WHEAT/BARLEY/FALLOW -- MAY BE POOR D.S. ROTATION

Summary: (updated 11/4/13)

       Our operation has been Direct Seeding for over 20 years.  The rotation for most of those years have been a three year rotation of winter wheat - spring barley or spring wheat - chemical fallow.  It appears this rotation, using Direct Seed, will lead to compacted layers near the soil surface.  Wheat and barley have a fibrous root system that don't have a lot of push.  To remove compacted layers, without  cultivation, our crop rotation needs to include a cultivar with a stronger, deeper root system.

Detail:

       The old ways I learned, which was associated with conventional farming in the 50's, 60's,70's, and 80's, like: a-- don't seed prior to Sept. 15th because of root diseases and aphids,  b--wait for rain to get one last whack at downy brome grass prior to seeding fall wheat, was costly for us in the early days of our Direct Seeding.  It took years to move past that engrained mind set.

        The winter wheat had normally been 10-15 bushels below the high yields in the area.

        One component of winter wheat yield, is, growing time.  In Direct Seeding, our yields joined the top yielding fields in the area when we started seeding early to catch the moisture for early emergence.  Our criteria now is to seed into moisture even if that is August.

        Spring barley and spring wheat crops have not made that break through for us yet; although recent information relating to compaction, and seeding depth may change that.

       We had concern about our current (2013) spring barley crop.  This crop was seeded into 90+ bushel, 40"winter wheat straw left by a stripper header. that did not get prepped properly last fall or this spring with timely applications of glyphosate.  We fully expected to find a serious soil borne disease issue (Rhizoctonia) from the "green bridge".  Two university scientists found little evidence of that; however, they did find that, at shovel depth, there were compaction layers where roots were growing horizontally instead of vertically.  Also noted was the fact that seeding depth was too shallow, which allowed wetting and drying of the seed and poor positioning of the plant crown.

Since research has not found any real problem with plants growing in heavy residue as long as the seed is positioned well in the soil, plant diseases are managed, and there is no light interference from standing stubble, we should be able to grow high yielding spring crops in heavy residue.------>   By:

1-Adding a deep rooted cultivar (chick pea, mustard, canola, alfalfa) to our crop rotation on a regular basis to remove compact areas that restrict vertical root development.

2-Being more diligent in watching field conditions and make depth adjustments for proper crown development.

3-Leave no standing stubble following seeding of the spring crop.

4-Seeing that we maintain crop rotations and field sanitation to avoid plant diseases.

2013 HARVEST -- STRIPPER HEAD

        In it's second year the Shelbourne header performed very well.  Our harvest consisted of winter wheat with excellent yields, spring barley with respectable yields, and spring mustard with below preferred yields.  This year we harvested the mustard with both the standard header and the stripper header.  Header loss was not distinguishable between the two types by observing seed on the ground.  The mustard set seed pods low on the plant this year.  The stripper head picked all of the seed pods, where the standard rigid sickle head missed a lot of pods near the ground.  We did have a field with high moisture, and the low areas grew mustard five feet tall.   This field was cut with the standard head.  This field had a high population of china lettuce, and we felt the stripper head would have received a lot of wear (damage) engaging those tough stalks.   I think that the stripper head would have had higher loss in those areas with the tall mustard because the hood would have had to be wide open.  Although, with the shatter resistants of the mustard seed pod, it's possible, ?????, that  the hood could have been lowered to an acceptable harvest position, ---the mustard would have been pushed and compressed as the stripper head engaged the crop.  We have a neighbor that had a very dense stand of mustard.  It started out tall but lodged.  I think the stripper head would have done well in that condition.
       An observation we have made: ---> immature wheat and barley heads do not strip well.
We all have experienced situations where secondary growth and head development cause problems because that under story of green heads seem never too ripen.  We notice that the stripper head leaves most of those heads intact, thus reducing the contamination in the bulk tank.  That gives you the opportunity for a second harvest, if the timing and quantity warrants it, or food for animals.

MODIFYING A GLEANER N7 TO IMPROVE HARVESTING WITH STRIPPER HEAD

7/28/15- Update: -- We installed new floors under the distribution augers.  We inadvertently cut the lip where material is released onto the accelerator rolls a quarter inch higher than what we added in 2013.  This was a problem.  The material would not release onto the accelerator rolls properly and would periodically jamb material between cage and auger.  The fix was quite easy.  Using a thin (0.045)cutoff wheel on a 4.5" grinder, we marked and cut 0.75" off the lip of the auger trough over the accelerator rolls.   All our issues appear to have gone away.  It looks great behind the combine.  Our grain sample, which was not as good as in the past, cleaned up, better than in the past, and our capacity is back, --or better.  While we were in the midst of replacing parts, (distribution auger drive belt, a broken rear feeder chain, and drive shaft for the rear feeder chain), we were told that feeder chains and drive shafts tend to have a shorter life when using a stripper head on the older Gleaners.  No reason given.  The chains are easy to check, but the shaft is not.  The center chain had every link holding a bar, cracked.  The side chains were fine.  The shaft broke under the center sprocket.  My current thinking is that when the chain is replaced, we also consider replacing the drive shaft.
9/20/13- Update: -- Adding the 1.5" to the cross auger (distributor) trough over the accelerator rolls appears to be slightly too high.  That small change was all it took to move the grain - maybe too far.  We may cut it down a 1/4" for next year, although for the most part we could live with it as is.  Although we have only used the standard header on mustard, it doesn't appear to have upset the "original" material handling capability.
      We rebuilt a spare cross auger (distributor) using an 8" pitch and made provision for bolting on flight extensions to extend either left or right.  Also, provision was made to put kicker bolts along the shaft to move material onto the accelerator rolls at various points.  This auger was not needed, so never used, and probably will never be used.
   
       Last year we did not have a clue what to expect from the combine.  As far as I know this is the oldest combine(1985) to be fitted with a new (2012) Shelbourne 32' stripper head.  We were very pleased with the results of the header on the three types of crops harvested -- winter wheat, spring barley, spring mustard.  What we weren't prepared for was the change experienced once the grain was in the combine.  Along with higher capacity, we also had higher loss.  Without straw in the machine the grain was not distributed across the sieve as before.   The grain, chaff, and a little stubble came up the feeder chain, dropped onto the rotor and concave; and then, instead of being carried along the distributor augers and and dropped more or less evenly across the face of the sieve, the material went straight through the concave onto the right side of the sieve, overloading that section.
       This will be a trial and error process that may take time to solve.  Our first idea is to add 1.5" to the height of the cross auger trough and change the auger from a 6" pitch to an 8" pitch to move material away for the concave area quicker.  At this time we do not have a way to adjust the trough height.  If this modification turns out to be bad, it will take about 3 hours to convert back to the original configuration.

IMPORTANCE OF FALL CHEMICAL TREATMENT

         I recently spent a couple of days participating in tours designed for growers sponsored by private and public entities.  Of all the things that I saw and heard, the following was the most striking.  I'll be interested in the harvest data on this plot of spring wheat.  We all have experienced the anxiety of putting out chemical on ground that looks bare of anything growing.
         This pic demonstrates the importance of a fall chemical application when your intention is to plant a spring crop.  In this case the crop is a spring cereal.  It is a little difficult to visualize, but look at the pant line on the researcher.  The right side is about knee high.  The left side is about mid thigh.  There were no specifics given to compare the the two sides; however, the right side of the plot looked stunted, and thinner compared to the left side.   If the right side had been a field, the grower may not notice there being a problem.  Standing alone, the right side doesn't look that bad, maybe a little thin. The only difference in the treatment of this plot was that the right side was missed when the fall application of glyphosate was applied.  The researcher stated that there was very little material growing on the plot last fall.  Each side of the plot had it's spring application of glyphosate three weeks prior to seeding.  The entire plot was seeded at the same time, and all subsequent operations were done consistent across the entire plot.  The first indication that something was different was the delay in crop emergence on the right side.  Rhizoctonia was discovered to be the culprit.  The green bridge effect raises it's ugly head even when there doesn't appear to be any green.

So the lesson is:  DON'T MISS THE FALL APPLICATION OF GLYPHOSATE --- even though it appears there is nothing for glyphosate to act on.

WEEDS & CRP

  [update 7/21/14]:-- It's most unfortunate that I did not scout our fields last fall.  Some of our CRP fields have significant amount of Delmation Toadflax that did not get treated until this summer.  Last year we had a young man scout and treat these fields, but there was too much for him to treat using Husky and Tordon.  There is too much to treat with any aggressive chemistry now.   It would limit our crop selection for the fall of 2015 or spring of 2016.  I have just treated these fields with Range Star (2-4D + Banvel) and two surfactants (WetCit + M90).  I'll update later on the effectiveness of this treatment and whether WetCit cut through the wax.
      This spring we put spring barley as the first crop on a CRP field.  All of the grasses were dead, but the field has a heavy infestation of Rush Skeleton Weed.  We have treated this aggressively with applications of Rt and 2-4D.  Timing is everything with this weed.  We have successfully put the hurt on it while in the rosette stage, but little happens once it bolts.  We'll harvest this crop within three weeks.  I'm thinking that we may want to mow this field soon following harvest to stop any new seed development.  Rush S. is one that you do not want to do any type of cultivation on as that drags roots and promotes new starts.  Tours that I have been on clearly showed where new patches sprang up from the weeder dragging roots.  Most perennials have that potential; however, Rush S. takes full advantage of roots being dragged across the field. 
 Recently I had the good fortune of being asked by a family wishing to put CRP ground back into production, to express my thoughts and interest.  Since we will be taking significant acreage out of CRP ourselves in a couple of years, this was an opportunity to give thought to what is currently growing in the field, and how we should proceed for a cropping scenario.  We have two years to prepare.  This family had 1-4 months to prepare.  If, when evaluating a field, you find a difficult weed scenario, the more time you have to address the problem the better.
     In this families case, the field generally had a good stand and mixture of grasses that presented no difficulty to remove.  The weed spectrum included the usual annual broadleaves and grassy weeds along with a significant amount of Canadian Thistle.  These don't create any particular difficulty when going into a cash crop.  There is adequate chemistry available for successful Direct Seeding that will give good control before planting, as well as in-crop control.  The trick is to chose chemistry that does not limit your choice of cultivar for your cash crop.   In this families case, what was disappointing was to find a high infestation of Delmation Toadflax .  My guestimate is that 80% of the field is contaminated.  There are a number of densely populated patches, and single plant scatter throughout the remainder.  I spent a lot of time talking to people, looking up reports, and surfing the web for success stories on controling this noxious weed.  There was no quick and easy formula that I could find.  Whether you chemical'd or cultivated the field, it was going to have to done with persistence and with repeated operations for a lengthy period of time.  When established, the Toadflax plant has an extensive root system.  It is a prolific seed producer, and the seed will remain viable in the soil for 10 years.  (This tells me not to plant this seed through soil disturbance.  Leave it on the surface where weather and critters can attack it.)  The leaf structure includes a thick waxy coating that is difficult to penetrate with chemistry. (This tells me that a contact chemical will need a very good surfactant and probably used at a higher than normal rate.)
      When I synthesize all this material down for a management plan, I conclude that Delmation Toadflax  is no different than any other noxious perennial weed.  You have to stop the seed development and deplete the root reserves to remove the problem.  Timing is critical to reach your goal for the particular type of chemistry you are using.  Research supports the best timing for impacting the root system is in the fall with a systemic chemistry.  Antidotal statements indicate that most of the common chemistry we use for weed control in our crops will have an impact on Delmation Toadflax seed development when timed properly.  Severe damage to the seed stalk at the start of bloom either mechanically or chemically will stop seed production and help draw down root reserves as it attempts to recover.  Any management plan to remove this noxious weed from the field will include years of hand roguing your cash crop.
       I don't consider cultivation as an option.  It makes no sense to me to destroy all the gains in soil health made over the years in CRP, --- as well as put 10-25 years of seed in a "soil" bank, and make annual withdrawals for the next 10 years.  The seed will degrade much faster on the soil surface through weather and fauna.

DRILLING INTO TALL STUBBLE 2013 - CONTINUED

[7/3/13 update] -- 
      Recent scouting of the spring planted barley fields shows a thin stand compared to some of the neighbors.  I contacted a crop specialist and a plant pathologist to evaluate the fields.  
     After seeing a plot with no fall applied glyphosate (see post title-- "importance of fall chemical treatment"), I was sure that we had a serious case of Rhizoctonia, -- and I expected it from past experience of seeding into green plant material (poor field sanitization). 
     In all cases where we checked, Rhizoctonia, if present, was a small part of the problem.  Testing will be done for plant diseases; however, the problem seems to be connected to planting depth, and compaction.  In all locations checked, seed was placed too shallow in the soil profile for early root development and crown establishment.  In all locations checked, the (shovel depth) soil profile showed multiple compaction layers.  Although these layers did not appear well defined, the roots have grown in mass, on horizontal planes, with restricted vertical growth.  Vertical root growth present appeared to traveling along old root channels and worm holes.  This crop will not utilize a lot of the 4 foot soil profile.  These fields have been continuously no-tilled for 20+ years with vertical disturbance limited to the depth of hoe opener on a single pass drill.  
       It was noticed that there was a lot of stubble left standing.  The barley heads had finally grown above the WW stubble so the field looks pretty normal.  There was a discussion on whether stubble should be left standing or be flat following seeding.  Research shows that standing stubble intercepts very little of the total amount of light energy; however, it does intercept some of the wave lengths, resulting in taller plants with fewer tillers.  I observed this condition in our spring barley fields.
       We will have to live with this crop; however, the good news is that these issues are relatively easy to fix.  The Cross-slot drill has proven that it can cut through tall, very heavy residue, even that which is matted down, with out plugging or pushing.  We need to monitor the depth setting more closely.  We may have to map the residue, creating zones where it is necessary to change the depth setting.  For the compaction, we will introduce a cultivar with a tap root (mustard, canola, garbs, alfalfa) as part of our crop rotation.  For the light intercept, we will incorporate a method to lay all the stubble down (plate, closer opener spacing, wider packers, segmented roller, ??).  Whatever we decide on, it will not create surface disturbance.  The heavy undisturbed residue proves to be a very good deterrent to weed emergence.   This is all good news for our concept of an ultra-low disturbance seeding system.  This experience probably goes a long ways in answering the question in the past of spring crops not doing well for us.  Winter crops do well because of the extra grow time to overcome the compaction issue.  We did experience significantly better wheat crops following mustard several years ago.  Diseases don't appear to be a factor for us to be concerned with.  Attention directed to making sure we have the seed at the proper depth for root and crown establishment appears to be critical for success in spring cropping.  We need to grow a tap root crop on all of our ground as quickly as possible and put it in as part of a regular rotation.

[6/5/13 - update]  --  
     MUSTARD @ St.John:  Most of the field is developing fine.  There are holes in the seeding and the very heavy area west of the shop is poor and will be destroyed in the near future.  Bloom has started
      At Thornton:  This field is developing well.  There appears to be fewer holes in the seeding.  We just destroyed 6ac along the drainage ditch that never received the preparatory spray this spring because of surface water.  Blooms are not showing yet.
     I am please with the seeding in general.  The drill penetrated the very heavy residue, which was a concern prior to our seeding.  The stand shows areas where we were not deep enough, or didn't hold enough disc pressure, to get the seed into soil.  Some was left on top of the soil under the residue.
     SPRING BARLEY @ St.John:  Most of the field is developing fine, and jointing.  There are holes showing in places, and an un-even development.  We are still seeing new plant emergence.  This is also mostly do to inoperative depth sensors giving an inadequate average across the drill.  We undoubtedly should have set the drill a little deeper, even if the depth sensors had been operating properly.
      At Thornton:  Very much the same as St.John.  The flat along the creek is doing very well.  When we seeded it, I didn't think this would emerge through the very deep matted residue.  The drill did cut through the residue, but left significant amount of seed on the soil surface under the residue matt.  This shows that seed doesn't need to be in the dirt to germinate and grow well if the matt provides the environment for seed germination and emergence.  The crown is set high.  Will the residue matt protect it when the weather turns dry and hot. 

[5/25/13 - original post]
      At St. John, I inspected the mustard and barley planting.
      Mustard:-- Earlier, the decision was made to replant and turn in an insurance claim.  Neighbors have reseeded their fields to the east and west of us.  Our decision was based on the flat area west of our shop.  It looks poor, with few viable plants visible.  Pithium and freeze damage were obvious and it appeared that seed may not have reached dirt in areas.  Today, the tale is different.  There are some small voids throughout the field, but generally, it is an excellent stand, except the flat west of the shop.  We will either fallow ≈10ac or seed winter canola later in July for harvest in 2014.  At this point, stand density and growth difference was not distinguishable between the areas with tall stubble, and areas with flat stubble.  We'll keep watching.
       Spring Barley:-- 99% of the field looks very good.  ≈1% has nothing but matted golden residue.  It appears that those areas, which are in draw bottoms, had sufficient depth of matted residue where the drill was not set deep enough to get the seed into dirt.  It is rowed up on the soil surface under the residue.  This is a condition that we will have to address in the future.  The options listed in an earlier post are still potential solutions.
       I will provide pics of these two fields in the near future.

Self propelled Sprayers

[Update: 12/3/14]-- The new location for the auto boom height sensors is a success.  There are limitations that were mentioned below.  We have been able to spray at 9-11mph without problem.  You just have to be ready to react when the rare situation presents itself.  The 275hp engine is adequate  with 1500gal load in our hills at 5-7mph; however, above that speed you can have issues.  The system safety sensors kick the transmission into neutral when over loaded.  Not nifty when climbing a 40% slope -- so, be aware of your terrain and how you approach it.  We have noticed that the transmission is finicky.  It goes to neutral if it senses a jerk or overload, and maybe other things.  We have less issues as we become familiar with the machine.  I run in cruise control all the time, including roading.  The system isn't tolerant of throttle hopping.  The cab is quiet at 1800rpm; however, in the hills, we need to keep the engine at 2000-2200rpm for the power --the fan for cooling the engine and hydraulics is a roar at high engine rpm.
[5/24/14 update:]-- Life on the sprayer has become more boring with less to do -- but we are doing a better job with less damage to crop and machine.  In the past, we placed the autoboom sensors at the joint where the outer wing boom flips over.  The center section has been lower than the wings giving a shallow [V] look from the front or back of the machine.  We have been using the manual outer wing switches to lift the outer boom to avoid ground strikes when transitioning from one slope to another.  Even in the "down" position the end boom of either wing seems seldom at the right height.    We got a lot of boom flare up as we traverse the ground. As the boom height is adjusted through the sensor it is magnified at the end of the boom (20+ feet farther out).  This has caused damage to neighboring crops, and in general doesn't look good spraying product and having the ends frequently 8-12 feet off the ground instead of 24-30".  The tall 40" stubble has worsened the situation since the sensors reflect from that material.  We have noticed some flop as the sensors pass from tall stubble into a wheel track.   We have changed this arrangement and I think we will like it.   
       The new autoboom arrangement:  a)--The center section has been lifted and blocked at 38" instead of  the original 28".  The blocks are for stability of the boom.   b)--the sensors have been moved out near the end of the wings.  Only two nozzles are beyond the sensors.  Those sensors are now normally set at 24-28" height instead of the earlier 32-35"height.  This has eliminated the need for manually controlling the outer boom to prevent ground strikes.  We have greatly reduced the wing flareups.  We can better judge the end of the boom  along a fence where the guidance system is inoperative.  The look from front or rear is a shallow inverted [V].  It looks better from the point of misting.  There is less need for watching and correcting height to prevent boom strikes.  We do go to the screen more frequently and adjust the sensor height.  I have run it as low as 16".  Two down sides to this arrangement:  1-- the hydraulics won't keep up with significant terrain change above 6mph., and 2-- if you need to manually control a wing, the auto boom has to be disabled on that side.   This normally only comes into play when you run the end of the boom (where the sensor is located) out into space over a near vertical bank.   
        We have a full year of experience now with this unit.  It is a great machine.  We like the capacity(100ac @ 15gpa).  We like the mobility (at 12' width we can move on the road without much concern, and we can go some distance for reload).  It's stable beyond any slope we will ever farm.  Our spray pack is an 02 model at 90'.  It has the rectangular box center frame instead of the newer parallel link center frame.  I think the parallel links are not as stable or as strong, and will likely be more prone to damage than the box frame in our hills.  I like the 90' boom.  We get good production, and now, with the new autoboom setup.  I think it will move around the field better with less trouble, and do a better job than the 120' booms that are making an appearance.  

[7/22/13 update:]-- We have divided the 90' boom into 9 sections with 4, 6, or 7 nozzles each.  This is better.  Even at 7 nozzles, the boom length is only 11.6 feet, so we can pick up small strips going down the center line on the GPS screen -- a lot easier than trying to guess on the screen where the end of your boom is situated.
     While spraying out a CRP field we noticed that going one direction we left a 4 foot skip in places on our hill sides.  Going the other direction we left no skip.  It turns out that we need to zero out our tilt correction that is part of the smart-steer system.  Without Smart-steer we watched the screen and tried to keep a 5-7' overlap with a setting of 100% boom width.  We had few skips and they showed accurately on the coverage map following an application.  With smart-steer I notice that it tries to keep the overlap 0.2-0.6 feet.  At this point in time the coverage map is not accurate.  When you go back to spray out the visible skips they don't show up on the application map.   It's obvious we need to adjust some settings so skips show accurately.
      Our overlap settings currently are as follows:  We have shortened up our 90' boom 20" (one nozzle), and left no overlap settings for the individual booms.  This evening I started the system up and hopefully corrected the tilt.  To do that I tapped the steering symbol on the Viper and tapped through the screens to the 3D screen and followed the directions for adjusting the tilt.

[5/21/13 update]-- We have 1000 acres sprayed with the GVM.  This is an impressive machine.  The smart-steer is responsive and holds the line very well.  The auto-boom holds the spray boom stable at the desired height.  We have 8 years experience with accu-boom (auto sectional on/off) and love it.   Although the GVM  is better than I ever imagined,  it currently has more overrun than our 100' pull sprayer with it's 7 sections controled by accu-boom.  We need to divide our current five section 90' boom into 7, at least, or maybe 9 sections.  The greatest return for the precision buck is accu-boom.  Hopefully the smart-steer will help a little to reduce overrun.  

[5/13/13 update]-- We have changed the wing cylinder lift point to give significant additional lift.  A test run through one of our sharpest "V" shaped draws indicates that we should not have any ground strikes with the sensor controlled inner portion of the wing.  The outer wing portion will need tending and that is OK.  There is no reason to grip the joy stick; so, the operators fingers can rest comfortably over the outer wing control switches on the console for quick reaction to slope change.  Monitoring, lifting, and lowering the outer wings will become second nature with a little experience.
      We have changed the fence-row tip to a TOC80 high volume tip giving an additional 30' of reach.  This tip operated at 40psi, traveling 5mph, closely matches the turbo twinjet 04's (red) on the booms at 24-25gpa.  This tip, along with the suspended boom, allows us to extend out over non-crop areas farther than in the past.  If we find that we actually need a fence row tip, we will modify the bracket too accommodate both the TOC80 and a smaller turbo twinjet 04 tip, or an 02.5 tip.

   [5/5/13]-- Past observations and concerns: --- There are several self propelled sprayer manufacturers to choose from, and more coming into the market.  --It may be a challenge to get a good job from self propelled sprayers.  A consistent height appears difficult to achieve.  Every spray job I have observed showed frequent ground strikes, and booms 6-10 feet off the ground.  --- The sprayers don't maintain a consistent speed.  They appear to be racing over the fields with booms a flopping.  ---By mounting skinny tires they do offer the potential to spray a fungicide late in the growing year as an alternative to an airplane. --- We have had five custom applications in the past 3yrs and I would classify all as failures:  three from not doing the job timely, one from a contaminated tank, and the last was from poor plant coverage.

      The decision was made to own one of these units.  The stripper header has made our pull sprayer obsolete, and the custom operators don't appear to be an option for us.  The question is -- can we find a unit we can afford.  Since we are not dealing with row crops and a mechanical drive is likely to work better in our hills than a hydraulically driven unit, a GVM Prowler is our preference.
        The Lord was with us on this project.  Although we did research GVM, self-propelled units are complex machines and there were questions we never thought of asking.  In the end, we have a late model, low hour machine with all the electronic gadgetry, for less than 25% new cost -- still a lot of money!   It all came together May 1st with our first field application.

Unit specifications:   2007 GVM chassie with a 6.7 Cummings engine developing 275hp, 10 speed Funk power shift transmission, front axle steer, four wheel drive with locking differentials.  The chassie came equipped as a combo-unit, meaning the wiring harness and hydraulic system was designed for either the spray kit or the spreader kit.  The chassie came with a 9.5 ton Fusion stainless steel two product spreader kit.  We purchased the spray kit separately. 

     The spray kit is a 2002, with a self cleaning 1500 gallon stainless steel tank, 90 foot booms equipped with nozzle bodies that have five ports, on 20" centers.  The solution pump is a hydraulically driven centrifugal that delivers up to 190gpm, and can be used to fill the tank without the aid of a transfer pump.  It also is equipped with a stainless steel inductor that allows you to introduce chemical into the system without any additional support equipment.

     The electronics include:  SmartTrax (auto-steer) by Raven, Auto-Boom (sonic height control for the 90' suspended boom) by Raven, Acu-Boom (GPS controlled on/off for a 5 section boom) by Raven, a single product node (product application rate control) by Raven, and cruise control (for maintaining a constant speed).   All control is done through a Raven Viper Pro touch screen monitor with mapping capability.

        Pic's above are from the first hour of product application.  AMAZING!!  We loaded up 1250 gals of product and started out.  All of the controls functioned as advertised.  At 7.5mph, the ride was comfortable, plenty of power for the hills, the booms stayed at the programed height and were steady (not flopping around).  The 12' width of the unit felt solid and stable on our slopes.  The back rack (which carries the booms) has no stabilizing cylinders, or shock absorbers that some of the newer units feature to control the boom flop when traversing uneven terrain at application speed.  The AutoBoom system mitigates much of the need for those features.  Field speed probably plays a major role as well.  Most of the units I have observed have been operating in the 12-15mph range when applying herbicides -- not the 7-8mph that we are currently doing.

        Most of my concerns about these self propelled, suspended boom spray units disappeared after the first day of spraying.  The only question left is the coverage?  That judgement will be left to the end of the season when we re-evaluate the system.  My early thought after watching the application on the first 500ac, is that it will be better than our pull sprayer --> more solution per acre, fewer tracks, less dust, more consistent speed.   We will do nearly all of our spraying at 12.5 gpm.  We have equipped the unit with 04 turbo-TeeJet (red) with duel spray pattern.  This looks like it will be the principal nozzle.  It's designed to operate in the range of 20-90 psi.  This gives us application rates ranging from 12.5-24.0 gpa.  We have also equipped the unit with 2.5 turbo-TeeJet (purple) duel pattern nozzles for our chem-fallow.  With these tips applying 12.5gpa, we will be traveling in the 4-6mph range for better dust control.   The unit came with two sets of air induction tips, one very fine droplet, and one very course droplet.  It's questionable whether we will use them.

     Adaptations to consider:  1--reposition the wing lift cylinder for more wing lift.  We do need to lift the wings to a greater angle for the transition between the flats and slopes in many areas of our fields.  2--possibly go from 5 to 9 boom sections for less product over-run???  3--put another AutoBoom node in to control height of the outer wing??--> we don't know it that is even possible at this time regardless of cost.  That would make this unit nearly independent from operator input as the unit follows along a line.

       This pic shows how we received the chassie with the Fusion stainless steel dry spreader box and the tinted glass from Tennessee last January.  Fortunately the glass tint was a film that came off easily.  We have not taken the time yet to check out the spreader.  It does have a two product node for GPS control through the Raven Viper Pro monitor.  It looks to be in excellent shape.  Once we find out it's condition, we will  probably offer it for sale since we currently don't have a use for it.

Cultivation vs Direct Seeding

      Following harvest of 2012, our "Cs" field had a boundary realignment with our neighbors.  Spring seeding in 2013 allowed us to compare ground that has been continually cultivated for 100+ years with ground (across the old property boundary) that has been Direct Seeded for the last 20+ years.  The purpose of this post is to state the physical difference between the two properties.  There will be no attempt to update this post comparing yields or crop vigor.

SUMMARY:-- Custom operators struggle in providing adequate service to Direct Seed system operations.
        The ground that has been Direct Seeded for a lengthy period of time moves moisture from the surface and into the soil profile much faster than ground that has been continuously cultivated for many years.

DETAIL:-- The ("Cs & Cc & D")fields were not prepared well for spring cropping in 2013.  The "new" property was not sprayed.  We seeded into heavy volunteer wheat which will likely cause disease to the spring barley crop.  The main field, "Cs", which the "new" property is attached was sprayed with Gromoxone by a custom operator.  The job ended poorly,--- likely, too little solution for adequate coverage.  It's possible that the tall, wind blown stubble interfered with the coverage.  This field should have been sprayed last fall (the custom operator never showed).  The field is a mess!!
       This custom experience is another example of our need to have our own equipment.  Five attempts resulting in five failures.   On one hand, our system is very simple (spray and plant, and harvest); however, simplicity is replaced by time sensitivity and chemical selection.  Time sensitivity is something that custom operations will continue to struggle with.  Spraying, for a Direct Seed system is very "time sensitive", and a problem with a specific application has to be dealt with quickly.  Once the custom operator leaves the property, good luck getting him back for cleanup.  Custom drilling has similar issues.  We have been lucky for the most part getting the drill when desired; however, as more demand develops for this service, timeliness will become an issue.   Farming operations using a cultivation system have issues of timeliness as well; however, they have a much wider window.
        When we drilled the Cs field, it was obvious when we crossed the boundary between old and new property.  Although both sides of the old boundary was left in stubble from harvest 2012, the side that has been cultivated for 100+ years was wetter on the surface and did not support the Direct Seed Equipment.  Ruts were left in the ground, particularly when turning.
         It was obvious that the moisture was held higher in the soil profile on the ground with a history of cultivation.  Decayed roots and macro-fawna has made channels that has allowed the surface water to move deeper into the soil profile in the Direct Seeded ground.   Improved soil structure also plays a role in helping resist soil compaction.

DRILLING INTO TALL STUBBLE

[Click on "direct seeding" label at bottom of post for similar posts.]
[11/15/14 update]-- This addresses comments below about thinner, taller spring barley.  It turns out, what we observed is exactly what is expected.  It's all about light.  Individual cultivars compete for light.  In discussion with Dwayne Beck, I commented on this observation and that it reduced tillering of the barley.  His response was that he did not want more than one or two tillers.  Every tiller takes 7-10 days to develop.  This pushes crop maturity back that much for each tiller the plant develops.  For us that means vulnerability to heat.  Beck adjusts tillering by plant density.  I'm no longer concerned about stubble standing following the seeding operation. 
         [5/13/13 update]-- Where we have looked, the spring barley looks fine.  Visually, it appears that the barley, in the areas with standing stubble, is taller, with fewer plants than that growing in the flattened residue.  We will watch, and do stand counts later as the crop develops.  
      The mustard field is more questionable; however, it appears that the mustard has enough emergence for a stand on all except the 10ac extremely heavy residue area around the shop.  A combination of freeze damage and erratic seeding depth has made this area a failed planting. 
        What to do differently in the future:  1-- consider planting a week or two later to lessen the chance for freeze damage.  My neighbors to the east and west of us has replanted their entire fields.  The down side of waiting is potential yield loss from high temperatures at bloom.  Mustard is a 95 day crop that flowers in 45 days.  It is likely that our mustard will be able to deal better with high temperature stress than the average field because of the tall heavy residue's ability to reduce evaporation, leaving more moisture for the mustard plant.  2-- Make sure the Cross-slot drill has all the auto-depth control sensors working so that you don't have the erratic seed depth we experienced.  Only one of the four was working this spring which meant that all the openers followed that one sensor whether it was on a high/low or hard/soft spot, instead of getting an average from the four across the width of the drill.  3-- The frequency of use of this ultra low disturbance drill over time will have an impact of it's own on depth control --->there will always be some soil movement and small ridges and hollows will be leveled out.
        Most of the mustard field has more plant population than needed; however there will be voids.  
        The barley came out fine because of the larger seed having more energy, and we planted deeper.   The tiny mustard seed is different, and more difficult to get an evenly emerged stand in our high residue situation.

            [4/21/13 update]-- The Cross-slot Drill worked well this spring on all the tall stubble whether 140bu or 50bu winter wheat residue -- meaning that the opener penetrated the residue and did not plug.  We carried stubble around where it went through frame holes and hinge points, but that was not a seeding issue.   Management issues eluded to in "DETAILS" may not be quite the problem expected when this was first posted.

SUMMARY: (started drilling April 4th)
      The stubble needs to be dry.  The drying period was surprisingly short. Two days of drying weather (wind and sun) following a rain was sufficient for the drill to penetrate the matted areas.  The matted areas tended to not be smashed flat on the ground, which allowed air movement for drying.  Our soil surface dries rapidly following a rain.  (See posting on "Cultivation vs Direct Seeding")
       Managing proper depth control in varying stubble conditions may be challenging.  The depth sensing technology built into the Cross-Slot opener design worked well; however, it doesn't distinguish between depth of residue and depth of soil.  Techniques to compensate for this difference will need to be worked out (down pressure change for different areas, or mapping out areas and resetting seeding depth, are two possibilities).

     
DETAILS:     This is our first attempt to drill into winter wheat stubble that was harvested with a stripper head.  Our "En" field of Brundage 96 averaged 88bu/ac, and the height of the stubble was 39-40" tall.  There was no operation applied to this field between harvest (August 2012), and March 8th, 2013 when Rt3 was applied with a 90ft self propelled sprayer from a custom operator.

      Started drilling 4/3/13.  We are using a 24' Cross-slot drill that applies aqua (N+S) near the seed and a solution of phosphorous(P) and uran (N) with the seed.

       When the straw is dry, the Cross-slot opener slips through and places the seed very nicely into the soil.  On the other hand, when the straw is damp and soft, the mat that develops from wheel tracks or wind blow, that lays across wise to the line of travel resists penetration.  Depending on the depth of the mat, seed and fertilizer can end up on the surface.  Without the addition of straw laying on the surface, which is normal when using a conventional header, the chaff spread area does not appear to be a problem for drilling, even when damp.  

       Observations --  that may help when seeding into heavy, tall stubble:

               1-- Starting at harvest, perform operations that are linear, along the line that you intent to seed. Avoid laying straw down where it will lie across the drills line of travel.

               2-- Configure (streamline) drill, including openers, so that there is minimal residue movement, either linear, lateral or vertical.  Residue material that is tipped or pushed will create an ever increasing problem as the drill moves along it's line of travel.
      This drill, which I consider the most versatile, and most forgiving, of all the designs, does have it's limit.  All drills designed for direct seeding will work if the residue is managed to address the limitations of that particular design.

    In the pic above, the seed is difficult to see (little red spot).  It lies near the top of the blackened area.  The seed was placed about an inch into black earth.  This area is matted by repeated trampling from combine, trucks, sprayer and drill, and is located near the field entrance.
     [4/18/13]-- In the flat at Thornton the mat of straw was 1-2 inches thick when compressed.  The drill cut through the mat but left much of the seed laying on the soil surface.  We'll watch this to see if dense residue environment will replace soil for seed germination and emergence.  We were pushing to finish this field before an expected rain.  It was dark, the drill was slicing through the residue and not plugging,  but attention was not given to this heavy mat condition.  Combining a poor chemical (in places, no chemical) application, inexperience of drilling in this residue condition, and dealing with custom operators (both spraying and drilling) with equal inexperience in these conditions, -- we are prepared to expect less then a stellar spring crop for 2013.

Video?? (something happened at google and video can not be accessed-- too bad!)

      This video is 1:30 minutes showing the drill in action, traveling 5-6mph.  The drill, as configured, does not flatten the stubble that it passes over.  When we build our own, this is an issue we will have to address.  My understanding is that the stubble needs to be standing prior to seeding and flat following seeding of a spring crop.  I think this messy look would be OK for a winter crop with it's longer growing period.  It would help with the winter snow intercept and I don't think the light intercept would be harmful.   I have concerns about this spring crop.

       

     This pic gives a broader view of the field.  The left side shows the undrilled area, and the right side shows drilled area.

     Does this volume of residue negatively affect the vigor of the crop through cold soil temperature and light intercept?  Does this volume of residue retard the evaporation of moisture, providing more to the growing crop?  This moisture potential is referenced in an earlier posting. (click on the "moisture" label)

     We are doing a soil temperature and a light intercept study with Hobo sensors now.  We will be monitoring the crop vigor as time passes.   There is enough area flattened to compare the light intercept aspect.

      After the stubble dried this afternoon, we successfully seeded; however, it appears that the stubble sprang back up more than when it was drier.

     

Our Winter Escape -- Amelia Island, Florida

Today we have finished a 5 day Road Scholar program in NE Florida on Amelia Island.  We stayed in Fernandina Beach, toured Cumberland Island, Amelia Island, and the Okefenokee Wildlife preserve nearby in southern Georgia.  The lectures centered around the history of the area, and the economic impacts caused, and endured by the residences since 1562.  Amelia Island is known as the First Coast for it's early settlement, along with the term of, The Isle of Eight Flags, for the various political interests involved over the years.  It was interesting to find out that the shrimping industry started on Amelia Island.

      FRENCH Flag ----1562 to 1565.  Explorer Jean Ribault was first recorded European visitor.
      SPANISH Flag ---1565 to 1710.  Pedro Menendez de Aviles drove French out killing 350 colonists. Several English raids took place during this time period including South Carolina's governor James Moore leading British and Indian forces in 1702.
     ENGLISH Flag ---1710 to 1783.  Georgia governor  James Oglethorpe invades and renames island, Amelia in honor of Englands George II daughter.  1776, Spain releases all rights and land grant rights to Florida.
     SPANISH Flag --- 1783 to 1812.  The town of Fernandina was platted in 1811 by George G.F. Clark in honor of king Ferdinand VII of Spain.
     PATRIOT Flag --- 1812 to 1813.  With approval from President James Madison, Georgia's governor, George Mathews fielded insurgents called "Patriots of Amelia Island" and seized the island.  After raising the Patriot Flag they replaced it with the US Flag.
     SPANISH Flag ---1813 to 1817.  Spanish pressure forced evacuation of US forces from island.  Spain built Fort San Carlos on the island in 1816.
     GREEN CROSS Flag --- 1817 to 1817. Scot born Gregor McGregor and a small force capture the  island for the "Green Cross".
     MEXICAN REBEL Flag -- 1817 to 1861.  American irregulars and pirates plague the area for years under the Mexican Rebel Flag, until President James Monroe drives them out, vowing to hold Amelia Island in trust for Spain.
     CONFEDERATE Flag -- 1861-1862.  Confederate forces sieze island and Fort San Carlos (renamed Fort Clinch).
     AMERICAN Flag -- 1862-present.  Union forces under Commodore Samuel Dupont retake Amelia Island and raises the American Flag.
      This information is a summary that comes from the City of Fernandina Beach website.  All this attention over the last 350 years is due to Amelia Island having the only natural deep water port along the Florida coastline.