Update on COVER CROPS page

I have put an update on the COVER CROPS page.  The section is titled "FALL 2016 ---WHAT WE LEARNED TO DATE.

Soil Health

      For the last couple of years my interest has picked up on "soil health".  I used to think that stopping the destructive practice of tilling the soil was sufficient.   ---After a few years it became obvious that something more was needed, and Dr. Dwayne Beck came into our realm of education with his research on crop diversity, rotations, rooting depths, moisture use.  That was a big leap forward for us, but something was still missing.  ---Than, in the last few years with the news about the Chesapeake Bay problems, cover crops are front and center in the news.  USDA's "Life in the Soil series" featuring Ray Archuleta is well done and has a compelling message.  Many speakers are available, selling their stories of success based on use of cover crops to stop erosion and holding nutrients.  Organic farming uses many of the same principals and appears to be getting increasing press coverage and retailer interest.  ---There is an increasing negative attitude toward agribusiness' chemical and fertility inputs in the non farm community.  Strangely, I'm fining myself moving toward that frame of mind.  There was a time that I accepted GE crops as logical progress toward higher yield, healthier plants using less toxic chemicals, and should not be questioned, --that is not my feeling today.  My thinking today is that every GE organism needs to be tested for negative environmental impact before being released.  A benign appearance may be deceiving.   ---The most recent interest I have developed on the hunt for a better way of farming is to learn more about soils and their complexity.  The spring of 2015 we spent a lot of money on Biological tests for one piece of ground, and spent the remainder of the year trying to figure out what they meant.  Last spring I listened to a presentation by Dr. Elaine Ingham.  It was mind boggling, --unbelievable!  My limited education on soils is now more than 50 years old, but her presentation sounded reasonable and logical.  Since then I have listened to a lot of her past presentations, and others on soil health, and her thesis is something that needs to be tried.  If successful, farming will become a very profitable business through greatly reduced inputs.  There are a lot of Guru's out there selling elixir's that promise higher yields and better food quality.  Some of them advertise as organics, and leave the impression that they are adding soil organisms.  So far, what I have found is that if most of the elixir was derived from natural grown products it is advertised as organic, and they are all fertilizers ammendments of one kind or another, --no live soil organisms are included.  At first, Dr. Ingham's program appears daunting; however, I think that it is not.  One can work her "magic" on plots as small as a garden for starters and work up to larger acreage.
       After viewing many different authored videos, I am including three presenters that I think have something to say that can be backed up with research.  They also, in their own way, support the other two presenters.  Each of these presentations are approximately 30 minutes.  These sites give access to other videos by these authors on the subject of soils and their health.
           -----  ( Soil Health Principles )    Jill Clapperton:  She was a soil scientist in Canada for many years, and now doing research in Washington State.  She is the founder of "Rhizoterra".  I first became acquainted with her back in the 80's when Guy Swanson would bring her down to his "Yielder Conferences".  She was an early spokesman on soil health.
          -----  ( Soil Health Principles )   Ray Archuleta:  He is a soil health specialist and agronomist with USDA.  He is the principle narrator for USDA's excellent video series on "Secrets of the Soil".
          -----  ( The Soil Foodweb )   Elaine Ingham:  She is a soil biologist, microbiologist, and founder of "Soil Foodweb".  She is the author of "USDA's Soil Biology Primer".  She currently is the hot commodity at conferences on soil health.  She upsets apple carts and draws controversy.  I think she knows her stuff and articulates it very well.  The following link is an interesting article on the principal controversy she is part of.  When I followed this through the various links provided, it appears to me, she was subjected to a real hack job.  It also appears she may have overstated some conclusions in verbal presentations.   < GM watch.org >

CROSS-SLOT EXPERIENCE

    We love the Cross-Slot drill for it's ability to seed into vary adverse seeding conditions, which we have, --uneven ground, uneven residue distribution, heavy, loose residue, tall tangled residue, hard ground with powder pockets,  For the most part the drill gives us great emergence.  We're getting better stand establishment than what we have ever been able to achieve with hoe drills and disc drills in the past, --particularly the spring seeded crops.  Winter wheat was much more forgiving.  With years of direct seeding, 100% surface protection, and the CrossSlot drill, soil surface sealing is not a concern.  Whether we can physically seed a field is no longer a concern.  If the ground will support the weight you can seed.   There are a couple of issues however.  One issue relates to the opener.

     ----We are not able to use the scraper on the opener as shown.  Years ago the scraper was designed at WSU  for the CrossSlot.   Farming the steep slopes of the Palouse Hills causes a lot of side force on the disc blade of the opener.  This force opens a gap on the up-hill side of the disc, and exerts enough force on the down-hill side of the disc, that the friction exerted on the seed by the disc grabs a percentage of the seed and moves it back toward the soil surface.  This displaces the seed from the horizontal slot left by the blade to a position along the vertical slot left by the disc.  When we A-B line on steep slopes, frequently, a striping effect can be seen.  In a lot of scenarios this does not happen; but, when you are drilling into thin moisture, or going through heavy straw, where that straw gets pushed into the disc slot, you want all the seed in the proper location for optimum emergence.  The "scraper" was designed for just that purpose, to hold the seed in the horizontal slot.  We need to find a way to get those scrapers functioning as intended.  Currently, they catch residue and than dirt and drag, making a mess.  What has changed since the scraper was developed?  I think it is our farming method/goal.  Twenty years ago yields were less, and we would struggle to seed into hundreds of pounds of surface residue, and maybe a long cut would be 24"tall.  Fields would be "conditioned" for seeding (harrowing, mowing).  Today, CrossSlot users are dealing with much heavier, longer residues, and not "conditioning" the field to seed.  In our case we are regularly seeding into several thousand pounds of residue and a long cut of 40+ inches.  The most residue we have seeded into has been in excess of twenty thousand pounds of tangle winter wheat residue.  The idea I have had since building this drill was to change the pull point by swinging the hitch to transfer the side draft to the tractor; however, the Auto guidance technology is not capable of compensating for this movement.
       The other issue, relates to the seed metering system.

    ---- The AgPro/Valmar metering system is long in the tooth and needs to be upgraded.   The deficiencies glare when seeding very low rates, --2-5#/a of canola as an example.  On the plus, it's simple.  On the negative: --in our hills, the seed delivery and volume is dependent on the systems aspect (front up or down, side tilt, shake).   --being nothing more than a form of flute feed, it draws in and spits out seed in clumps depending on the air stream to spread it out.  --Overrun is horrible, and when you factor that in, reduce the rate to compensate, one is left wondering what rate he has actually seeding.  Singulation is probably not feasible, but I think building a bottom using the JD double run feeds will give us a close alternative.

The double run feed will require a lot of adjustment to vary seeding rates but with our Omni drive coupled with the Bourgault gear box, I don't think we will have to change any sprockets to seed 2#/a to 200#/a.  Until I find differently, if the seed is metered out fairly even, I think the current air system will deliver to the ground fairly evenly.
       We are fast approaching the time where we will not be able to cut seeding costs by saving back seed.  All of the new wheat cultivars we  are interested in are proprietary and the cost is significant.  Seed overrun will be an expense to eliminate.
Pic above is showing the Bourgault transmission with it's capability of 1/1 to 60/1 ratio.  The Omi drive with it's effective 30-150rpm variable capability is connected to the input shaft on the back of the Bourgault.  You see the chain connecting the output shaft to the roll.  A 180 position encoder is mounted on the end of the roll shaft to control seed rate through the Omni drive and Viper.

2016 Harvest Update

   This year has been the most confusing of my 60+ years of farming.  The weather looked like it was going to treat us pretty good, but, mostly after the fact, we found it wasn't as good as it first appeared.  I thought we missed the frost in April, but as it turned out, not quite.  The moisture was coming along just fine, then it shut off.  The years moisture was just short of our long term average.  The heat wave in May, although not real hot, apparently did damage depending on where the crop was in it's development.  The temperature for this growing and harvest season was quite comfortable.  A relatively mild winter, and no 100+ days. Very different from 2015's long stretch of 100+ temperatures.  All in all everything was looking pretty good.  Looking back on Art Douglas' prediction, I think he was right on for my immediate area.  There apparently was a big swing of temperature in the April-May period that set us up for falling number issues depending on area, and wheat cultivar.  I knew when it happened but didn't think anything about it, --not severe, not unusual.  Everything I hear is antidotal; however, I'm of the opinion that the test is badly flawed.  Inconsistency in the ability to replicate the numbers, even in a relatively narrow range, is wide spread.  It appears to me that the milling industry has found a way to purchase high quality grain, --cheap, and at our expense.  Hopefully, this will be addressed before another harvest.  I have been hearing of some fantastic yields, but some are pretty mediocre,  and some fields have very low FN's, but not all of them.  With the quality issues and plummeting prices, this will be a year we hope to never repeat.
     Now, for our farm.  ---Wheat yields were good, but not exceptional, --with exception.  The FN's varied across the fields ranging from 279-330.  Wheat yields ranged from 83 to a little over 100.  This yield range is close to norm for us at this stage,--slow but steady gain over time.  We have a variety of soils ranging from very complex shallow ground to deep Athena soils.  Our cover crop ground was the 83 and we consider that fantastic.  This is the worst ground we have with complex soils and large areas that have a couple of inches of soil over fractured rock, and infested with Rush Skeleton weed.  This area was seeded to a multiple cultivar (brassica/legume) cover crop last year and used 3" water compared to our CF.  This spring there was less than an inch (0.8") difference in moisture.  There were variations in yield over the CC area but none of the shallow spots showed significant drop as was expected.  Was this unexpected yield do to the cover crop?  Too early to tell!  One year doesn't make a trend, but since it wasn't a flop, it's encouragement to expand the practice.  Our experience is paralleling the experience of other farmers in the area, --covers used 3" moisture, yields didn't collapse.  This also matches the literature on the subject.  The remainder of our Brundage 96 looked exceptional through harvest, but didn't end up yielding exceptional.  The Puma went over a hundred.
--- The mustard was a disappointment.  Yields ranged from ≈680 to 870#/a.  The stand emerged well with an OK population.  Quality was good.  It was harvested with the stripper head.  The field Rep. indicated that they were finding similar results region wide, and no real explanation as to why.  In our case, my thoughts are: --we should seed 8-10#/ac instead of the 5-6, and that we seeded to shallow.  we had emergence over too long of time span.  I'm guessing that another factor was that the little heat wave in May hit the mustard at the wrong time in it's development.  I didn't see frost damage during emergence.
--- The winter peas were problematic from the start.  They yielded 1262#/a.  One field was destroyed because of contamination with Billy Beans.   They were all dormant seeded in November.  They came up this spring looking great and high population.  With no experience in dormant seeding we didn't put on the pre-emergence chemistry.  Bad mistake!  Spring applications of grass and broadleaf herbicides were a total failure.  Dormant seeding of winter peas has great potential, but make sure to get the pre-emerge chemistry applied.  We ended up with an even over-story of Jim Hill Mustard, that proved to be challenging to harvest.  An IH8230 with MacDon header had no easier time than our N7 and standard head.  A very slow grind.  The crop grade showed high percent of hard seed which was subtracted from the germ making it un-usable as seed stock.  Our supplier had only one field that returned seed quality winter peas, and they were seeded in the spring, --so missed the environmental condition that caused the hard seed.  We will likely see Austrian peas show up for several years because of this hard seed issue.  Fortunately they are not difficult to remove.
----The spring peas were fantastic at Thornton.  Thornton was DRY.  They were ≈6" below normal, but the yields were very good.  Most communities north and south of Thornton had fairly normal precipitation.  Except for the rainfall, the other environmental conditions favored a good crop in 2016.  Our "Ginny" peas ranged from 2400-2980#/a, depending on the field.  The normally high yielding low ground tallied as much as 6500#/a.  They stood way too long for a green pea; however, the bleach, was insignificant, and seed coat damage was reasonable.  Normally green peas will have significant bleach if they stand beyond maturity.  Ginny is a great cultivar.  We harvested them with a standard head w/o pea lifters.  A slow harvest and in areas some peas were left on the vine (too deep in the track).  Our old wheat residue was left intact and we had a lot of pea residue left in the field.  We expected we would process all the residue, leaving exposed ground, which is normal with pea harvest, --but didn't.
--- Our DNS (Glee)@ 42b/a was ok.  Heavy weight, but only 13+% protein.  Stand was good but maybe it needed to be thicker.  Consider increasing seed rate, --we had 2-3 tillers and don't want more than two.  Probably needed more N to get protein.
--- Our SB (Lenatah) @3030#/a was ok.  Heavy weight and quality was excellent.  Stand was good, but may consider increased seeding rate.
--- We had a Viterra test plot of 6 new spring canola cultivars for the area.  Most were a GMO of one type or another.  They all had excellent yields ranging between 1700-2700#/a.  The plot was in the flat in front of our house.  The trial was not limited in moisture, and had a high pH (8+) in much of it.  We seeded the plots after the mustard and before moving to Thornton.  The seeding rate was ≈4#/a.  The stand developed over about 3 weeks,--it didn't seem to effect the outcome.  The canola probably stood too long; however, there was very low shatter on all the cultivars.  The quality of the stand didn't allow much movement within the crop canopy.

2016 Rainfall Summary

I have updated the  -----  2016 CROP YEAR -- RAINFALL, posted on April 13th, 2016 to reflect the moisture received for the Thornton, Wa. area,  and the St.John-Ewan area.

A little Tillage Ruins No-Till

      [update 10/6/16]  I have no comment related to the cover crop aspect; however, the tillage part supports my experience, and my contention that using "no-till" as a rotational practice, in CT is not sustainable.  It takes time for ground to re-develop soil structure, and channels from earthworm activity, and decayed root channels.  Any cultivation will destroy the surface connection for moisture to rapidly enter the soil profile.  Many will argue that moisture goes two ways as a reason to till and make the dust mulch in the fallow year.  Yes! --CF with little cover, can dry down the seed zone moisture.  I haven't found that it dried deeper than CT; however, it's harder to reach.  In our operation moisture has improved through increased surface residue, --it's a priority for us.  Moving to ULD (ultra low disturbance) is helping.  Using the stripper header where possible is helping.  The main factor in making winter wheat a high yielding success for us is to seed for early emergance in the fall.  Don't wait and let seed zone moisture escape.  That may mean seeding in August.  We have not gone that extreme yet, but some have.  No-till takes different management thinking to be successful. 
     FARM JOURNAL, Oct.2016:  Article by Darrell Smith reports on experiment done by Farm Journal's field agronomist, Ken Ferry.  The experiment compares two fields, --one with 4 years of no-till and the last two years featured cereal rye as a cover crop.  The other field had three years of no-till with the fourth year either having one or two tillage operations.  The implements used were, a soil finisher, moldboard plow, chisel plow.  There were several conclusions made by Ferry.  Among them, --cover crop (rye) did little to improve infiltration, --top few inches were dryer than the no-till prior to termination, but wetter after termination. --tillage hurt soil structure resulting in less infiltration, --the moldboard plow sole restricted water percolation into lower soil profile, --in their soils, more water ran off the surface with that one tillage year in four, compared to four no-till years.  Consider what those conclusions mean for us in the Palouse Hills when translated from the flatlands of Missouri.

Mixing DS and CT

     In recent years there has been a lot of money available to farm operators encouraging the use of direct seeding in the Palouse.  I am seeing more direct seeding, DS drills are being bought, but many of those operations are still including cultivation as a farming practice.  Why? --are they continuing to compare DS with CT? --are they expecting to use DS as another practice in the toolbox?

     I'm not a proponent for either, --if either are the reason.   The more I learn about building healthy soils, the more apparent that DS is only the starting point, and ULD has to be employed to reach that level.  DS may stop the bleeding from water and wind events depending on the amount of surface cover, and disturbance done by the seeding operation, but building soil health requires more.  We all know how destructive CT can be from water and wind events, but, I'm finding out that there is a real lack of understanding among farmers about the destruction that tillage does to the soil without any water and wind events.  Every tillage operation degrades soil structure by breaking soil aggregates into ever finer particles.   Tillage accelerates OM loss, reducing moisture holding capability of the soil.   Every tillage operation slices and dices the environment that supports the biological life that makes soil out of dirt.  The effect can be somewhat compared to a bulldozer being run through your home.   Every chemical application, every fertilizer application, every tillage operation, fire or other natural event that denudes or moves soil degrades the biological life of that soil.  So, everything we normally do to raise our crops has a negative impact.  The more we add, or do, the worse the damage.   Our various technologies allow increasing  yields even though our soils continually degrade through current cropping practices, --that includes most DS operations.  As our soils degrade to dirt, it's ability to partially support our yields is also reduced.  It doesn't take soil to raise crops.  Proof is the thriving business of hydroponics where all plant nutrition is supplied by applied chemistry.  As our soils degrade we will find ourselves applying more plant nutrients with their associated cost.  This needs to change!  The challenge for us is to learn how to reduce these negative impacts, and promote an environment that builds soil structure and soil biological communities, and still maintain reasonable yields during the transition.  At this point in time, that means reducing soil disturbance, increase crop diversity, use covers for our specific soil needs, and probably apply compost or teas to jump start the soil biology.  Don't bother adding compost or teas that don't have the specific elements needed by your soil.  They will be a waste of money.  Soil biological tests from Earthfort in Oregon will give you the information you need about the condition of your soils, though finding compost that will meet your specific soil needs may not exist at this point in time.  I'm looking into that now to see if any composting facility can analysis the compost for bacteria, fungi and protozoa, nematodes, and if they can make compost to a specific proportion of these elements.

      Dr. Elaine Ingham, a soil microbiologist, will be a featured speaker at the 2017 Pacific Northwest Direct Seed Conference in January.  She has an interesting message that will blow your mind about soil health and what healthy soils are capable of producing on their own without commercial inputs.  She is the lead scientist at the Rodale Institute and has a consulting business "The Soil Food Web".  She is featured on several Utube videos.   Dr. Ingham's website

2016 WHEAT COLLEGE - WSU WILKE FARM

Wilke Farm - Winter Pea Variety Trials

On 6/29 the Washington Association of Wheat Growers held their annual Wheat College, this year, at WSU's Wilke Farm located east of Davenport, Wa. on SR2.  The morning consisted of the farm tour with three locations featured, and the afternoon session was held in the memorial hall in Davenport featuring several speakers.  This was an excellent program.

      Station 1 & afternoon presentation featured]--Dr. Elaine Ingham talking about soil health using a soil core as a prop.  The soil core they pulled showed roots only to the two foot level.  Statements she made:  --probe pressure of 150psi will stop most plant roots, --probe pressure of 300psi stops all plant roots, --plant roots in an unobstructed profile will go 15-20'.  Minimum SOM of 3% is needed before the biological processes can start to work their magic, --there is enough nutrient source available for plant growth, without commercial supplement, as long as we have rocks.  Well balanced biology can supply every nutrient necessary for maximum plant production, --Well balanced soil biology can build soil at an amazing rate, much less time than USDA's 100 year time frame for building an inch of soil, --when she was a child only 4 essential elements were known to be necessary for plant development, now it's 42 known elements found to be necessary,  --nutrient cycling requires bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and nematodes.  Micro arthropods are also necessary in a perennial system, -- aerobic process creates alkalinity, -- anaerobic process creates acidity, --acsenio bacteria are long strands of very narrow (1µ) diameter, --all fungi are ≥ 2 µ in diameter, --good fungi are ≥ 3µ in diameter, --seeds subjected to 130-135 degrees for three days die, --low growing perennial understory plants are very moisture efficient, --weeds have a very poor moisture efficiency, 

      Dr. Ingham uses compost that is tested for the biological organisms she wants for the ground she is restoring, and either spreads a thin 2-3" layer on the ground or uses the compost to make a tea that is applied to the ground.  There is a specific process for properly done compost.   Good compost tea of Humid Acid has all the microbiological elements needed and is a chocolate brown.  There are color charts available to distinguish good humid acid from mediocre humic acid.  Natural material used for compost that has had chemistry applied, particularly insecticides will not have organisms survive to propagate. 

       Dr. Ingham's team restored Native Texas Prairie on 500acres that surround the GW Bush Library in Dallas, Texas.  She showed pic's of the project, it's success after a year, and an amazing story of the project done during a drought with no irrigation.  The project included restoring the O-A-B & C soil horizons, establishing drainage that supported a lake, planting trees and native prairie grasses.  With no rain, no irrigation, one year later the lake had 3 feet of water, grass was established, all the trees and shrubs survived, --and it was all from moisture provided from dew from 10% humidity.  She stated, that if you have soil with all the proper microbiology, they will provide moisture from alternate sources, all the nutrition necessary for plant growth, and protection from diseases and predatory attacks without commercially applied nutrition or plant protection chemistry.  It was an astonishing story bordering on the unbelievable.  She will be a principal presenter at the 2017 PNDSA annual meeting this winter.  Her presentation is a "must hear" --again.  There are several Utube video presentations. < Soil Food Web >

       Dr. Ingham recommends that individuals learn the composting process and purchase a simple lighted microscope to check, identify and count microbes.  She has equipment available on her website < Dr. Inghams website >.

      Station 2] --Winter peas and winter canola was being promoted as alternate crops to plant in rotation with winter wheat in low rainfall regions.  Both have been successful in low rainfall areas.  Both, legumes and brassica's are know to improve wheat yields that follow.

      Station 3] -- information on number and type of soil and biological tests.  Lots of data that has been difficult to make sense of.  Most need study for compatibility with our soils to interpret data.  Wire worm biological control and traps have not been successful in deterring them.  The best test for wire worm activity and density is still to place grain in a fine net, like women's nylon stockings, and bury them a few inches deep in various field locations and leave them 5-10 days.
      The afternoon session featured several speakers.  Besides Dr. Ingham, a Wheat Commissioner made a few comments.  Two item struck my interest, --wheat prices would be relatively flat do to adequate world wheat supplies, and a good "new" crop on the way.  White wheat is not oversupplied, and there is a growing market for it; however, don't look for price increases.  Western White wheat  (club wheat) has a history of very wide price swings, and there is interest by most involved parties to develop a marketing program that will level out those swings.

      

2016 - PRLCD - Drill Demonstation Video

This post is an extension of the June 13th post on the drill demonstration:  Spray Center Electronics brought a 4 prop drone, the Typhoon Q500 4K, by Yuneec ElectricAviation, and videoed the demonstration.  This is a 12:53 minute aerial view of the demonstration showing  all 7 units doing their thing.   < video of 2016 high residue drill demonstration>
     The test area was WW from the 2015 crop that had ≈100bu stubble, but not grain.  Approximately  300 feet of residue was left standing from a 32' Shelbourne Stripper Header.  At Each end, ≈100ft of stubble was mowed cross ways to the header travel with a 26 foot Schultz mower.  Between harvest, spraying and mowing, there were a lot of tracks that laid down the tall stubble.  There was basically solid  ground cover prior to any mowing.  Conditions were tough for any drill regardless of disc or hoe.
     The smoke is from a Case 4994 WT with an inexperienced operator not releasing the parking brake.  There was fire dropping onto the residue that was quickly extinguished along with fire on the oil/dirt deposits around the brake.  Unfortunate, but that is part of life at these events on occasion.

     Below are five pics from the five drill types demonstrated taken 17 days after the event.  All pics facing west from bldgs.  None of the drills were tuned for barley or had fertilizer.  One drill used a garb roll.  The operators just made sure they had barley coming out the tubes.  These pics were showing all level ground except the AgPro which was seeding on the hillside.  That was an additional complication.

 Horsch Anderson (all mowed area)

CrossSlot Drill (both areas)

JD 1890 (two pass in both areas)

Case 400 w 2280 cart (both areas)

AgPro with Bourgault point (both areas)

WSU - COOK FARM - SOIL HEALTH TOUR

      Recently I attended WSU's soil health tour at the Cook Agronomy Farm.  It was a long day from 7:30am -4:30pm.  It was interesting, but depressing.  So many questions with so few answers.  I had a number of pic's of charts I was interested in logging and talking about, but sadly they aren't available.
      There was a REACCH presentation related to the climate.  The climate models haven't changed much from a presentation I attended back in ≈2002 in predicting climate as we approach year 2100.  This study was not related to the UW and USGS presentation of ≈2002.  The short version:  We'll need to adopt "adaptive crop management" to stay nimble during periods of wet years followed by droughty years.   On average, we may get a little more moisture.  It will come in the winter .We'll likely have hotter summers with less moisture.  They are predicting less residue, less SOM, more erosion.  There will probably be a crop shift capability, for crops that use more GDU's.
      Explanation given on use of the "Flux Towers" located around the region.  Basically weather stations that have a special sensor array that senses water and carbon movement going in and out of the soil.  Sensor operates 10 times a second.  Useful for studying land use activity and it's impact on carbon and moisture.
      A new critter:  look for the "Cereal grass aphid".  It appears at pre-boot stage in wheat.  Not yet known if it will have an economic impact.
      In 2010 the Cook Farm moved from planting DNS to SWW.  This reduced N application substantially.  All growers in the Palouse need to be aware of the potential, but a train wreak is coming along ID/WA border area where very low pH levels exist.  N applications are driving pH down.  N calculators indicate that actual N used by crop is significantly less than that generally applied, resulting is excess N being lost to the environment and driving pH down faster than necessary.  A better management tool would be to use a "%predictability chart/calculation".  This chart, which an operator would need to build from their own records,  is a tool to be used for nutrient application based on yield goals and the percentage of time they actually attained that yield.  This could save a grower a lot of money without dropping yield, and it would slow the drop in pH.
      pH tests for lime applications need to be studied for, both, "Correlation" and "Calibration".  Current testing procedure does not work well for our soils.
      Researchers are finding areas where the pH is very low deep in the soil profile making it virtually impossible to correct.  Normally the pH problem is confined to the top 4" of the soil profile.  Continuous over application of N is the cause.
     During the ice cream social following the tour, Huggins was soliciting ideas for the direction of future research at the Cook Farm.

2016 - Late Spring Review of our Cover Crop

 

 This spring we started taking out CRP with 2qt of Rt3 with extra surfactant, using 12gpa solution, TeeJet blue TT with 40psi.  Results were excellent.  Two weeks later we seeded a cover crop mix that included:  Yellow Blossom Sweet Clover, Common Vetch, Daikon Radish, Graza Radish, Attack Mustard, Ida Gold Mustard, Winter Canola, Spring Canola.  The mix at 10#/ac contained about 1.7million seeds per acre.  Because the source of the Ethiopian Cabbage (Corinne) was not certified disease free, it was not included. The intention is to leave this cover to grow through March, maybe April 2017, and then chemically destroy it, leaving as much of a residue mat as possible.  The cultivars that are expected to survive the winter is the clover, vetch, and Graza radish.  Both of the legumes should grow well early in the spring 2017 and provide N by takeout time. The Graza will exist and grow leaf material prior to takeout.   If we could have planted the Corinne, it would likely survive and provide us with another vigorous bio-bore plant.  The radishes, canola's and mustards are bio-bore plants as well.  We have found that our CRP ground is in need of deep boring cultivars.  The mustards, canola and Daikon Radish will seed out in 2016 and likely die during the winter.  Come spring we will see high populations of these cultivars emerge early.  None of these cultivars will be a problem to remove.  Our intention is to seed these acres to winter wheat the fall of 2017.
      Today, I noticed some areas are very good and others with a sparse population.   On reflection, we should have started the process about a month earlier.  The south exposures indicates they were short on moisture showing a spotty stand with few cultivars.  One 0.40 rain will get them started.  Field aspects that point anywhere northerly looks good with high populations, and a good diversity of cultivars.
   

WSU's Agricultural Research Center at Lind

        The WSU Dryland Research Station at Lind receives less precipitation than any other state or federal dryland agricultural research facility in the United States.  The average precipitation for the years 1921 to 2015 is 9.53 inches annually.  The traditional agronomic cropping system in this region is winter wheat/fallow using conventional tillage. 
       I attended the annual Field Day to catch up on research centered around practices for the low rainfall regions of Washington.  Rainfall this year is a couple of inches above average and the crops in the region reflect that.  They look pretty good.  The tour this year was basically a variety trial for triticale, spring wheat, winter wheat, and winter peas.  There was a presentation on chemical control of russian thistles.
       I am looking for cultivars that will grow in low moisture to use for diversifying  cash crops as well as cultivars to add to cover crop mixes.  Two crops stood out.  One was triticale and the other was winter peas.  Both were developing a lot of biomass.  For the Lind area I think triticale will be the better for the near term.  It offers more fibrous roots and top biomass with a high carbon ratio.  
        From what I'm observing, this research station needs to either expand, or change it's emphasis.  That will be hard with all the decision makers and money driving the station to maintain the course of minimum tillage using bigger, heavier split packer drills.   Developing cultural practices that reduce tillage operations is not enough.  This soil has very low OM content and getting worse.  Ability to store moisture is poor, and moisture wicks out fast.  The practice of setting a deep moisture barrier with sweeps or under cutters and following up with seeders designed to place seed deeper seems archaic for the 21st century, and self destructive in the face of a warming planet.  With all the climate models pointing towards a warmer earth our soils will have an increasing need of an insulating cover.  Soil surface temperatures reaching 150-160+ degrees is not going to cut it for moisture retention or crop development.  I'm shocked to find that my HOBO's are already registering short periods of max temperatures (4" above the surface on bare soil) of 154 degrees.  That's scorched earth.
        This station need ssome new young blood that don't carry all the baggage of the past, --that don't know that residue can't be increased, --that don't know that crops can't be successfully emerged with no-till.  They need to be handed the keys and told, --GET IT DONE.

THE LONG & SHORT OF THE STRIPPER HEADER

IT'S ALL ABOUT MOISTURE  ---->  FARM TO SAVE IT OR LOSE IT
       Fact: --there is a layer at the soil surface, even though it looks dry, that is at 100% humidity.  This layer may be only 1-2micro's thick.  This layer is maintained until the soil profile can no longer draw on it's reserves.   How you manage this soil surface environment has a big impact on evaporation and the moisture available for the crop.
       Fact: --residue modifies soil temperature.  Soils are warmer through the winter and cooler during the summer with surface residue either standing or flat.
      83% of rainfall over a two year wheat/fallow rotation is lost off the soil surface through evaporation.  (see post of 9/19/2012)-- conclusion was to keep soils as cool as possible and air velocity across the soil surface as low as possible.  This translates to, --maintain as much cover as possible over the soil, and keep the cover as tall as possible, for as long as possible, to maximize moisture available for crop production.
      Our observations over 4 years indicates considerably fewer weed cultivars germinate and compete with the crop on ground that is not disturbed.  The more residue, the less disturbance, including disturbance from tracks/wheels, the better.
   
THE LONG:

       1-- Removing the straw row of a poor residue managing combine, is a major plus.  It gives new life to older machines and increases capacity by 10-20%.
      ---There is much less material being processed.  This has resulted in significant savings for us in combine repairs.

       2--Potential increase in moisture available to the crop by:  
      ---increasing snow catch (when we get it) over the standard cut or mowed height.  This resists snow drifting, leaving more even snow (water) distribution over the field.
      ---Accompanied with solar energy which warms the stems, the snow melts and enters the soil at the base of the plants in a slow controlled manner.
       ---reduced weed competition when used as part of the ULD system.  Fewer weeds, leaves more moisture for the crop.  Less surface disturbance including wheel tracks, the fewer the weeds.
       ---reducing air velocity over soil surface. Studies are showing reduced evaporation from tall stubble.  This means more moisture for the crop.
        ---reducing soil temperatures in the warm season.  Several studies, including our  own measurements with HOBO sensors show significant drop in summer surface temperatures compared to bare soil.  Studies concur, that lower soil temperatures conserves moisture for the crop.
       3--Modifies winter soil temperatures.  Our HOBO sensors are showing that tall stubble insulates the soil, not only in the summer to reduced soil temperatures, but also insulates the soil from the cold winter temperatures.
       4--The Shelbourne is a low maintenance header for us.
       5--The Shelbourne, being a sealed unit, reduces harvest dust around the combine cab.

THE SHORT:
       1--Is not useable for all the crops we grow.
              ---spring standup peas:  grade reduction from cracked/skinned seed coats.
              --mustard/canola:  problematic if stems carry seed pods extending more than 24 inches along the plants vertical axis.
              ---crops with seeds forming around a central stem like sorghum.
       2--Not all drills will successfully seed behind the stripper header.  Type and density of residue needs to be considered.
               

WHY WE STILL FALLOW

      Why do we still have fallow in our farming system when we have the equipment to direct seed was, in essence,  the question I received from a recent post.  We have no conventional tilled fallow, but do have chemical fallow.  
       I've concluded the short answer is TRADITION.  It's part of my family culture. There are plenty of university studies indicating how poor the moisture efficiency is with fallow, and how destructive fallow is to our economic base (the soil), and to the environment, however, we have learned to farm with it, getting good yields, and that is a comfort level of it's own.
      There is no question in my mind that, for the future, we would be better off if we broke tradition and looked at building up our soil health instead of continually farming it into oblivion as we have for the past 100 plus years.  That; however, puts us into the realm of the unknown, associated with higher risk.   Our forefathers used cover crops to a certain extent, but never to the extent of soil sustainability.  Sweet clover was planted for nitrogen, then ploughed down.  Many operations rotated cattle or sheep onto crop ground and seeded pasture, but those "soil building" attempts were negated by grazing those fields into the dirt.  As time went on, cattle left most of the operations, ground  has been consolidated, and transitioned into a monoculture of wheat.  The little our forefathers did understand about soil health and the role of cover crops was hampered by the equipment available.  To build soil health we have to remove our traditional fallow practice, and introduce more diversity of crop cultivars.  We will probably need to introduce cover crops to help with that diversity.  Chem fallow is a no-brainer for those of us that have been doing it for a couple of decades, but even that "conservation practice" is used by a small minority of the community as a whole.  I'm seeing more delayed tillage where the first one or two operations are application of chemistry, then tillage follows before planting.  This has morf'd, in some cases, into the two pass system (or 3-4).  That looks risky to me, but I've seen some pretty nice crops develop from that system.  It's all about moisture and it's timing.
      Even the mention of introducing cover crops leave people walking away shaking their heads.  It's just too risky.
      The next step for our operation to reach the goal of no fallow will probably be Green Fallow, --and that may be as far as we wish to go.  I'm starting to see where the "fallow" period my be the staging for the next cash crop.  The "fallow" will be planted with a diverse (designed plan) mix of cultivars that will bio-drill, add root mass, add nitrogen (if needed), and scavenge nutrients from the depths of the soil profile.  I'm reading where most (or all) the plants nutrition comes from the top 18" of the profile, and roots drive deeper for the purpose of accessing moisture.  If this proves out, we need to rethink how and when we apply nutrients in the short run, and plant appropriate cultivars to replace commercial fertilizer in the long run.

Stripper Header - Drill Demonstration

     Considering there were three other ag tour/events contending for peoples attention, we had over 100 people in attendance.  No media this year, --probably do to other better known events.  Interest in dealing with a stripper header is still there.  There were eight units that participated, --AgPro with Bourgault points, CrossSlot, Case 400 with Kile openers and 2280 cart, JD 1890 single disc opener that was set up as a two pass system, and the Horsch with Anderson opener.  Also three low disturbance fertilizer applicators were demonstrated.  The JD 1890 with Exactrix system where the seed boot was replaced with a fertilizer boot to deep band liquid NH3.  The Great Plains NP40 Nutri-Pro uses a coulter to cut a slot and stream liquid solution into that slot from above ground level. The Fast 8200 unit is  similar.  The drills seeded barley.  There was no solution provided for the fertilizer machines.  The area had a lot of residue.  The machinery park had the residue swathed and baled for building protection last summer.  The demonstration site had a mowed area on each end with standing (≈30") stubble in the middle.  Between harvest, spray applications, and mowing, there was a lot of wheel tracks with long stubble laid down.  Along with the fact that no leveling/smoothing operation has touched this site for over 20 years, this is a challenge for any drill to get a decent looking stand emerged.  Even though we hadn't received any appreciable moisture for 30 days, the site had good moisture levels, even in the scalped areas where the equipment is parked.  The following day, the site received 0.45" of rain.  That will eliminate any drying out the drills may have promoted.
       Where we strive for maximum moisture retention through low disturbance and residue, my bias of course, favors the CrossSlot, so, expectedly, it did the best, --at holding depth, consistent seeding without plugs or drags, and features a one pass system to maintain the ULD status that we strive for in our operation.
       The JD didn't hold depth in the mowed area which was the hardest for both it and the CS.  Too much variation in seeding conditions for spring loaded down pressure systems.  Also, the JD moves more dirt than the CS, and being set up as a two pass system, there is additional soil disturbance.
       All of the hoe type drill entries, were able to make it through the course, with more or less plugging and dragging.  Neither mowed nor standing stubble, with all the wheel tracks, was ideal for a hoe drill.  Even 30" stubble, when laid crossways to the line of travel spans across multiple opener widths.  Much of the time, coulters will cut through the mat in front of the hoe --but not all the time.  When a hoe passes among standing stalks, they tip and can become an obstacle to the next line of openers.
       Although I didn't watch any of the fertilizer applicators navigate the course, I could see from all the straw hanging, that the Great Plains NP40 struggled.  I didn't notice how the Fast 8200 faired, but my guess is that it was much the same.  With this type of application, where solution is directed towards a slot through a surface air gap, I have to wonder how much loss of N takes place. The JD 1890 fertilizer unit, like the drill version, probably suffered from depth control.
     Sorry to say, I was distracted,  and completely neglected to make a presentation about the stripper header and it's value to our operation, and the moisture it helps save.  I'll write two more posts that relate to: -- 1) the long and short of the stripper header, and 2) moisture saved with the stripper header in the near future.  I have yet to analysis the HOBO data gathered since September on soil temperatures under different residue scenarios .

All done, and equipment gone.  The site was completely used, but didn't need to go into the mustard.  We'll follow the site for awhile, then destroy it before weeds become a problem.

CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE & MOISTURE

It's that time of year!!  We, along with our neighbors have started making fallow that will be seeded to WW this fall.  There are as many ways to do this as there are farmers in the area.

I walked into this field the other day (not ours) and smelled the pungent aroma of fresh tilled soil, and also I felt a significant difference in humidity while traversing from the cultivated area into the non cultivated area.  It was a bit startling.   There is a lesson here!  (actually 5 that comes to mind.)
1--Soil moisture:  Moisture has been exposed by the cultivator and is being evaporated out of the soil at a rapid rate, raising the humidity.  Some documents I have cruised indicate approximately 0.5" lost per trip.  (Many years ago, I checked this on our operation and found that we had lost ≈0.5"+ in three operations of cultivating, weeding, harrowing to set up the fallow.)
        On this field(pic), the lack of residue (standing or not) allows air movement along the surface, removing the high humidity(100%) interface between soil an the atmosphere, --if you see dirt there isn't enough residue to protect the soil.  This high humidity layer is constantly being replaced until the soil can no longer provide the moisture.  Research shows that most of our soil moisture is lost through EVAPORATION (83%+) from the soil surface.  The best moisture saving practices keep the surface COOL and CALM.  This loss can not be eliminated, but it can be dramatically slowed.
2--Soil Temperature:  Destroying residue that covers the soil raises soil temperature.  This in turn increases the evaporation from the soil.  Research shows a 20 degrees difference between covered and uncovered soil.  Our own testing verifies this.

 3--OM is being destroyed.  Tillage introduces oxygen (air).  By combining  OM(fuel), oxygen, and heat(from ground and atmosphere), so the biological furnace is stoked and the OM is destroyed, converting to elements that include nitrogen(N), and CO2.
 4--CO2:   --is released into the atmosphere.  When soils are not disturbed, a relative balance of gases is established in the soil profile.  The two most notable are oxygen and CO2.  Cultivation, while adding oxygen to the soil releases CO2 from the soil.  There is some exchange of these gases all the time through soil interaction with plant growth and biological activity; however, soil disturbance accelerates this phenomena.  The more intense the disturbance, the greater the gas exchange.  Conventional fallow, requiring several tillage operations, releases CO2 to the atmosphere several times during that fallow period.  Minimizing mechanical soil disturbance, and building soil structure through plant diversity is the best way to provide oxygen to the soil, and control the release of CO2 into the atmosphere.
5--N:  There is no question that N is produced by this accelerated biological furnace, and standard soil tests acknowledge this by calculating an expected amount of N, from a given level of OM.
      The stability of this N seems to be the question, and I am totally confused at this point.  Nitrate N is water soluble and goes where the water goes.  Ammonia N ties to the soil particles and goes where the soil goes.  Both of these forms evolve over time.  This has been known for many decades.  A high percentage of these forms end up in the public waters.  From what I'm reading, our crops are only using about 45% of the N that we apply.  That's pathetic, costly to our operations and the environment.
       Now "Organic N" is becoming a subject of discussion.   What is this, and what distinguishes it?  From what I am reading, Organic N is suppose to be stable and available to plants.  It's not suppose to disappear except through plants or the physical removal of the organic matter from the field, --but information is all over the board on this subject and my understanding is minimal.  Please enlighten!

SOIL HEALTH - USDA SERIES

USDA, with their "UNLOCK THE SECRETS OF THE SOIL" series have some great stuff in easy to understand Utube presentations.  Most are 2-4 minutes.   Attached is a 20 minute compilation titled "The Hope in Healthy Soils".                    soil health compilation

2016 SPRING CROP UPDATE

      SUMMARY:  Nothing compares to the CrossSlot for direct seeding into adverse seedbed conditions.  Our 2016 crop consists of WW, WP, DNS, SB, SP, M.  All the crops emerged well with good populations, and growing.  Our crop year is starting out 1-4 weeks early, depending on what indicator you use.  The lilacs are 4 weeks early, cheatgrass is ≈1 week early,  The Iris are 3 weeks early.  Our moisture gain faltered in April with only 0.5"and nothing is showing in May to this point.  Warm weather is upon us, and stored moisture is depleting.  This may be another year that will tell us more about the moisture saving aspects of tall residue, ground surface cover, and using a ULD seeding system compared to the bare soil with conventional tillage.  I have been watching different operations in the area.  Conventional tillers have gone over the fields with 5 trips, and some with as many as 7 trips to get their crop in the ground.  We have sprayed and seeded.  Our crop stands are better than most, and comparable to the best.  With CT and the closer drill row spacing those fields (in their better ground areas) look fuller; however, studies have not shown yield increase with that system, --everything else being equal.  The closer row spacing normally will canopy quicker offering the potential of lower moisture loss from evaporation on bare soil.  With all this being said, there are times that I wonder if 8" row spacing would have been better for spring cropping, even with the CS.

WINTER WHEAT (WW):

       We are very pleased with the progress of the crop at this point in time.  We have two ages of cultivars in the field.  One emerged on time near the end of September and is tall and a good dark green color.  The other emerged in November. It has good growth and a dark green color but is 6-8" shorter (this includes the CC winter wheat which has the same height, but a little lighter in color).  Very surprising is that both cultivars are in the 8 leaf stage.  What did the older cultivar gain in the 6 weeks extra growth other than longer internodes?  We will check the head size and fertile meshes when the time comes.

         The cover crop area WW has good height and color for it's late start in the fall.  It will be interesting to see what the yield lag may be between the CC and CF winter wheat.  We have a long border between the two that will give us some indication as to yield difference on comparable soils.  The CC field generally has much shallower soils than the CF field.

         Another question without an answer:  --Our small wheat, which went into the winter in a similar condition to most of the other WW in the area came out of the winter in better condition.  Ours came out of the winter growing, while most of the crops around us did not (and in some cases, have not), --why?  With a relatively open winter and significant rainfall, it was expected that N would have converted and leached down into the 2-3-4 foot level of the profile.  Most of the little wheat in the area acted as if that were the case.  Ours did not, --why?   I can only assume that our years of no-till played a role; however, our soil tests don't show the qualities that would lead to that conclusion.  Recent discussion with Dave Huggin's from WSU, reinforces my belief that there is a lot about soil tests and their interpretation that we don't understand for soils in our environment.  The biological tests I have taken show our soils in poor condition including it's structure; however, the Slake test shows great aggregate stability from our years of no-tilling.  Experience has shown me that our infiltration is much better, than the soils around me that are conventionally tilled.  Other than the Feb. 2014 thaw, we have had no water leave our fields for years, while the conventional tilled fields regularly have water running down the slopes and into the ditches during storm or winter events.  There is something going on here that is not explained by our normally accepted testing procedures.

AUSTRIAN WINTER PEAS (WP):

[Update: May 13]  We are applying Bassagran on the WP field that will be harvested.  Jim Hill Mustard has bolted and blooming.  A few purple winter pea blossoms are showing on the south exposures.  Our earlier application of Select II for grass weeds did not work well on the borders.  Downey Brome will be with us in the next crop.  The Rattail Fescue under the CRP, eyebrows and some area on our borders was missed as well.  Next year we will post seed/pre emerge Sharpen and Tricor 4F for weed control.  I have spotted two areas damaged from a cold night at the end of April.  Neither weeds or WP's have regrown.  Because of the poor growth of  the mustards, I have some concern there may be chemistry reaction rather than frost.

      We seeded WP (winter peas) last November in what was termed dormant seeding.  You want them seeded deep.  Austrians are a dark speckled little thing and I found them difficult to locate in all the duff.  The ones I did find were much shallower than our intended 2-3" which was cause for worry.  Our understanding at the time was that the peas needed to break germ before freeze up, but not emerge before spring.  We seeded them at 100#/ac.  They came up thick this spring.  For insurance purposes, since they were seeded beyond the closing date last fall, we had to have the stand evaluated to qualify for insurance.  The count was 3 times more than needed and were calculated at 4200#/ac for yield (under perfect growing conditions).

       The Austrians on SW stubble look great with few weeds.  The Austrians planted into garb ground  are not salvageable.  Between volunteer garbs and a heavy population of several varieties of wild mustard, those acres will not go to harvest.  They were reevaluated by the insurance company so that we could destroy the stand prior to harvest.  Our understanding of how the insurance works is, --since we applied for insurance and the stand was accepted we will pay the premium on all the planted acres.  The yield was recalculated showing the garb ground had the potential of ≈2100#/ac.  At harvest this yield calculation will be added to the harvested amount for yield history.  We now are free to do whatever we wish for those garb/austrian acres but those acres will not be eligible for insurance in 2016.  The garbs are starting to bloom, and the austrians are in the thirteenth node, standing about 6-8 inches.  Both legumes are forming an abundance of root nodules.  What to do???  Our current thought is to manage the acres as a cover crop.  We have a fair diversity of plant material, --garbs, peas, and several varieties of mustards that are rooting deep in great abundance.  There is some dog fennel, a few fiddle neck tar weed, some lambs quarter, some prostrate knotweed, very few russian thistle, some china lettuce, and few if any grass plants.  We don't want the weeds to seed out, nor the peas to go beyond early podding for maximum N development.  Since this acreage is planned for a spring cereal in 2017, we are not concerned about the required destruction by June 1st for summer fallow yield protection for 2017 WW.  Current thought is to max N development from peas and garbs.  If weed development comes on faster than the legumes we'll mow the acreage and manage for the regrowth.  If the legumes reach the proper stage prior to the weeds, we'll apply chemical and hold as CF until spring of 2017.  These acres won't look pretty because we will leave the residue stand.  We're hoping to have a mat of pea vine but the austrians appear to be growing slowly.  We had a frosty night a few days ago and the top node of the peas turned yellow, slowing them up.  The wild mustards are having a banner year.  Since we have been killing them for 100 years and the population doesn't seem to decrease, I'm not worried about them developing some seed.  They are easy to kill in any grass type crop. 

       SURPRISES:  ---after years of clean CF through timely applications of Rt3 and Valor, and having clean appearing grain crops, mustards have populated most of the garb/austrian ground with high populations. Russian thistles and china lettuce, although present, have a very low population.  That's a testament for using Valor in the fall to combat those two aggressive weed species.   ---grassy weeds are nearly nonexistent, showing that grass control chemistry for our broadleaf crops are killers, not suppressors.  Our past rotations with only small grains and CF, Downy Brome was always present in yield depressing amounts.   ---the number of billy beans (garbs) that took root and grew this spring.  Weeds are problematic, but we have chemicals, swathers, and pickup heads for harvesting that type of contamination; however, billy beans are a "grade issue" that is not manageable.  Even if they didn't mature with the peas, it's feared many would end up in the grain bin.  I don't think they would have rooted if there was good surface cover.
       With the next WP crop we will want to consider putting down Tricore 4F following the seeding for broadleaf weed control and maybe the Sharpen as well.

DARK NORTHERN SPRING (DNS) & SPRING BARLEY (SB):       

      Our DNS and SB both have great stands.  They are not perfect.  There are breaks in the rows in places, but mostly the wheat and barley emerged rapidly without winding it's way to the surface.  The stands look pretty much like soldiers shoulder to shoulder on parade,  --straight cotyledons, even color, even height, even fill.  It's difficult to tell how even the stand is from a distance because of the color differences and reflection off the residue.  We seed between 1.5 and 2" deep.  Standing stubble gives us less trouble drilling than stubble laying down.  Stubble  firmly attached to the ground is the easiest regardless of the volume.  Loose or rotted stubble will, on occasion, catch on the spring plate of the blade and drag, causing a pile.  We have a few of these in some of the fields.  They are unsightly.  We'll eliminate most of them over time as we gain experience on setting the drill for the field condition.  We are trending to the long blades for both sides of the disc.  They allow us the most space between the ground and the spring plate when we go for depth.  Currently CS doesn't provide a long blade for the left side with a fertilizer tube.  We hope that becomes available soon.

MUSTARD (M):

      Mustard was seeded next and it has taken longer to see the stand establishment than I expected.  We seeded about 6#/a.  We couldn't find any of the seed except at the opener when stopped.  We trusted that the CS put the seed where we wanted it.  It did.   The bare ground (truck roads, ridges) showed early, while the heavy residue (90u WW stubble) took longer to show.  Stand is good, measuring 6 plants per foot of row on 10" row spacing.  It's not as even a stand as I would like (void, then clump of seedlings).  The plants are not standing like soldiers in line, shoulder to shoulder as with the wheat and barley.  Unless we put a planter together with it's singulation capability, this is probably what we have.

SPRING PEAS (SP):

     Spring Stand Up Peas were the last crop seeded.  Seeded 160#/ac.  Excellent stand in heavy residue.  We applied Sharpen and Tricor 4F, as a premerg application for weed control.

      

(??) MAKING A SILK PURSE FROM A SOWS EAR

Summary:  Cropping a broadleaf behind a broadleaf is problematic if grain is the expected end product.

Background:   Last fall we wanted to even out field acres.  To do this we had to put winter peas (WP) on Billy Bean (Garb) ground.  The remainder(majority) of the WP was put on DNS ground.  The stripper headed bean ground had very light residue, and the stripper headed DNS ground had reasonably heavy residue.
        The ground had little or no weed/volunteer growth when we applied 20oz/ac of Rt3, late October.  We dormant seeded the Austrian WP on the second week of November, placing them ≈2.5" deep.  Freeze up occurred a couple of weeks later.  The information from the breeder was to get the peas to break germ but not emerge until early spring.  Our timing was apparently good, because this spring we had three times the population to qualify for a successful stand, and no weedy cultivars were present.  When temperatures warmed, the weeds and volunteer came big time in the garb ground, but the DNS ground remainder relatively clean.  The only broadleaf chemistry we can apply to the WP is Basagran and that does not have a good reputation. There is good grassy weed chemistry for WP.  A couple of cold nights set the WP back allowing the weed species to become more competitive.
       The pic below shows the WP on the garb ground.  The WP are topped by mustards.  The RCIS evaluated the stand the other day and came up with a projected yield of 2100# if all the stars line up right.  All you can make out in this pic are black mustard and jim hill mustard.  Neither cultivar do we see anymore in our small grain crops, but they waited for a screwed up rotation like this to show their ugly head.  The real problem with this crop though is not the weeds, but the surprising number of garbs that germinated and rooted.  The fear of our supplier is that the garbs will foul the grades making them non-marketable other than feed.  If there had been a good mat of residue I don't think these garbs could have survived long enough to root down.

         The pic below shows our WP crop on DNS ground.  It has good residue cover that includes DNS stubble and the previous WW stubble.  The CrossSlot drill has had a low impact on the stubble, other than laying it over.  If the stars all lineup, this field still holds the potential of 4200#/ac.

SO, HOW DO WE MAKE SOMETHING POSITIVE FROM THIS!

         The WP on garb ground will not go to harvest, --so, what to do??  We could still destroy and reseed to a C4 plant like millet or milo.  We could CF the field, however, the next scheduled crop is in the spring of 2017.  We could manage the field as a cover crop (green fallow).

        We have decided to manage this field as a cover crop, but instead of destroying this mess and seeding cultivars normally associated with cover crops we are going to utilize what's already growing.  ( 6/26/19 update: --After re-reading this post I find that this is not what actually occurred.  Kye couldn't stand this mess so we roundup the field and seeded a 9 cultivar cover crop mix that included --2 canola, 2 mustard, 2 clover, 2 radish and one vetch.  This grew to maturity and was seeded to winter wheat.  The winter wheat emerged but was very small the following spring.  The notable part of this was that I found no noticeable runoff from that field, where our CF field did have runoff.  Our rotation for this field changed at this point.  I'm leaving the remainder of this post more as a "what if".  We may have been able to accomplish a similar result without the expense of seeding the cover crop mix.)  The next regular cash crop will be either spring wheat or spring barley.  None of the weed species currently growing, (primarily black mustard and jim hill mustard, along with a smattering of fiddle neck tarweed, prostrate pigweed, russian thistle, and china lettuce), offer any real challenge for the herbicides we use on spring cereals.  This field has a long history of high populations of grassy weeds (primarily downey brome), but fortunately, following the garb crop I have found NO grassy weeds other than a few plants of rattail fescue.  Chemistry for grassy weeds in a broadleaf crop are killers, -- not suppressors like those available for small grains.  This is a very good reason to incorporate a legume or brassica in the rotation, --removing grassy weed competition.

       Our Reasoning: (for keeping this mess).  WP, with our high population will grow a lot of biomass.  I expect the vines to reach 12 feet long and stand 3 feet or more in height.  Both the WP and garbs are nodulating well, so, we are growing N.  The mustards, which is the primary weed species, are growing long taproots (already slender tubers are 12+inches, and will continue to grow for some time.  They will add significant amount of biomass along with the WP.  We'll watch to see if one suppresses the growth of the other.

         Our goal for this field is: grow biomass, grow N, keep live roots for as long as possible.

---bio mass for surface protection and critter food (worm, and others).

---N for the following grain crop.  (hopefully we can find a way to successfully test for it)

---live roots for making critter food, and boring holes to allow moisture infiltration later.  

         How to manage from this point on (????).

---We'll plan to terminate at full bloom or early pod set to maximize the N.  When pods start setting, N is moved from the root nodules to the leaves and eventually in to the pea.  (I have to learn more).

??-- can we mow or crush, setting back the podding, allowing the WP to continue building N?

??-- will we need to seed into this mat to extend the cover crop through the winter?

Residue & Wind

           The fall of 2015 we had several wind events of short duration where winds gusted to 30, 40 and 50mph, depending on the event.  I never gave much thought to it at the time; however, this spring it was a shock to see a couple of bare areas on SE slopes.
           This field started out with good standing cover of stripper headed spring barley that was chem fallowed, and seeded to WW around September 20th of 2015.  We missed the moisture so much of the field did not emerge until late October or early November.  This is a scene similar to what I experienced 30 years ago, in this same field,  when I mistakenly thought that it was good to mow standing stubble early in the season for ground cover.  it didn't take a lot of wind to deposit residue drifts up to a foot deep on our NE facing slopes at the time.  Only once did I make that mistake.  After that, I mowed a short time prior to seeding, leaving standing stubble most of the fallow year.  We needed to shorten the stubble to minimize problems drilling.

        The pic below shows where I chopped a hole in the packed residue drift.  The drift was  4" deep and very dense packed.  It was easy to cut this hole with my hand tool.  Walking on this was like walking on a firm sponge.  Very few WW cultivars emerge through this dense, deep mat.  As may be expected the soil surface was very damp.  Soil was cool but not cold, --probably in the low 60's.

       The pic below shows a WW plant that made it through this dense residue pack.   Close up shows that the plant received light nearly to the ground level.  I don't have a clue as to why a few cultivars emerged where the vast majority did not.

  

Hopefully, we won't have a repeat of these wind events for years to come.  One event in late November dropped our cast iron flag pole my grandfather put up over 100 years ago.  Winds topped 50mph.  Very little damage was noted except for the flag pole.