History of alfalfa yields

The idea that little progress has been made in alfalfa breeding in not new. This question was being asked by the late 60's and early 70's. Presentation on the subject can be found in agricultural libraries in NAAIC proceedings.

Around this time, Dr. Clarence Hanson, who was USDA alfalfa coordinator made the observation that; 'little progress was being made in breeding alfalfa for higher yields; because we have been too busy putting out fires' At that time USDA alfalfa research funding was going toward the alfalfa weevil. The answer turn out to be a parasitic wasp, although great effort went into unsuccessful attempts to breed resistant alfalfa varieties. Then came Anthracnose, Phytophthora root rot, Verticilliun Wilt and Aphanomyces. As each new disease was discovered, marketing centered on that disease and marketing came to control, alfalfa breeding. When no more diseases were discovered, private industry came up with a disease index. This high disease index or perfect disease index became the advertising hype as it still is taday. Farmers fell for it because when alfalfa plants die and stands thin, it must be those advertised diseases. The truth is, it is the crown and root rot taking out stands. These diseases are many, are mildly pathogenic, and are slow and difficult to breed resistance to. As an alfalfa breeder, I find marketing companies are still insisting on a high disease index, and they claim they have to have it because the farmers think they need it. If we had not spent all this time breeding for the meaningless disease index, we would likely have better performing alfalfas varieties today. If you think this is not true look at Vernal in 'compare varieties' a variety now over 50 years old, with a disease index of 13, still yielding quite well, in spite of better seed quality of fresh commercial seed and at in at least a few instances some trials are placed in harsher environments. Also note that yields of Vernal are not decreasing as the stands age as you would not expect if diseases were a problem. Doesn't this suggest that all these hot new varieties over the years weren't maybe quite so hot and that you maybe would be better off with an older less expensive variety with proven performance?