It's been a long time since Senator Herb Sparrow traveled across the country promoting the book, "Soils At Risk". His message, at the time, was to inform the public of the dangers to the soil resource as a result of existing conventional farming practices and also of the need for soil conservation programs. He was a big hit at meetings and with the media due to his knack for an interesting style of delivery and upbeat presentations. He also garnered a lot of attention because the recent drought years in the eighties had spawned such terrible soil erosion that many were reminded of the devastating dirty thirties. The awareness of the dangers of soil degradation and the need for conservation programs was driven home.
The timing for the SSCA couldn't have been better. Our organization had just been established by farmers who also had concerns regarding existing production practices and the deleterious affects these practices had on the soil resource. The SSCA supported the stand that people like Senator Sparrow took on the issue of soil conservation. Governments heard the message and realized the need for programs aimed at helping farmers understand the dangers to the soil resource and what to do about these concerns. Over the next several years millions of dollars were pumped into programs such as: the Soil and Water Accord, the SOS program and the Green Plan. Through these programs our organization took the lead in educating farmers about the soil degradation process and the practices necessary to bring the land back into good shape. Much of our effort has focused on promoting reduced tillage farming systems and more specifically, low disturbance seeding. These efforts have been very effective. Saskatchewan can now boast the highest percentage of cropped acreage under, what we consider, effective soil conservation practices. We have also taken the lead in working with the power generating industry in raising awareness of the carbon sequestration issue and how the soil can function as a carbon sink for greenhouse gas emissions.
We have made some pretty positive steps in protecting our soil resource. But what about the future? Current programs that support the SSCA's farmer extension efforts will expire in eighteen months. Without these programs will it be possible to sustain the current momentum of soil conservation efforts? Some people in places of significant influence have taken the attitude that no further support is necessary. They suggest the momentum is sufficient now to carry the soil conservation message to farmers without further resources or extension efforts. I wonder. No doubt the level of direct seeding adoption has increased significantly since the early 90's when extension programs were initiated. And we are in a better situation than in our neighboring provinces. But to suggest this level of adoption will provide the impetus for further unsupported growth is, in our opinion, wishful thinking. Currently we have just over twenty five percent of Saskatchewan's cropped acreage under low disturbance seeding techniques. This situation exists due to an extensive effort with respect to technology transfer. Future gains in the adoption of soil conservation practices will probably require more extension effort and resources, not less.
So what will the future hold for soil conservation programs? Our neighboring provinces seem to have taken the strategy that what has worked in Saskatchewan will work there. We can see a gearing up in extension efforts for both Manitoba and Alberta. In Saskatchewan I would have to say, it doesn't look good. There are no government programs scheduled for soil conservation at this time and industry budgets are extremely tight. It would be difficult to ask farmers to fund the efforts as they are in the toughest economic straits in decades. No one, at this time, will commit to a future program supporting soil conservation efforts like we have seen in the past several years. If anyone should fund the necessary efforts it should be those who have the most to lose. The food eating public. Unfortunately, this would be a minefield for a politician on a campaign trail. What I see happening in absence of government supported programs is a reduction in extension efforts. The information flow from researchers to farmers and back again will slow to a crawl. No field days, no annual conventions and no one on one support programs to which farmers, over the past ten years, have become accustomed. The rate of adoption for reduced tillage practices will slow and may even develop a negative trend and our valuable soil resource, on which we rely for our food, will still be largely at risk to erosion. Where are you now Mr. Sparrow?