3RD EUROPEAN AGROFORESTRY CONFERENCE, MONTPELLIER, FRANCE, MAY 23-25, 2016.

CURRENT  ISSUES  IN  CANADIAN  AGROFORESTRY

A.  M.  Gordon,  N.  V.  Thevathasan,  L.  Zabek,  K.  Van  Rees,  T.  Ward  and  R.  Bradley

2

.

University of Guelph, 1984 +

¨  1st  Conference  on  North  American  Agroforestry,  Guelph,  Ontario,  1989  

¨  14th  Conference  on  North  American  Agroforestry,  Ames,  Iowa,  2015  

¨  15th  Conference  on  North  American  Agroforestry,    Blacksburg,  Virginia,  June  27-­‐29,  2017  

 AssociaYon  for  Temperate  Agroforestry  (AFTA)  

Agroforestry Systems in North America

Forest Farming Systems – “Commodity” Windbreak Systems – “Trees around fields” Silvopastoral Systems – “Trees, animals and pasture” Integrated Riparian Management Systems

– “Trees on streambanks”

Intercropping Systems – “Trees and crops” Bioenergy Systems – “Trees for energy”

Agroforestry Systems in North America

Forest Farming Systems – “Commodity” Windbreak Systems – “Trees around fields” Silvopastoral Systems – “Trees, animals and pasture” Integrated Riparian Management Systems

– “Trees on streambanks”

Intercropping Systems – “Trees and crops” Bioenergy Systems – “Trees for energy”

Canadian  Agricultural  Greenhouse  Gas  Program  (2010  –  2015)  [AGGP]  

¨  Cropping Systems ¨  Livestock Systems ¨  Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ¨  Agroforestry

Canadian  Agricultural  Greenhouse  Grass  Program  (2016  –  2021)  [AGGP]  

¨  Cropping Systems ¨  Livestock Systems ¨  Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ¨  Agroforestry

¤ Agroforestry for carbon sequestration on agricultural land

¤ The adoption and efficacy of agroforestry practices

AGROFORESTRY  –  BRITISH  COLUMBIA  

BEFORE  

AFTER  INTEGRATED  RIPARIAN  MANAGEMENT  SYSTEMS  

Southern Interior Silvopasture Project Site  60  million  ha  forested;  35  million  ha  grazing  land  (forested  and  non)    Evaluate  effecYveness  of  silvopastoral  systems  to  draw  livestock  away  from  riparian  habitats;  grow  both  fiber  and  forage;  generate  benefits  such  as  carbon  sequestraYon,  wildlife  habitat,  other  products  (e.g.  Christmas  trees).    

Stand Structure

Seedlings Forages Cattle

Wetland  willow  rings  for  sustainable  small  scale  feedstock  and  bioenergy  producHon  

•  Significant   areas   of   under   uYlized  land  

•  Periodic  flooding,   inaccessible  field  locaYons  and  irregular  field  shapes,  salinity   impacYng   producYon,   or  unfavourable   soil   textures   or  topography  

•  Small   scale   agroforestry   willow  systems   have   the   potenYal   to  p rov ide   a   sus ta inab le   and  renewable  clean  energy  resource  

AGROFORESTRY  –  SASKATCHEWAN  AND  PRAIRIES  

Shelterbelt Species Green ash Hybrid poplar Manitoba maple White spruce Scots pine

Caragana

Type   Brown   Dark  Brown  

Black   Dark  Gray  

Gray   Total  

Length  of  shelterbelt  (km)  

Farm   8,488   12,422   8,048   778   19   29,754  

Field   7,859   10,852   2,892   293   3   21,899  

Total   16,347   23,274   10,940   1,071   21   51,653  

Length  of  digiYzed  shelterbelts  in  various  soil  zones  

51,653  km  windbreaks  in  total!  

Amount  of  C  sequestered  

Amount  of  C  sequestered  under  the  shelterbelts  varied  from  9-­‐33  t/ha      

AGROFORESTRY  -­‐  QUEBEC  

AGROFORESTRY - ONTARIO

Major  Findings  (30+  YEARS)  

Crop  yields  –  no  major  losses  

Enhanced  ‘good’  insect  diversity  –  less  pesYcides  

Increased  earthworm  populaYons  (but  not  N2O)  

Enhanced  microarthropod  communiYes  

Enhanced  animal/bird  diversity  (benign)  

Enhanced  soil  carbon  

Reduced  N  losses  to  receiving  waters  by  50%  

Enhanced  mycorrhizal  communiYes  

Carbon  budgets  

Major  Findings  (30+  YEARS)  

Crop  yields  –  no  major  losses  

Enhanced  ‘good’  insect  diversity  –  less  pesYcides  

Increased  earthworm  populaYons  (but  not  N2O)  

Enhanced  microarthropod  communiYes  

Enhanced  animal/bird  diversity  (benign)  

Enhanced  soil  carbon  

Reduced  N  losses  to  receiving  waters  by  50%  

Enhanced  mycorrhizal  communiYes  

Carbon  budgets  

TBI vs. Conventional Agriculture

Table 10. Annual net carbon (t C ha-1 y-1) from five tree species commonly grown in tree-based intercropping systems in comparison to conventional agricultural system (planted with soybean)

Poplar Oak Walnut Spruce Cedar Soybean

Total inputs 4.73   3.45   4.06   4.20   2.75   1.40  

Total outputs -­‐2.66   -­‐1.81   -­‐2.95   -­‐1.82   -­‐1.39   -­‐2.76  

Net Carbon +  2.07   +  1.64   +  1.11   +  2.38   +  1.36   -­‐  1.36  

21

22

Short rotation willow and poplar systems for bioenenergy production

The ‘Feedstock to Furnace Bioenergy Value Chain’

23

hqps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5oxiSTcycE  ‘Woody  Biomass  -­‐  Filling  the  Fossil  Fuel  Gap’  -­‐  

~22,000  Ymes!  

Trees  within  Trees!  

 AdopYon  of  Agroforestry  PracYces  

EURAF    -­‐  50  %  of  farmers  using  agroforestry  by  2025      Canadian  Problems:    Lack  of  Policy  –  In  Ontario,  ‘Cap  and  Trade’  will  lead  us  …  ???    Farmer  Awtudes  …        

Norfolk  County,  Ontario,  1907  

26

Erosion  PotenYal  from  either  wind  or  water  

The  Next  5  Years  –  Ontario/Quebec  

•  Emphasis  will  be  on  an  understanding  of  the  carbon  budget/GHG  balances  in  riparian  areas  

•  UG  to  lead  a  naYonal  study  on  the  agroforestry  adopYon  ‘problem’  in  Canada  

28

Washington  Creek,  Ontario  –  5  years  ayer  planYng  NPP  =  4  ODT  ha-­‐1  y-­‐1  

Acknowledgements    

The  University  of  Guelph  and  its  partners  greatly  acknowledge  the  funding  contribuYons  of  the  following  in  support  of  research  on  greenhouse  gas  emissions  in  agroforestry  systems  and  on  bioenergy  research.      Agriculture  and  Agrifood  Canada  -­‐  AGGP  Natural  Resources  Canada  -­‐  Canadian  Wood  Fibre  Centre    Natural  Sciences  and  Engineering  Research  Council  of  

 Canada  –  Canadian  Biofuel  Net    

Gordon,  A.M.  and  S.  Newman.  2016/17.  2nd  EdiYon.  CABI.    Chapters  on  Canada,  U.S.A.,  Europe,  U.K.  and  6  other  global  temperate  regions  

32

C Pools: Findings – Tree Carbon C

hapter 1: C P

ools (Findings)

33

0

50

100

150

200

250

Hybrid Poplar Red Oak Black Walnut Norway Spruce White Cedar

Mea

n C

arbo

n C

onte

nt (

kg C

per

tree

)

Tree Species

Twigs

Secondary

Primary

Trunk

Roots

Average [C] (%)

Figure 1. Mean carbon content (kg C) for each tree component plus mean carbon concentration (%) for five TBI tree species

a b b bc c

34