By DOUG GRAVES
Ohio Correspondent

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Global warming has been blamed for many things, from melting polar caps to intensified hurricanes; now, those in the agricultural community are being told this warming trend is sure to affect corn crops in the Midwest.

In Ohio there’s a group of concerned officials and representatives with Environment Ohio, who are canvassing this state and painting a bleak message.

“Hotter fields will mean lower yields for corn, and eventually, the rest of agriculture,” says Katy Kiefer, a field organizer with Environment Ohio. “Global warming is raising temperatures in Ohio and across the nation.”

According to Kiefer, global warming could cost corn growers in this state more than $50 million a year. “That ranks Ohio eighth for the highest damage estimates,” she said. “We expect these costs to go up unless Congress and the president take decisive action to repower America with clean energy and reduce global warming pollution.”

Environment Ohio is a statewide, citizen-based environment advocacy organization. Its agenda is to protect Ohio’s air, water and open spaces.

Global warming is a hot topic with this organization, which is based out of Columbus.

Last week the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared global warming a danger to public health and welfare. In the same report the agency stated agricultural production could be harmed by a warmer climate, but acknowledged there could be some benefits to crops.

Citing scientific reports, the agency allowed that some crops will initially benefit from rising temperatures and carbon dioxide levels.
But the agency said yields of corn and other commodities could fall as the climate continues to warm and some areas experience more frequent droughts.

Moreover, fruit and vegetable yields are “very likely to be more sensitive to climate change than grain and oilseed crops,” the agency stated.

“In some arenas they’re still arguing whether global warming even exists,” said Mark Lambert, communications director with the Illinois Corn Growers Assoc. (ICGA). “If you talk to producers right now they’re going to have a hard time thinking there’s any impact on corn, especially when any part of the Corn Belt is too cold and wet to plant corn.

“If you look at the yield increases through the new technology, we’re seeing the yields increase faster than trend. By 2030 we may see yields at 300 bushels per acre.”

Dave Loos, director of technical and business development at the ICGA, agrees.

“I work closely with the Corn Farmers Coalition and if there’s an impact on yield it must be positive, because we’re seeing five times more corn than we did 30 years ago, and we’re groing it on 20 percent less acreage. If global warming has any impact, it must be positive,” he said.

“Right now there’s too much uncertainty about what the cause and effect really is. But right now if global warming has an impact on corn, it must be positive.”

According to Lambert, last year farmers in Illinois had a late planting season, yet came away with 12 billion bushels of corn. In its report the EPA said the impact of climate change on crop yields is still uncertain, stating that some types of plants, including soybeans, are expected to increase yields when there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Corn is expected to be less affected.

This global warming has sparked debate about whether it affects wildlife and livestock.

“Our fish, our deer, all our wildlife, our trees are all being affected by global warming,” said Jim Wentz, a member of the League of Ohio Sportsmen. “Widespread drought is causing problems for fishing, our birds are changing their migration patterns. I found out this week that the whooping crane, which is on the endangered list, has lost 20 percent of their population.”

Darin Williams, executive director of the National Cattleman’s Beef Assoc., weighed in. “Whether global warming is affecting livestock remains to be seen,” he said. “It’s too early to reach any conclusion.

“The big question now is whether livestock affects global warming, and how it adds to greenhouse gases. One thing is for certain – our environmental footprint is very small. In 2006 there was a United Nations report that said livestock contributed to 18 percent of the greenhouse gases. That’s the headline we see in mainstream media.

The EPA reports that 6 percent of greenhouse gases come from agricultural areas of the U.S. and half of that comes from livestock. If that’s the case, we need to look at what we get for that 6 percent, and we get good food, fiber and fuel.”

It is a hotly contested issue, to be sure, and one that will continue for quite some time.

“As you can see, there are two kinds of environmental groups out there,” Loos said.

“There are those who will review science and investigate issues, and there are those who have an agenda and don’t let the facts get in their way.”