or

A SWUMM -W4

4'lalltmwlm%k4 I,* t - 1, 04-

contents2 summary6 where

who and why8 the markets9 legislative look

10 the benefits of burning12 burning by machine14 smoke management16 some partial answers20 grower and industry adjustments24 staff involved in field burning and

related research

4

,

2 Most agricultural practices such as field burning haveevolved because they were successfully adapted to thesolution of problems and served the welfare of a broadsegment of society.

These practices must also stand up to continuouspublic scrutiny, however, and must be accountableeconomically, environmentally, legally, and ethically. Fieldburning has thus become a controversial issue in Oregonbecause people apply these measures of accountability indifferent ways.

The Agricultural Experiment Station at Oregon StateUniversity has been involved in field burning research formany years. Because of this experience and ourresponsibility to inform the people of Oregon aboutcontroversial issues, we have prepared this publication.

In some instances, we have a substantial backgroundof good information that permits some precise statements.In other cases, we may not have all the answers and canonly suggest some possible courses of action includingn -led research.

any event, we have attempted to provide somer brief information to be helpful in developing

decisions ahead of us; we recognize the possible dangersin the brevity and suggest that you contact AgriculturalExperiment Station personnel if additional details aredesired.

Following is a summary of each of the major areas ofinterest:

The reason for field burningThe only feasible control for most diseases of annualand perennial grasses is the thermal treatmentprovided by field burning or other thermal fieldsanitizing. Development of chemical control of certaindiseases is progressing. Control of weeds, whichcreate problems of seed quality, is dependent on fieldburning to destroy crop residues which interfere withthe activity of soil-applied herbicides and to kill mostweed seeds. For the present, it appears that a thermaltreatment for annual and perennial grasses is the onlyeffective way to maintain seed yields and controldiseases, weeds, insects, and other problems whichotherwise could wipe out the grass seed industry.

The pollution problemAir pollution is created by field burning, slash burning,industry, and vehicle exhaust emissions, among otherthings. Eugene has been particularly vulnerable to airpollution from May through October because of theprevailing north wind. The air, during its long,southward path over the Willamette Valley, passes overmany sources of pollution (cities, factories, highways)before reaching Eugene and is, therefore, alreadyburdened with an accumulation of pollutants. Wesuggest that the residents of Eugene should not blameonly field burning for their problem but look to all theair pollution sources which cause intense and

extended air degradation. Scientific investigations todetermine the relative importance of vehicular,industrial, slash, and field burning sources of pollutionshould be invited to provide for the development ofpublic policy to manage multiple pollution sources.

Cropping alternativesIn most areas of the mid to southern Willamette Valley,soils are too dense and too saturated in the winter andspring to permit the growth of crops other thangrasses. Other crops are available for production inthe better-drained soil areas, but for the approximately150,000 acres of poorly drained lands there simply areno good alternatives unless both drainage systemsand irrigation systems are widely deployed. With newtechniques, drainage is a definite possibility but thereare no drainage outlets for much of the land and theenvironmental impact of drainage on the waterbalance and on wildlife is unknown.

Burning management and air pollution controlSome systems of field burning result in less airpollution than others. Burning straw in stacks, back-fire burning, and burning large areas to create atremendous updraft are examples of these systems.Certainly, improved burning management or theorganization of districts to provide burningmanagement will continue to reduce air pollution.

Although alternating burning with mechanical strawremoval has been shown to sustain seed yields ofsome grasses, it is not satisfactory for weed anddisease control. We have just begun to understand theatmospheric condition that permits or minimizes airpollution problems. A study at OSU recently funded bythe National Science Foundation should provide amuch more precise means of using meteorologicalinformation for maintaining air quality.

Field sanitizersEveryone had high expectations for the potential useof field sanitizers but there are problems with thesemachines that presently almost preclude theircommercial development and widespread adoption.Even with partial straw removal, the life of themachines is unknown and the cost of machineoperation under commercial agricultural conditions isquestionable. Some of the factors involved are highengine fuel consumption in an energy- short period,metal fatigue, and low field operating speed. Thelikelihood of private industry risking the capitalnecessary to produce sanitizers also is rather lowwithout state subsidy. The sanitizers emit pollutantsnearer ground level than open burning. In addition,their use will require their operation nearlycontinuously during the summer. On days that wouldbe so restrictive meteorologically that open field

4 burning would be prohibited, there would still beconflict between required continuous use of sanitizerson one hand and the potential for increased airpollution on the other hand. Thus, the problem of airpollution could be intensified rather than reduced bythe sanitizers.

Straw utilizationStraw can be substituted for part of the ration foranimal feed. In years when the price of alfalfa hay isvery high or pasture is not available, straw cancompete as a maintenance ration for cattle. Incompetition with other raw materials, straw is toobulky and dispersed to allow for economic pickup anddelivery for uses such as paper products or as a fuel.It is, indeed, unfortunate that this natural resourcecannot be used as a source of fuel for producingenergy, but the market price of other sources of fuelwould need to be high if straw were to be competitive.

ConclusionsOn the basis of the best information available, weconclude that the application of improved burning,cultural practices, and atmospheric forecasting cansustain a grass seed industry in the Willamette Valley.This might involve a management program that couldresult in burning about 200,000 acres in one year. Thisfigure may be reduced to 100,000 acres in years when

atmospheric and field conditions do not allow muchburning, or may be increased to about 300,000 acres inyears when atmospheric conditions and dry fieldconditions are conducive to burning withoutappreciable air pollution.

The economic value of this industry to all residents ofOregon, including the use of grass for wild fowl andfor animal industries during the winter and theaesthetic and erosion-protecting values of grass fieldsat most times of the year, deserves additionaldeliberation by decision-makers and researchers.Oregon cannot give up its grass seed markets andexpect at some later date to get back in the business.Our competition would not allow us to do this.

We suggest that the last several years havedemonstrated to an extent that pollution can indeed becontrolled and that all Oregonians in the WillametteValley should insist on an economical and sociallyacceptable solution to the problem.

J. R. Davis, DirectorOregon AgriculturalExperiment Station

whereOregon, with about 240,000 acres of grass seed crops

grown in 1976, is the world's largest producer of forageand turf grasses. All but about 12,000 acres are located inthe Willamette Valley, the "grass seed capital of theworld."

Mild and moist winters with dry summers for seedmaturation and harvest make the valley an ideal place toproduce high-quality seed.

Linn County, with about 110,000 acres of grass seedin 1976, is the leading grass seed producing county in thestate. Linn County produces more than half the volume ofOregon grass seed and essentially all the ryegrassproduced in the United States.

Significant grass seed production also occurs in Lane,Benton, Polk, Yamhill, and Marion counties. Smallamounts continue to be produced in Washington,Multnomah, and Clackamas counties. Outside theWillamette Valley, limited grass seed production occurs inUnion, Jefferson, and Jackson counties.

ETS

whoand why

YEASPRO

Grass seed growers in Linn, Benton, and Lane countiesend to specialize in grass seed crops, especiallyyegrasses. Grass seed is grown on the poorly drainedboil where most crops will not survive the wet winters.=arms are larger than average and use specializedmachinery and equipment. Annual and perennial ryegrassproduction is extensive in nature with very low net returnsper acre.

Although draining and supplemental summer irrigation)f the poor lands is technically possible, market;onditions preclude large-scale opportunities forproducing intensive fruit and vegetable crops.

Seed growers in Polk, Yamhill, Marion, Clackamas,bnd Washington counties have smaller, more diversifiedarms. Soils are variable, providing opportunities for avariety of crop alternatives and rotations. The choices arelefinitely limited in the hilly areas where soil erosion canpe a problem. In those cases, specialization in bentgrassind fine fescue grass seeds is common because of thegenerally higher return they offer over ryegrasses and theprotection they provide against soil erosion if annual orow crops are grown.

TREATEDSTRAW

609b TDN

UID

TE

T

8

themarkets

Cash farm receipts for grass seeds in Oregon totaled$48 million in 1976, with a cleaned and sacked value of$54 million. They have averaged near $50 million for thelast three years but variation is high because of changingcrop acres, yield, and market prices.

The total effect on the state's economy in 1976, usinga 2.0 multiplier, is estimated at $108 million. That value-added effect, which includes input purchases of $30 to $50million, is considerable.

Domestically, Oregon's grass seed growers producemore than 90 percent of U.S. production of annualryegrass, perennial ryegrass, bentgrass, and fine fescues.They produce a significant but smaller percentage of U.S.-produced bluegrass, orchardgrass, and tall fescue andcompete with growers in the Northern Great Plains,southern states, and Washington and Idaho regions.

Internationally, the competition in lawn and turfgrasses (fine fescues and bluegrasses) comes fromDenmark, West Germany, Holland, and Canada, and inpasta and cover crop grasses (tall fescue andryegrasses) from Denmark, Canada, New Zealand, andHolland. The export market is important for U.S.-producedbentgrass, ryegrass, tall fescue, fine fescue, and otherKentucky bluegrass. Essentially, all U.S.-producedbentgrass is exported. The principal export markets forgrass seed are the EEC (European Economic Community),Canada, Europe, Japan, and Mexico. Producer subsidiesto growers in the EEC and non-tariff trade barriers are

restricting free trade flow of grass seed from the U.S. andelsewhere into the EEC market.

The export of seed is important to Oregon. In 1976,Port of Portland reported 30 percent of all containershandled during the shipping season carried grass seed toEurope and 15 percent of all tonnages exported to Europewas grass seed.

.egislative

.ookThe practice of burning grass seed fields after harvest

as adopted quickly by growers in the late 1940s. Theycognized its effectiveness in disease control, its

nportance in weed and insect control, and the stimulusie heat gave to seed yield.

Burning also disposed of large quantities of strawhich did not decompose readily when plowed under andMess removed presented a problem for the next crop.

The public, at first, considered the large fires andWoke plumes as annual curiosities. But as the number ofres burned increased, and particularly when fields

here regrowth had developed were burned late in the3ason or under adverse atmospheric conditions,)mplaints about smoke increased.

Before 1967, post-harvest burning of gras seed strawas regulated by local fire districts for fire safety. In 1967,e State Legislature declared that field burning smokeas air pollution and the State Sanitary Authority-nowe Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)-wasven authority (advisory) to recommend where fieldrning was to be done.In 1969, the Legislature granted the State Sanitary

ithority the power to limit the amount of field burning onarginal burning days.

The summer of 1969 was a critical year in the historyfield burning. The Department of Environmental Qualitygypped field burning for two weeks because ofmospheric conditions.

On August 12, DEQ, which had little experience incontrolling field burning, forecast a good burning day andpermitted field burning for the entire Willamette Valley.The winds changed to flow from the north and moved thesmoke up the valley into Eugene resulting in a situationthat led to more restrictive legislation.

In 1971, the Legislature set up a burning permit systemwith a fee to the grower of 50 cents an acre. Five cents ofthe fee was deposited in a special account, to be used inthe smoke management program conducted cooperativelyby the Oregon Seed Council and the DEQ. The rest of thefee was used in a research and development program. The1971 Legislature also established January 1, 1975, as thedate field burning would be prohibited.

The 1971 law established a five-member committeeto direct the research and development program fundedby grower acreage fees. This program has been directedprimarily toward development of an acceptable mobilefield sanitizer by private contract. Other committee fundshave supported methods of removing and using strawwhich must be taken from the fields before sanitizers canoperate under field conditions.

In 1973, legislation increased the growers' burningpermit fee to $1 an acre (with $1 matching state funds) tobe used for research and development after 10 cents anacre was set aside for smoke management. Improvedsmoke management substantially reduced the intrusion ofsmoke into metropolitan areas.

the benefitse

10 In 1975, the Legislature replaced the ban on fieldburning with a phase-down system which would reducethe allowed field burning from 285,000 acres burned under1974 regulation to 235,000 acres in 1975 and down to50,000 acres by 1978. A system of increased grower feeswas adopted that would increase to $3 in 1975, $4 in 1976,$5.50 in 1977, and $8 per acre thereafter.

The primary reason for initiating field burning of grassseed fields was to control disease. However, there areother benefits:

Inexpensive residue removal.Weed control.Stimulation of seed yield.Insect and rodent control.Reduced pesticide requirements.Quicker return of minerals to the soil.Easier crop establishment.Increased fertilizer efficiency.Reduced fire hazard.

Grass seed residue must be removed from fields.Otherwise, pests, including diseases, and reduced standvigor will reduce yields below economic levels. Burning isthe most inexpensive way to remove grass seed residue.

Burning destroys many disease organisms, helpingcontrol serious diseases including some which cannot becontrolled any other way. Weed seeds, too, are destroyedon the soil surface, reducing the number of weeds in thenext crop. Burning provides the only present means ofgrass weed control in annual ryegrass.

In perennial grass seed crops, the reduced weedpopulations and removal of material which can adsorbherbicide materials dramatically improve the degree ofweed control.

The seed yield is increased by removing the residueand1the older surviving shoots. Burning changes the soilenvironment, promoting vigorous new plant growth earlyin the fall, and increases the amount of seed heads thefollowing spring.

The burning process also controls some insects androdents both by direct heat and by destroying the residuewhich is their habitat. Cutting down on the number ofpests reduces the number and amount of pesticidesneeded in seed production.

Ash deposited from burning residue also helps achievemore rapid recycling of straw and stubble minerals in

Soil. Burning has maintained the potassium level of soilsn the Willamette Valley so additional potash has not been,equired. Other plant nutrients also are returned to theSoil more rapidly after burning than from natural decom-)osition which is slow in the valley's wet winters and dry'ummers.

Residue burning also helps establish the next crop.Nith burning, annual ryegrass can be planted with little orto tillage, thus saving fuel and reducing costs.Eliminating straw also gives a boost to establishing smallseeded legumes on better-drained soils.

If straw decomposition is allowed to proceed, nitrogenn the soil is tied up. Burning the residue not only avoidshis requirement for essential nitrogen but also reduceshe amount of fertilizer which must be applied to the grassseed crop in that crop year.

Controlled field burning adds protection from large,accidental fires that could occur in the accumulatedresidue.

From a research viewpoint, open field burning is abroad spectrum, effective and non-residual pest controlmeasure which has improved seed yield and quality.

11

12

beingby machine

Research over several years has shown that experi-mental field burning machines, called sanitizers, stimulateseed production as effectively as open burning whenoperated under proper conditions.

However, serious damage has resulted to the cropwhen recent commercial test models have been usedunder less than ideal crop and weather conditions.

OSU, given the task of developing and testing a mobilefield sanitizer by the Legislature, began in January, 1970,with a project goal: to produce a machine with a fieldcapacity of 2.5 acres per hour with a burning capacity of10 tons of grass straw residue per hour. The machine wasto operate within specified DEQ limits for smoke emissionand at a total cost of less than $10 per acre. Data from theexperimental machine were to be used for constructingpractical field units on a commercial basis.

Working with its own experimental machines in 1971and 1972, OSU produced engineering recommendations,information about the effects of heat on plants and soil,and other research results which were used by companiesto build the first field sanitizers.

OSU evaluated plant and disease response to severalnew sanitizers in 1975 and in 1976 evaluated refinedprototypes.

Partial straw removal from the fields before machinesanitation is essential to achieve economical operatingspeeds and temperatures. Some straw and stubble for

fuel must be left in the field and it must be uniformlydistributed.

Each machine has its own fuel burning characteristics.Additional study will be required to describe the properoperating conditions when a machine design has beenselected for wider field use.

The 1976 evaluation report summation: the severalmodels field tested in 1976 varied in their effectiveness insanitation and in their operating characteristics. Ingeneral, the sanitation results were acceptable when themachine was well designed and was properly operated.

Further study will be required before these machinedesigns can be considered ready to be recommended forcommercial operation. Problems which have not beenovercome include factors such as metal fatigue, emissions,operator safety, and field operating speed. Recent testshave not completely established the crop tolerance tothese designs when operating at the upper temperaturerange.

Total machine sanitizing costs, including machineoverhead, maintenance, repair and operation, have notyet been demonstrated to be within the operating profitmargin of most of the grass seed crops grown in Oregon.

pjH1C

C

14

smokemanagement

Scientific evidence indicates that the burning of fieldscan be arranged by acreage and date, in conjunction withappropriate atmospheric conditions, so overburdening ofthe air can be avoided If all persons are objective andreasonable.

Smoke management, properly done, results inacceptable air quality. An air quality standard is stated bylaw as a maximum concentration of pollutants allowed.Thus, to manage smoke pollution we have the expression:Air quality = pollution source strength divided bymeteorological conditions.

Air quality is directly related to meteorologicalconditions. To keep the equality in balance, sourcestrength (acreage to be burned) can be increased only ondays when meteorological conditions increase (becomebetter for dispersal). When dispersal conditions are poor,acreage burned must be reduced or eliminated.

There was no systematic effort to manage smoke in theearly years of field burning. Fire safety, not air quality,generally dictated what burning management there was.

During the early 1960s, the U.S. Weather Bureauissued public advisories for agricultural burning. Theseadvisories included the degree of atmospheric stabilityand the likelihood of good smoke dispersal. Farmersinterpreted the advisories before arranging their burningprograms.

In 1967, the Weather Bureau and the State SanitaryAuthority (now the DEQ) began to work together on

forecasting daily conditions of the asmosphere. Each day,the Sanitary Authority, as management agency, made adecision about the feasibility of burning.

In 1969, advisories were changed to list the number ofacres which could be burned daily.

Smoke management is accomplished by balancing thefield acreage to be burned against the meteorologicalconditions of a given day. The smoke problems inpopulated areas have decreased with more experience inforecasting, better communications, greater growercooperation, and acreage allocation of grass fields byareas. DEQ figures show visibility at the Eugene airportwas reduced to 6 miles or less by smoke on 14 occasionsin 1976-only 3 from field burning and 11 from othersources. This compared with 7 cases attributed to fieldburning in 1971. In Salem, there were no occasions in 1976when field burning reduced visibility below 6 miles but 14cases were attributed to other sources.

In August and September, 1976, DEQ, with thecooperation of the Oregon Seed Council, scheduled three"big burns" to test the concept of whether a concentratedheat source created by burning large areas would givesufficient buoyancy to the smoke column to avoid low-level pollution.

Depending on a number of factors, the "big burn" canbe successful but takes a great deal of field preparation, alarge number of workers, and special equipment. Thistechnique could become important in smoke management

Lit requires greater organization of growers and perhaps)me revamping of fields to make them easier to fire.

An active smoke management program should besneficial to grass seed producers and other Oregoniblics because research in meteorology and inimatology of the Willamette Valley indicates that burninglarge acreage is feasible in July, August, and earlyaptember.

somepa.rti seers

One of the primary purposes of field burning is tocontrol plant diseases.

Experimental chemicals to control ergot and blindseed disease are continually being evaluated but mosthave not given control in field plots. In 1976, for the firsttime, one experimental chemical controlled ergot andblind seed disease after it was applied in field plots.However, it controlled the diseases only in two of threetests.

Work on the chemicals, which are not registered foruse, will continue.

Cultural research on alternatives has centered onphysiological effects of non-burning methods. Mechanicalremoval is expected to be more expensive and reducesseed yield. The extent of loss depends a great deal on soiltype, soil conditions, and age of stand. Weed problemsintensify when non-burning techniques are used in bothperennial grasses and in annual ryegrass seed production.

Mechanical removalMechanical techniques studied:

Raking the straw (leaving remaining stubble intact).Flail-chop removal of a major portion of the straw

and stubble.Close clipping (a technique for removal of most

organic material on the soil surface).Soil incorporation of the residue in annual ryegrass

production.

16

Research results indicated that the physiologicalesponses to mechanical removal techniques vary in theirmpact on seed yield depending on the species and,ariety of crop. Chewings fescue, red fescue, andighland bentgrass usually showed greater need for

Turning than did bluegrass, perennial ryegrass, and,particularly, orchardgrass. Differences in responses ofarieties are expected to be measurable and thisiformation is being collected.

Leaving straw in the field was found to lower seedMeld substantially. Raking was little better than leavinghe straw in terms of seed yield and flail-chop removal wasomewhat superior.

Close clipping and removal were found to be aneffective treatment for approximating the physiologicalesponse of burning for maintaining seed yields but dust4 a problem. Field testing of a prototype machine wasartially successful on some species but demonstrated theifficulty in designing appropriate equipment. Soil particlend chaff entrainment is a problem with this operation.

Researchers also determined that age of stand willfluence response to non-burning treatment. In the

bsence of burning, the yield from older grass stands waseduced more than from young grass stands.

Seeding annual ryegrass through straw and stubble,sing specialized drills, was not successful. Mechanical?moval of straw improved the establishment of annual

ryegrass drilled through stubble. When annual ryegrassfields are not burned, weed control problems increase.

Non-selective pre-plant chemical weed control waspartially successful in years when early rains occurred.Because it relied on moisture to germinate weed seedsprior to seeding, this technique was not effective whenearly rain did not occur. A new herbicide to selectivelycontrol annual grass weeds in annual ryegrass is beingtested. This herbicide is effective only if crop residues arecompletely removed mechanically or are incorporated bytillage operations before application of the chemical.

Alternative ways to remove residue from harvestedgrass seed fields will be more expensive and less effectivethan open field burning. The greater the degree of residueremoval, the higher the subsequent seed yield, it wasfound. Even the best experimental technique is lessthorough than thermal sanitation and adequate fieldequipment has not yet been designed. Historical evidenceindicates that diseases will increase under mechanicalremoval operations without annual thermal sanitation.

Soil incorporation of straw from annual cropsIn establishing annual ryegrass it was necessary to

chop the straw before it could be plowed into the soil.Incorporation of straw was still difficult particularly whereheavy straw loads were encountered.

Applying fertilizer to the straw at the time ofincorporation did not have visible effects on the

17

18 breakdown and decomposition of straw. Biologicaldecomposition of crop residue was slow because of highsoil water level and low temperatures in the winter andsummer's dry soil conditions which limit microbiologicalactivity.

Since grass weed control in annual ryegrass dependsmainly on burning, these practices will be faced withintensification of weed problems and reductions in thequality and marketability of the seed. In experimentaltests, annual ryegrass seed yields were substantiallyreduced with non-burning seed bed preparation methods.

Alternate year burning with mechanical removalBurning one year with mechanical straw removal the

next year may provide a method for sustaining seed yieldsof some grasses but it is not satisfactory for weed anddisease control. A reduction in seed yield is realizedcompared to annual burning but results are superior tocontinuous mechanical removal techniques.

Straw utilizationStraw can be used as a raw material to make paper

particleboard and other fiber board products, oil, gasoline,fuel logs, plastics, composted fertilizer, and microbialprotein.

However, its bulk, transportation difficulties,uncertainty of long-term supplies, and cost of collectionand shipment make straw non-competitive with other rawmaterials used to manufacture these products.

In livestock feed, straw's low protein and high celluloseand lignin content limit its use in winter maintenancerations or as a fiber source in a feed mix. Palatability anddigestibility can be improved chemically and/ormechanically but this, too, is costly.

Supplies of wood chips, the traditional base formaking pulp and paper, generally are adequate and theiruse requires no retooling of manufacturing plants.

20

grower andindustry adjustments

Historically, the Willamette Valley's grass seedindustry has had an economic advantage in supplyingpremium-quality grass seed to domestic and foreignmarkets for lawn and turf, cover crop, and pasture grass,primarily because of its climate.

Changing economic and social conditions in recentyears may be eroding the economic advantage. In 1974and 1975, average grass seed producers suffered losses.Improved market conditions in 1976 provided positivereturns. A number of factors contribute to what appearsto be a generally deteriorating condition:

1. Senate Bill 311 was enacted to reduce acreage offields open burned, eliminating the traditional least-cost means for thermal sanitation and residueremoval.

2. Inflationary pressures, since 1970, have doubledgrass seed production costs per acre.

3. Growers compete in the open market which ischaracterized by widely fluctuating market pricesover which they have no control.

4. The major international markets for public varietiesin the European Economic Community and Japanface stiffer non-tariff import restrictions and internalproduction subsidies.

Individual grower adjustments to the changingconditions are diverse, economically painful, and slow.Contributing factors include:

On the poorly drained Valley soils there are fewalternative crops to annual and perennial ryegrasswhich will survive winter flooding.

Unfortunately, major technological breakthroughsin developing economically viable alternatives to openfield burning without significant reduction in grassseed yields and/or farm income have not beenforthcoming.

Active markets for grass straw have not developed.Its bulkiness imparts costly densification andtransportation costs which make straw generallynon-competitive with alternative raw materials.

Results of economic research suggest a number ofdjustments are likely to occur from Senate Bill 311 whicheduces acres of open burned from 234,000 acres in 197550,000 acres by 1978.

rop adjustmentSome grass seed acreage reductions in acreage of

nnual and perennial ryegrasses are occurring as better-rained lands are shifted to wheat. The potential forholesale shifting to other crops is very limited, however,paving changes in cultural practices as the only croppingvoice.

For bentgrass, confined primarily to the Silverton hills,ie world markets for bentgrass and wheat appear to bee major factors influencing bentgrass acreage. Large

shifts from bentgrass to other seed types are not expectedsince bentgrass is a serious weed problem in other seedtypes. The relatively high profit margins on orchardgrasssuggest some increased production of it. Unfortunately,acreage increases of orchardgrass may be limited since itis a serious weed in the turf-type grasses. Whether finefescue acreages will be reduced greatly will be influencedin part from market competition by Canadian red fescue.Considerable bluegrass acreage is shifting into easternOregon, Washington, and Idaho where open field burningis permitted to assure high seed quality.

A substantial decline in tall fescue acreage may occursince Oregon produces a very small volume of total U.S.production. For bluegrasses, tall fescue, fine fescue, andorchardgrass, an overriding economic concern is thatproduction cost increases in the Willamette Valley fromair emission controls may well place this area at anabsolute economic disadvantage with other productionregions. Whether this will precipitate large-scale shiftingof grass seed to other regions is determined not only byeconomic conditions in the Willamette Valley but also byprofitability of grass seed production relative to otherenterprise choices in those regions.

Farm adjustmentHistorically, farm reorganization adjustments, both in

the U.S. and Oregon, have taken the form of (1) farm sizeexpansion and adoption of unit cost-reducing technology,

21

22 and (2) transfer of farmland near urban centers to non-farm uses. The extent to which grass seed farmadjustments will continue these historic trends is animportant but unanswered question.

In central Willamette Valley counties where poorlydrained soils are prevalent, the only farming choice is tocontinue ryegrass production and adopt cost-reducing/output-stimulating machine technology as it becomesavailable to stay competitive or leave the industry. Farmsize expansion is an integral part of this adjustmentprocess. Conversion of grass seed land for urban use is

not expected to be rapid.The pressure to acquire land for agricultural purposes

will keep land values high in spite of varying marketprices for grass seed as long as a relatively large numberof growers can withstand the increased costs fromenvironmental controls. The number of commercial grassseed farms is estimated at about 800. This number likelywill decline, depending on the extent of imposedenvironmental controls.

Industry adjustmentTotal acres of grass seed produced in the Valley are

declining. About 20,000 acres of grass seed were takenout of production in 1976. The immediate uncertainties offield sanitation for disease and weed control and theireffect upon increased production costs appear to bemajor factors.

Whether this is a continuing and more permanenttrend is not known. Countervailing market prices, futuretechnology developments, and relative production costincreases between competing regions are importantfactors. Historically, the grass seed industry has beenable to adopt unit cost-reducing technology which hasmore than offset market price decreases from increasedproduction volume. Consequently, grass volume in Oregonhas steadily increased over the last 20 years in spite ofgenerally low or declining farm prices.

Whether this will continue in the future because of theadded economic pressure from environmental controls isa fundamental, complex, and as yet unanswered question.

'[S

-. -___j

--

I— -

L

staff involved in field burning

24I,

and related researchOregon Agricultural Experiment StationDepartment of Agricultural Chemistry

Virgil FreedDepartment of Agricultural Engineering

Dale E KirkGlen E Page

Department of Agricultural and Resource EconomicsFrank S Conklin

Depattrnent of Agroroin c Crop ScienceDavid 0 Chilco!eHarold Youngberg

Department of Animal ScienceDavid C ChurchDonald ClaypoolA T Ralston

Decar!nient of M,crobmfogyA W AndersonTerence GreenGlen Gr,rl

OtherAgricultural Retsearcfr Service (USDA)

Yuun W HanJohn R liaidrsonJames A KaminW Orvid I ee

Department or Atmospheric ScienceCharles D Craig

NOAA--National Weather ServiceEad M Bates Graphic design by Sally Sc ielz. senior. Depailmcr,