenance-oriented app-roach to repairs. Even though we may have some off hours to do in-season maintenance, I don’t intend to do a halfway job with repairs. This year we’ll fix things more and install replacement parts less.

All things considered, there are encouraging signs that we can expect in this aftermath of change. Like our grandparents who survived the Great Depression, gins will survive by diversifying or developing other income-producing divisions.

There is clearly a transition occurring within the U.S. cotton industry. And some might wonder about the survival of the cotton gin. Regardless of the method, we are about to see what the descendants of Eli Whitney can do to help our industry, and I have no doubts about the ingenuity of ginners and gin managers.

So, while this is just as much a time of discipline as invention, I’ll pinch pennies. And, more excitedly, I’ll await with anticipation the ingenuity and innovation that has always sustained this great industry B2B market directory.

article source : www.cottonfarming.com

Growing cotton in a conservation tillage system requires a good burndown treatment for weeds and cover before planting. This is becoming more complicated because of glyphosate-resistant horseweed in many areas.

Some areas are finding this resistant horseweed continuing to emerge after the cotton has been planted. This is causing many farmers to consider residual herbicides in their burndown.

Another weed that emerged suddenly in northern Alabama last year is common groundsel. This weed was difficult to control and served as a host for false chinchbugs. The chinchbugs moved to cotton and killed cotton plants in several fields last season. Determining what weeds are present in the fields before burndown will be critical in determining herbicide combinations to use.

Article source : www.cottonfarming.com

With the volatility in the grain markets and the increase in acreage for corn, soybeans and wheat, an opportunity exists for cotton producers. With the decrease in acreage, the cotton prices are far better than most would have predicted. If you can’t plant more acreage, then manage for the highest yields possible.

The key for cotton production this year will be management. Producers who had irrigation last year during the drought had yields well above the Missouri projected yield of 962 pounds per acre. In fact, some producers had personal yield records due to the high number of heat units. So, producers who increased their irrigation capacity during the off-season can at least have more yield stability.

Final plant populations should be in the 1-2 plants-per-foot range, and the crop should be managed for early maturity in some of the fields by either planting earlier maturing varieties for managing growth regulators and fertilizer inputs to keep the internodes shorter and the total plant height more manageable.

Producers should look at all of their inputs and see what they can change to stay in production. With the high cost of fuel and labor, reduced tillage systems will benefit producers, yet we still have holdouts that use conventional tillage. Fertilizer inputs should be managed to increase earliness. Split applications are very beneficial on the sandy soils.

Missouri producers should take advantage of the increased yield potential created by removing the boll weevil as an economic pest.

Source : www.cottonfarming.com

USA Rice Foundation Chairman Marvin Hare announced the selection of the 2010 Rice Leadership Development Class during the USA Rice Outlook Conference. The class is comprised of five rice producers and two industry-related professionals selected by a committee of agribusiness leaders. Candidates must be 25 to 45 years old at the time of application and derive their primary livelihood from some aspect of the rice industry.

The new rice producer class members are Alex Clark, Poplar Bluff, Mo.; Matthew Fielke, Stuttgart, Ark.; Shannon Harrington, Iowa, La.; Nicole Van Vleck, Sacramento, Calif.; and Jim Whitaker, McGehee, Ark. The new industry related class members are Andy Morris, Murfreesboro, Tenn., and Dan Squires, Yuba City, Calif.

Many Rice Leadership Development Class alumni are currently serving in key positions on various industry boards and committees, including Brian King, chairman of the USA Rice Merchants’ Association, as well as Paul Combs, Charley Mathews and Linda Raun, all members of the USA Rice Federation Executive Committee.

Alumni of the Rice Leadership Development Program are eligible to participate in a new international program session made possible with the addition of RiceTec Inc. as a sponsor of the program this year. John Deere Company, RiceTec Inc. and Syngenta sponsor the Rice Leadership Development Program through a grant to The Rice Foundation. The USA Rice Federation administers the program.

Source : www.ricefarming.com

Arkansas rice and soybean farmer Wayne Vines explains why he intends to plant more soybeans this year. Vines also reveals where he goes to get production advice when he needs it.

High diesel bills will take a lot of ground out of rice production in 2006. Arkansas rice/soybean farmer Wayne Vines, who farms in northern Jackson County, plans to switch more of his operation to soybean production this year.

“If a field is not absolutely prime rice ground, we cannot afford to plant it to rice,” explains Vines. “My sandy ground will be planted to soybeans. I rotate beans and rice, and I’m normally 60 percent soybeans and 40 percent rice. This year, I will probably not have more than 30 percent of my farm in rice production.

“The high input costs, particularly diesel, plus low rice prices, are the main reasons why I will plant more soybeans this year. Fuel and fertilizer are just too expensive, and a producer cannot afford to cut back on fertilizer, so diesel is the prohibitive cost. I’m not convinced you can burn over $2/gallon diesel and still raise rice profitably.”

Vines normally starts planting soybeans around May 10, depending on the weather. He always tries to plant rice before he starts planting soybeans; he plants both with a 7.5-inch spacing drill.

Going no-till is another way Vines plans to cut back on the amount of diesel that he will burn this season. “I have a no-till drill and haven’t really done much no-till in the past but I’ll do it for sure this year to reduce the amount of diesel that I’ll use,” he says.

Vines planted all Group Vs in 2005, but might plant some Group IVs on some of his dryland ground since he will plant less rice than normal this year. He planted Delta King Seed soybean varieties last year and plans to do the same this year. “Delta King offers good soybean varieties that perform consistently across the board on different soil types,” he says. “Last year, I planted DK 5567 RR, DK 5161 RR and DK 5967 RR.

“Keeping up with all the different soybean and rice varieties is difficult. Having a consultant helps me a whole lot with variety selection.”

Vines’ consultants ‘walk the walk’
Vines’ consultant is Marlow Wiggins of the Lawhon Farm Services. Wiggins, who is based at the Grubbs location, is involved in the recommendation and application of chemicals, fertilizer, fungicides and water management for all crops grown in his area. “We also make timing recommendations,” says Wiggins, who, like the other Lawhon consultants, is a Certified Crop Advisor accredited by the American Society of Agronomy and the Arkansas Consulting Licensing program.

Wiggins pulls soil samples and determines the crop’s nutrient needs on a field-by-field basis. Vines says, “My father was a firm believer in pulling soil samples, but I now depend on Wiggins to do it for me. Having another man walk my fields helps me out tremendously.

“Additionally, Lawhon has a top technical soybean man, Bill Rushing, who is the seed production manager for Delta King. I had a problem in one soybean field in 2004. We thought it was SDS, so Bill pulled samples and found that nematodes were causing the problems in the field. He was real thorough and really impressed me.”

Pre-season planning pays off
Wiggins continues working for Vines during the off-season. In addition to pulling soil samples, he tries to keep Vines and his growers informed as much as he can.

“For example, when the University of Arkansas publishes their variety yield results at the end of the year, I always take a copy to my growers to help them in variety selection,” Wiggins says. “Information is as important to them as products and practices.”

Vines adds, “We meet several times during the winter for pre-season planning, such as determining what varieties we need to plant on what field.”

He flood irrigates about 60 percent of his bean acreage. Vines also farms dryland beans – even more this year with his shift away from rice. He markets all of his soybeans and a little rice through Riceland Foods. The Arkansas producer markets most of his rice through Poinsett Rice and Grain.

“Poinsett has a great marketing organization and they’re locally owned by a good, honest man,” he explains. Vines grew up farming on the family operation. After graduating from college, he taught for five years, but returned to the farm in 1973 to farm with his father, who passed away in 1981.

B2B trade directory contributed information for this article.

article source : www.ricefarming.com

The test results of a Finnish Customs Laboratory has showed that the export consignment of organic long grain aromatic rice from a private exporter in Indonesia contained pesticide residues in organic rice, particularly inorganic bromide 23 mg/kg indicating the possible fumigation with methyl bromide.

According to a recent notification received by the Commerce Ministry on Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed from the European Commission in Brussels, the Indonesia agencies have also been getting reports from the exporters of organic products that some consignments were rejected at ports in the EU and other countries last year and early this year.

Source : www.oryza.com

Every farm B2B business directory, whether a sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation, will some day change ownership. This Factsheet deals with the tax implications of transferring farm assets to family members and the options available to minimize tax.

Prior to any major transfer of assets it is critical to consult a tax advisor. Do this well in advance, since the best tax results often require a two or three year planning window.

For information on the sale of farm assets outside the family see OMAFRA Factsheet Taxation on the Sale of Farm Assets, Order No. 08-047. For an overview of the succession planning process refer to the Farm Succession Planning Guide, Publication 70.

A change in farm ownership is often a significant transition, with two significant components. One is the “procedural” dimension dealing with the how, when and what to transfer. This could include tax implications, credit arrangements, business organization, operating agreements, insurance, wills and legal documentation.

The second is the “psychological” dimension. This involves the family and relationship dynamics that often determine the ultimate success of a family farm business transfer. Components include the meshing of personal and business goals, the willingness to let go of ownership, the selection and training of a successor(s) and communication among family members.
Transition Manager and Team Work

A farm transfer and succession plan can be complex. Given the multitude of components an advisory team is essential. A business management advisor can help the family:

* clarify goals
* identify alternatives
* assist with business and financial planning
* understand the potential tax and legal ramifications

The accounting and legal advisors can fine tune the alternatives and implement the decisions made by the family.

The most successful farm business transfers usually reveal a strong transition manager who acts like a team captain. Ideally the farm business owner would fill this role, providing the leadership, attitude and patience needed for a successful transition.
Important Considerations
Clarifying Goals

Before formulating any meaningful transfer plans, it is crucial to clearly identify family and business goals and communicate these to all farm family members. Some farm families find this easy, others benefit from professional advice. A current business advisor may be able to help with this step or direct you to another professional.
Farm Business Viability

Since the B2B business directory must be profitable – or have profit potential – for a farm transfer to occur, determine the financial condition of the business early in the transfer planning process.

Financial Needs of Parents

If parents have other assets or sources of income they could be more generous in both a transfer price and credit terms. However, this would not be the case if the parents have considerable cash needs.
Successor Training

A successful farm business transition is more likely where the successor(s) have management experience. This is often obtained through owning assets, revenue-sharing arrangements, or where progressive management responsibility is given over time.
Section 2 – Methods of Transferring Farm Business Assets

There are several methods of transferring farm business assets.

1. Bequest

Farming and other assets can be transferred by bequest through an individual’s will. If certain criteria are met, most farm assets can transfer from parent to child upon death free of immediate tax. In the absence of a transfer plan the will can be a “contingency” plan. Unfortunately some families use the will as their primary transfer vehicle, creating uncertainty for the farming children. It also prevents farming children from developing their own succession plans with their children.

2. Gifts1

While farming children would prefer this method, not all farmers can afford to make such a gift. Many farmers do partially gift their farms by selling to their children at below fair market value or by gifting certain assets. In either case there is no tax on a gift of farming assets. The gift of a non-farming asset to a child however may be taxable. Placing a child on title to a property is also a considered a gift to the child and a disposition or transfer of the property for the parent.

One exception is the gifting of inventory, which is fully taxable in the year it is transferred.

Gifts to minor children or spouses can result in property income from the asset being attributed back to the giver. These rules are covered in Section

3. Sale

The sale of farm assets to family members at fair market value (FMV) is the same as selling to a non-family member. Normal tax calculations are made. Good planning is essential to create the desired tax results.

4. Combination – Bequest, Gift, Sale

Most transfers involve a combination of bequest, gift and sale. Parents often desire to sell farm assets at the lowest price they can afford in order to defer the maximum amount of tax. A bequest can then be used to distribute other assets to non-farming children on the parents’ death.
Section 3 – Income Tax Rollovers and Deferrals

The Income Tax Act allows farmers to defer tax on the transfer of farming assets to a spouse or child. This is called a “rollover”. Spouses can also receive non-farming assets by way of rollovers. On a rollover of farming assets to a child any price between zero and fair market value can be chosen, although for tax calculation purposes the tax cost is used as the lowest value. The rollover provides significant flexibility in choosing appropriate transfer values. Even though the $750,000 capital gains exemption may be available, it is desirable to maintain the eligibility for the rollover.

The term “child” has an extended meaning and includes a daughter, son, grandchild, great grandchild, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, adopted child, step child or their spouses who are resident in Canada. In addition a person who, at any time before aged 19, was wholly dependent on the taxpayer for support and of whom the taxpayer had, at that time, in law or in fact, the custody and control is considered a child.2

Rollovers of property to a child must meet the requirements outlined below.
Requirements for Tax Deferral Rollovers from Parent to Child

To qualify for the rollover to a child the eligible property must, before the transfer, be principally used in a farming business in which the individual, their spouse, common-law partner or their child or parent, was actively involved on a regular and continuous basis.3 In 2006 the words “immediately before” were inserted into Section 70 of the Act that made the provision more difficult to meet. However Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has indicated they intend to revert to the phrase “before the transfer”.

According to the CRA “principally used” means the property must have been farmed for more than 50 per cent of the time of ownership by the transferor. See OMAFRA Factsheet Taxation on the Sale of Farm Assets, Order No. 08-047 for a more detailed explanation of the term “principally used”.
Other Considerations

* The eligible property may be owned either solely or jointly
* The transfer may take place while the taxpayer is alive, or at the time of death
* Rollovers are allowed on successive transfers such as a rollover of property to a spouse and then to a child while alive or upon death. The assets eligible for a rollover could also pass to a spousal trust and then to a named child
* Eligible property transferred from an estate must vest indefeasibly with a child, which means it must transfer to the beneficiary within 36 months of death with no strings attached. A longer period may be granted if special circumstances warrant it
* On the death of a child an election is allowed to transfer the property to a parent on a rollover basis.4

Pitfalls that could negate rollovers

* Rental of assets to persons other than children or spouses for more than 50 per cent of the ownership period negates rollover and deferral.
* A “tainted” spousal trust can negate a rollover. This can occur if the spousal trust breaks certain rules. For example if a spousal trust makes payments to someone other than the spouse it would no longer be a valid spousal trust.
* An obvious beneficiary of a spousal trust must be named. For example, a will that leaves land to a named beneficiary if they outlive the spouse, but to a different beneficiary if the first beneficiary should pre-decease the spouse, can negate a rollover.

Section 4 – Capital Gains
Taxation of Capital Gains

Fifty per cent of a capital gain is tax free. The other half is subject to regular tax. This portion, called the taxable capital gain, is added to all other income in the year the gain occurs. Any allowable capital losses can be deducted from the taxable capital gain. If the capital gain occurs on a corporately owned asset, 50 per cent of the gain is tax free and is allocated to the Capital Dividend Account. Dividends from this account are received tax free by the shareholder. The other half of the gain is taxable in the corporation.

Some tax credits may be affected in the current year and/or the year after reporting a capital gain, even though the capital gains exemption is used. This is because the taxable capital gain is reported on your tax return and affects the calculations of tax credits even though the exemption is used to reduce the tax paid. The increased net income may result in the claw back of some benefits such as the Old Age Security and Child Tax Benefits in the current year and may also reduce them in the year following the capital gain.
$750,000 Capital Gains Exemption5

In 2007, the Capital Gains Exemption was increased to $750,000 from $500,000 for dispositions occurring after March 18, 2007. The $750,000 Capital Gains Exemption is available to individuals on the sale of qualified farm property. Anyone who used the entire $100,000 general exemption when it was eliminated in 1994 has $650,000 remaining. The exemption is also available to partners in a partnership, since capital gains in a partnership flows directly to the partners who can then use the exemption. The capital gains exemption is not available to corporations; however, the shares of a family farm corporation are eligible for the exemption.

Qualified farm property6 includes:

* farm land and buildings
* shares in a family farm corporation
* an interest in a family farm partnership
* quota

Equipment and machinery are not eligible for the capital gains exemption. However, in a partnership or corporation, the value of equipment and inventory is included in the corporate shares or partnership interest.

Qualified farm property must meet the following definitions:7

* Property must be principally used in farming by one of the following qualified users:
* the individual
* the spouse, child or parent of the individual
* or by a family farm partnership or corporation of the individual, spouse, child or parent

and

* Property purchased prior to June 18, 1987:
o must be used in principally farming in the year of sale or
o have been principally used in farming for any 5 years during its ownership
* Property purchased after June 17, 1987:
o must be owned for 24 months prior to the sale

and

* in at least two years, the gross farm revenue of one of the qualified users who is actively engaged in farming the property must exceed income from all other sources

or

* the property was principally used by a family farm partnership or corporation in a two-year period, during which time the individual, spouse, child, parent or partnership of which they are a member, was actively involved in the farming business.

In all cases, the qualifying individuals – whether farming as a sole proprietorship, a partnership or corporation – must be actively engaged in management and/or the day-to-day activities of the business.
Definition of “Principally Used”

Similar to the requirements under the rollover provision, the CRA defines “principally used” to mean “more than 50 per cent” from either a time or usage perspective.
1994 $100,000 Capital Gains Election

In 1994, the $100,000 capital gains exemption for general property was eliminated. At that time, individuals were allowed to elect to increase the adjusted cost base of their property by up to $100,000, but not exceeding the February 1994 value. If you made such an election on your qualified farm property, you are deemed to have disposed of the property and reacquired it in 1994. As a result you must now meet the more difficult post-June 17, 1987, rules for qualified farm property on a future sale.
Splitting Capital Gains Between Spouses

If both spouses contributed to the purchase of property, they can split the gains to reduce taxes. Although both may be on title, it is the contribution toward the purchase that is the most critical. Generally, the capital gains from assets that are transferred to a spouse by way of gift attribute back to the spouse who transferred the asset. However the timing of the transfer is important.

Spouses added to title on or before December 31, 1971, would likely be able to split the capital gain. However, if they were added after that date, attribution rules would prevent splitting. See Section 6 for an explanation of the spousal attribution rules.

If the property is the asset of a spousal partnership, the capital gains will flow through to each partner based on their percentage ownership.
Calculating Your Capital Gain
Adjusted Cost Base

To calculate a capital gain or loss, you must know the adjusted cost base (ACB). This is the amount deducted from the selling price to determine a capital gain or loss. For property obtained before 1972, the ACB is the greater of original cost or the December 31, 1971, value. If obtained after 1971, the ACB is the purchase price plus costs. The cost base of land is adjusted by adding any non-depreciable capital improvements, legal and realty fees to the adjusted cost base. The ACB of buildings is increased by any capital improvements or additions, beyond just the normal maintenance and repair. Table 1, Calculating Capital Gain, shows an example of a capital gain calculation.

Source :isroi.wordpress.com

Please note that the information provided on this site was provided by the farm business advisors and is current as of the last update date. OMAFRA or its agencies or its representatives do not warrant the accuracy of any of these statements nor should inclusion of this information on this site be taken as an endorsement by OMAFRA or its agencies or its representatives of any particular service provider or advisor. This is simply a service to farmers and farm businesses and provides contact information on advisors who have submitted information about themselves and are recognized as meeting a minimum level of qualifications. While OMAFRA has made every effort to check the qualifications of these individual advisors so they meet the minimum qualifications, this list does not in any way guarantee or warranty the quality of the advisor or the quality of their work or information that they provide.

Furthermore, these advisors will be providing their own advice concerning individual situations and this is not the advice nor should be interpreted as advice by a government agency. These advisors are private sector individuals working for the producer who engages them for a specific task (Farm Financial Assessment).

OMAFRA or its agencies or its representatives accept no responsibility nor will they be held liable for any claims, demands, losses, or actions which may be made or taken against them, arising out of advice, operation or any other action related to the Farm Financial Assessment. Farmers, farm businesses and producers are encouraged to fully understand the terms of engagement when entering into a contract with an advisor. For more information on selecting an advisor, please refer to the factsheet entitled, “Choosing a B2B Business Directory Consultant”

The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) is maintaining a list of qualified farm business advisors to assist Ontario producers undertake the Farm Financial Assessment as part of Growing Forward Business Development for Farm Businesses.

The goal of Growing Forward Business Development for Farm Businesses is to increase the economic viability of Ontario’s agriculture and food industry. Based on their reviewed Action Plans, producers may require the services of a professional farm business advisor to review past financial performance, analyze their current business situation, discuss objectives and prepare financial projections based on identified goals.

Producers may be eligible for a maximum of $2,400 for up to four days of one-on-one consultation with a private sector farm business advisor (to a maximum of $1,900), as well as up to one day of follow-up (to a maximum of $500). The farm B2b business directory must provide a payment contribution.

There will be two options available to farm businesses to undertake the FFA:

1. Program-led – the farm business may choose an advisor from the approved FFA roster.
2. Producer-led – the farm business may choose their own advisor. This advisor is not required to be on the approved FFA roster but they must meet the same minimum education/experience qualifications as the rostered advisors.

Source : www.omafra.gov.on.ca

Jepang dikenal sebagai negara paling maju di Asia. Namun tahukah anda, bahwa pertanian disana ternyata masih kuat nuansa ‘tradisional’nya? Bagaimana itu? Mari kita simak selengkapnya!

Begitu kita berada di luar Tokyo, terjadilah anomali. Ini terjadi karena ternyata Negeri matahari terbit ini juga merupakan negeri para petani lokal/kecil. Di Fukuoka, kota terbesar nomor tujuh di Jepang, ladang padi yang damai terselip diantara rumah dan candi, dalam bayang-bayang pencakar langit yang hanya berjarak 10 mil.

Di iklim yang sangat kondusif ini, pertanian keluarga menanam buat dan sayuran dalam siklus tahunan, untuk memproduksi bahan pangan bagi kota berpenduduk 1,3 juta ini. Di daerah suburban, dimana pertanian lokal jauh lebih banyak, konsumen sering mendapatkan sayuran yang baru dipetik tadi pagi untuk makan malam. Di supermarket pada jantung kota Fukuoka, adalah umum untuk mendapatkan sayuran yang dipanen sehari sebelumnya.

Hasil pertanian segar

Jika anda menggigit tomat atau stroberi disini, maka efek dari kesegarannya akan segera terasa. Mereka sangat penuh cita rasa, sehingga tidak perlu dipersiapkan lebih lanjut lagi. Bahkan anak-anak menyukai sayuran, termasuk juga yang dianggap tidak enak seperti bayam atau kacang-kacangan.

Jepang memiliki istilah untuk hasrat terhadap makanan lokal dan segar: chisan, chishou, yang berarti, ‘produksi lokal, dan konsumsi lokal’.

Preservasi chisan-chisou pada salah satu negara yang paling terurbanisasi di dunia merupakan teladan yang baik, bahwa di negara lain yang terurbanisasi hal ini juga dapat diterapkan.

Dengan perkecualian Hokkaido, pulau Jepang yang paling utara dan paling rural, sebagian besar pertanian di Jepang adalah operasi skala kecil yang dijalankan oleh beberapa anggota keluarga. Hasilnya tidak hanya pada kesegaran makanan lokal, namun juga dedikasi untuk terhadap produk. Anggur dan peach, diantara buah lain, mereka lindungi dengan pelindung, sewaktu masih tumbuh, untuk melindungi mereka dari serangga dan gangguan lain. Tanah pun dipetakkan dengan baik, sehingga sayuran akan tumbuh dari dalam beberapa kaki. Dengan bantuan dari rumah kaca, hal ini membantu pasokan tanaman dari musim semi, panas, gugur, dan dingin. Sebagian besar pekerjaan dilakukan oleh tangan. Petani Jepang memproduksi semangka kotak, dari trik bonsai dengan membentuk semangka menjadi kubus sewaktu ia tumbuh, sehingga ia dapat dimasukkan kedalam kulkas. Ini menunjukkan dedikasi mereka terhadap pertanian.

Bantuan Pemerintah

Dalam era modern ini, generasi muda sudah mulai tidak tertarik atau mengapresiasi pertanian chisan chishou. Namun, pemerintah Jepang tidak tinggal diam. Mereka memberikan insentif-insentif, untuk mengakselerasi pertanian lokal. Di 20 tahun terakhir ini, pemerintah telah memfasilitasi pertanian lokal untuk memasuki pasar. Menjual tanah pertanian kepada kepentingan komersial, akan dipajaki sangat tinggi oleh pemerintah, sementara memberikan tanah tersebut ke anak untuk pertanian hanya dipajaki sangat minim. Pusat pertanian juga mengundang anak-anak sekolah untuk menanam dan memanen, untuk meningkatkan minat mereka. Pertanian kadang menjadi bagian dari kurikulum sekolah.

Minoru Yoshino dari Pusat Penelitian Pertanian Fukuoka menjabarkan peran pemerintah pada chisan-chishou dalam tiga hal. Makanan lokal yang segar adalah lebih sehat, dan rasa yang nikmat akan meningkatkan konsumsi sayuran. Sementara, pertanian lokal adalah lebih baik bagi kelestarian lingkungan, karena hanya memerlukan air dan pestisida lebih sedikit.

Banyak informasi tentang produk-produk pertanian yang beredarar saat ini, untuk lebih banyak lagi informasi yang di dapat silahkan kunjungi Supplier Indonesia

Source : www.netsains.com

Super crops won’t be enough — the planet will run short of food by 2030 unless we invest to avoid an imminent world water crisis, says Colin Chartres. A long list of factors have been blamed for the global food crisis which along with the energy crisis has hit developing countries, and the poor in particular, hardest. Prices of staple foods have risen by up to 100 per cent.

A growing population, changes in trade patterns, urbanisation, dietary changes, biofuel production, climate change and regional droughts are all responsible, and commentators point to a classic pattern of price increases caused by high demand and low supply.
But few mention the declining supply of water that is needed to grow irrigated and rain-fed crops.

An often-mooted solution to the food crisis is to breed plants that produce the ultimate high-yielding, low waterconsuming crops. While this is important, it will fail unless we also pay attention to where the water for all our food, fibre and energy crops is going to come from.

Essentially, every calorie of food requires a litre of water to produce it. So those of us on Western diets use about 2,500-3,000 litres per day. The expected addition of a further 2.5 billion people to the world by 2030 will mean that we have to find over 2,000 more cubic kilometres of fresh water per year to feed them. This is not any easy task, given that current water usage for food production is 7,500 cubic kilometres per year and supplies are already scarce.

Facing severe water scarcity A few years ago, my organisation, the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), demonstrated that many countries are facing severe water scarcity, either because insufficient fresh water is available or because they lack investment in water infrastructure, such as dams and reservoirs. What makes matters worse is that this scarcity predominantly affects developing countries where the majority of the world’s 840 million undernourished people live.

Serious and extremely worrying evidence indicates that water supplies are steadily being used up. And the causes of water scarcity are much the same as those of the food crisis: demand exceeds a finite supply.

The world’s population is projected to grow from 6 billion to 8.5 billion by 2030 and unless we change the way we use water and increase water productivity — ie. produce more ‘crop per drop’ — we will not be able to feed them. That is the conclusion of the IWMI’s recent Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture and its book, Water for Food, Water for Life, which drew on the work of 700 scientists.

Declining investment
Compared with the long-term threat of climate change, this problem is coming fast upon us. The latest estimates
indicate that in 25 years’ time we will not have enough water to feed ourselves and the current food shortage could become a perpetual food crisis. Yet, although the effects of water scarcity will be profound, very little is being done about it in most countries. Indeed, just as in other areas of agricultural research and development, investment in providing and managing water resources has declined steadily since the Green Revolution. This must now change.

Since the UN Millennium Goals were formulated in 2000, much of the water agenda has focused on providing drinking water and sanitation. This water comes from the same sources as agricultural water. As we urbanise and improve living standards, there will be increasing competition for drinking-quality water, putting agriculture under further pressure. While improving drinking water and sanitation is vital for raising health and living standards, we cannot afford to neglect provision and improved productivity of water for agriculture.

There are potential solutions. Better water storage has to be considered. Ethiopia, which is typical of many sub-Saharan African countries, has a water-storage capacity of 38 cubic metres per person. By comparison, Australia has almost 5,000 cubic metres per person, yet, in the face of current climate change, even that may be inadequate. We will certainly need to build new large- and medium-sized dams to deal with the critical lack of storage in Africa.

Other simpler actions are also part of the solution. These include constructing small reservoirs and using groundwater systems sustainably, including artificial groundwater recharge and rainwater harvesting for smallholder vegetable gardens.

Improved year-round access to water will help farmers maintain their own food security using simple supplementary irrigation techniques. Redesigning both the physical and institutional arrangements for some large, and often dysfunctional, irrigation schemes will bring productivity increases. Safe, risk-free re-use of wastewater from growing cities will also be needed. Of course, drought-tolerant crops and the infrastructure to get fresh food to markets must be developed in parallel.

I and my water science colleagues are raising a warning flag. Significant investment in both R&D and water infrastructure development are needed if dire consequences are to be avoided.

Dr Colin Chartres is director general of the Sri Lanka-based International Water Management Institute, a non-profit research organisation focusing on the sustainable management of water resources for food, livelihoods and the environment.

COMMENTS Dr Chartres’ observations should be taken seriously by all, though the same warnings have unfortunatey been
ignored repeatedly in the past. One correction: according to a Ministry official at Africa Week, Ethiopia has increased its storage to over 160 m3/person, ie, 4 times the figure quoted. So some countries are progressing.

Doug Merrey
There are organizations working on these problems! We at International Ocean Institute have been focused on these issues since the 70s. The International Ocean Institute-USA and the city of St. Petersburg, FL, USA, are hosting a Coastal Cities Summit on November 17-20, 2008, to address the complex challenges that coastal city leaders face as populations increase, resources are depleted, and the impacts of climate change are felt. The Coastal Cities Summit intends to bring together 600-700 coastal city leaders, managers and academics to Douglas Merrey. For more information B2B trade directory

Source :http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org