What a disappointment to have this outfit on our property. The only thing good about this is that they came quickly and sucked up acres fast with three swathers and four balers. They wanted this long (stripper headed) straw. When the main field was baled, they estimated 3000#/a. We are getting $10/t, but that's about a third to a half of the value of the nutrients that we are losing through this removal process, plus the loss of carbon from the removed residue. We will have to put up with stacks of bales for 90 days while they age and ready for the mushroom industry. A constant reminder of failure.
This was an extra ordinary year in many aspects. Generally, this year, the spring crops were good to excellent for potential. The late spring start ended up with a late harvest for many operators. Even though most everyone has crop insurance, this is not going to be a good year for those that still have crop to harvest (now it is moving into the latter half of October). There are thousands of acres of garbs, spring wheat, and even some winter wheat still in the field. In my 65 years of being in the field I don't remember ever seeing harvest in this area this late. Our spring wheat crop averaged ~65b/a, with a range of 40-130b/a across the fields. Even the heavy high yielding areas, as pictured here, only produced ~ 4k#/a residue, which is nothing compared to the 20k#+/a that we had successfully drilled with the CrossSlot, the spring of 2014. We never expected to have any trouble drilling into this residue, but after several fitful days of adjustment, and even putting all new coulters on the drill, we admitted defeat and looked at alternatives, --either bale or fire. We chose bale, as the lessor of two evils. Fire, although the ground and surface residue was damp, may have caused more damage by burning into the soil where partially decayed residue resided. Cultivation was never considered due to it's lasting destructive effect on soil health. We are too far along the path to a healthy soil to revert back to that destructive practice.
WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS TROUBLE? We were convinced the CrossSlot was a foolproof drill capable of drilling any field condition where crops are grown without any field preparation? One caveat we knew was that the residue needed to be dry so the notched coulter could cut at least most of the residue it encountered. This residue appeared dry, but it was tough. My serrated clipper struggled cutting the residue at ground level, and you could ring a shock of stubble in your hands and not break it apart. Our rational then became, --we had never drilled into spring or winter wheat stubble that had not first gone through a winter, hence, some decomposition had taken place prior to any attempt to seed into the residue.
THEN CAME ANOTHER SURPRISE! The pic above is part of a 3ac, three cornered patch that was not baled. This was one of our higher yielding areas. The day after the remainder of the field was swathed and baled, Kye was able to drill this patch without any issues,--WHY??? The simple answer is: --The residue became cut-able! Time had given us enough dry days to lower humidity to the point the residue could be broke apart. Well, we lost this years residue on these fields but it is worth the knowledge gained, being,--one, we don't necessarily have to wait for wheat stubble to deteriorate by going through a winter, and, two, it was once again shown that the CrossSlot needs dry residue to be successful.
What a whiplash this past week has been, --going from no expectation of trouble, to a revelation that we can't seed this field, and back to OK, it's seeding just fine.
I have been skeptical about man being able to influence the climate, but I have become a believer. Increasing atmospheric CO2 and NO3 levels are just a part of what I see as being influenced by man. Desertification appears to me to be a bigger problem, and we, in the worldwide agricultural community, are a major part of the problem, -- along with the spatial needs generated by 7.9 billion people. (In my lifetime world population has more than tripled from 2.2b)
The earth's climate is dynamic, changing continually. Natural cycles resulting from the earth's tilt, relationship to other planets, their orbits, and earth's position to the all important sun and our moon, have powerful influence on the earth's climate. Thirty years of lecturing by Dr. Art Douglas has left no doubt in my mind on the importance of these cycles.
Our use of fossil fuels probably is contributing to CO2 buildup that so many are claiming to be the major cause of climate change. It's the goto energy source for 7.9b people with an infrastructure that gradually developed over more than a 100 years, and we probably ought to change, --but to what? I hope I'm wrong but it seems that we have taken a hiatus on working out the problems with fusion reaction, and fission waste disposal is a nasty issue. I view wind power as nothing more than a scam, a money pit that has fleeced the public. It is horribly inefficient, extremely high maintenance, and a low life expectancy (It was recently reported that 20yrs is current expectation, down from the original 50yrs), and the eventual removal of these dinosaurs will be equally expensive as when they were installed. Solar Energy holds a lot of potential. It is something that can be built into building construction, and not rely total on huge solar farms. There is also geothermal, wave action, hydrogen fuel cell technology that can be improved and brought into the mix, and, who knows what new technologies the future will hold.
Recently, all the information I access that relates to soil health makes reference to "taking cues from nature in developing farming practices", or "work with nature, not against it". In my striving to learn about soil health I ran across a presentation that was intriguing. It gave a pretty impressive picture and narrative on global desertification and it's implication. DESERTIFICATION by Allen Savory. The pic in this post is from that presentation. Notice the light colored areas contrasted with the green areas. The light colored areas are associated with "desertification". The more I watch this video the more connected I become with the message. The reasoning behind our operations move to a ULD farming system is incorporated in Allen Savory's message, but he goes farther. Being a grain producer, I'm resisting the introduction of livestock into our operation; however, I understand the reasoning, their potential, and it's possible they will show up on our operation sometime in the future.
My statement above, about agriculture worldwide being part of the problem stems from the fact that in any given year we leave a lot of ground in a nonproductive state that is radiating energy instead of capturing energy and converting it through photosynthesis to a crop. Our practice of fallowing is an example of a poor land management practice. The global increase of wild fires, along with the ever increasing number of people and their related spacial needs, are factors that influence desertification. These man caused influences are gradually changing air currents related to high and low air cells across the globe, concentrating energy. This concentrated energy is effecting the strength and location of storms. Each of us, with our relatively small farming operation think that we are insignificant, so, what we do will not have any effect on the climate. I'm beginning to realize that the mismanagement of our tiny amount of global resource combined with millions of other independent operations doing the same thing adds up to be a huge potential impact. We need to rethink our attitude on how we manage our land so as to make a positive contribution to sequestering carbon, and reducing practices that promote desertification!!
This is a copy and paste posting from "Soil Matter, Get The Scoop" blog. It's informative and pretty complete on the subject of soil aggregates, their value to us in the farming game, and suggested management for developing and maintaining these aggregates. This post starts out with the question of what are soil aggregates, and the reply is by Nall I. Moonilall of Ohio State.
The ground beneath your feet might seem like a uniform material, but it’s really a mixture of soil particles, organic matter, and other mineral/organic components. For a soil to be healthy, it must have good structure. Soil is made up of a combination of primary particles - sand, silt and clay. These particles can be bound together into what soil scientists call “aggregates.”
Soil aggregates retained on a 4.75 mm sieve after wet sieving experiment. Credit: Nall Moonilall
These aggregates are clumps of soil that range from the micro level (less than 0.25mm in diameter) to the macro level (greater than 0.25mm in diameter). Furthermore, they can resemble various shapes: granular, blocky, etc. These varied shapes allow for healthy soil to have pores spaces for air and water, needed for healthy plant growth.
Aggregate formation is a complex process. Soil aggregates are formed through physical, chemical and biological activity below ground. They are even influenced by human factors, like tilling, walking on the surface, or even how you fertilize your garden. Formation of aggregates begins with finer soil primary particles binding together. You may know that clay particles have a negative charge. And, the fertilizers you use include salts that have positively charged cations (things like potassium nitrate, etc.) The positively charged cations allow the negatively charged clay particles to bind together creating “floccules.” The type and amount of clay minerals in the soil often plays an influential role in aggregation formation.
Soil crust formation on a soil exposed to simulated rainfall. You can see the crust formation on the surface of the soil as well as how deep the crust extends. (This really is soil - not cement!) Credit: Nall Moonilall
The second part of aggregate formation deals with cementation. Here, the clay floccules and other soil particles are bonded together by some type of cementing agent. (Here we mean "binding" - not cement like in concrete!) Examples of cementing agents include organic matter, and liming materials like calcium carbonate. Even types of oxides, like iron and aluminum can help cement particles together.
In the case of organic matter, it is broken down by the soil microorganisms and soil fauna (earthworms, etc.) When breakdown occurs, these organisms secrete organic compounds that are the “glue” that makes cementation occur. Plant roots also play a role in aggregate formation by secreting organic compounds called root exudates. These help bind soil together near the root zone. Fungal hyphae also contribute to aggregate formation by entangling and weaving around soil particles.
As you can see, aggregate formation is the result of many interactions and feedback loops occurring below ground.
Soil aggregates play a major role in soil structure formation and soil health. In agriculture, the stability of aggregates is critical to how well an agroecosystem will function. The pore spaces in soil influence air and water storage, and gaseous exchange. They create habitat for soil microorganisms, and allow for plant root development and penetration. They also assist in nutrient cycling and transport.
Soils that have high aggregate stability are less susceptible to erosion. They hold their shape when exposed to disruptive forces, like water, and do not easily break apart.
Keep soil covered! Crop residues on the soil surface help to protect soil from erosive forces. Credit: Nall Moonilall
Poorly aggregated soils disintegrate easily when exposed to erosive forces. They tend to breakdown faster, leading to soil degradation. Poor stability can lead to pore spaces being filled in and can ultimately result in the formation of soil crusts. This can lead to reduced infiltration and gaseous exchange. Poorly aggregated soils can reduce crop productivity.
Soil management often influences aggregate size, shape, and stability. Favorable practices that promote and maintain greater stability include:
Minimizing soil disturbance, like minimal tillage. This reduces aggregate destruction because they are not physically or mechanically broken apart;
Adding organic matter enhances aggregate strength and stability;
Keeping soil covered is essential to keeping soil intact. Vegetative cover on the soil reduces the impact of erosive forces;
Promoting a diverse cropping system. Systems that promote perennial plants or meadows have expansive rooting systems and require no tillage. Promoting this kind of diversity within a system will ensure that soil’s function is not reduced;
Managing for grazing. Grasses have strong root systems, but if animals graze too long, that can be disruptive to the forage system. There are many ways to graze animals and preserve or enhance soil stability; and,
Managing for pest control. The choice of plants and how they are managed (e.g., annual vs. perennial, cover crops, rotation) are highly influential.
To recap – soil aggregates are the building blocks that make up soil and their stability is extremely important in the long-term. Soils that are well aggregated exhibit greater soil health, ensure greater agronomic productivity, are less susceptible to soil erosion, and can play a role in carbon sequestration.
Answered by Nall I. Moonilall, Ohio State University
It seems that agriculture is besieged from all sides. Soils are being degraded from erosion and conventional farming practices. Pest control products, --herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and the additives that enhance their activity are coming under ever increasing public scrutiny that will eventually lead to more restrictions. Fertilizer products and pest control products along with soil are entering the "public waters" through runoff which is triggering demand for more action to clean up these waters. Everything we input to grow our crops is under regulatory pressure that likely will increase
There is a lot going on behind the scenes relating to these issues. As an example, I am part of a Washington State Department of Ecology advisory committee being used mostly as a sounding board for staff's evaluation of NRCS best management practices. The result of this is expected to be a manual for farmers to voluntarily use to reduce pollution of state waters. I see nothing good coming out of this for farmers or the environment unless it results in a massive education push to educate farmers on the value of improving soil health. Erosion from farm land is much too complicated to be resolved with a cookie cutter manual. Over the years I have discovered that farmers generally follow tradition more than science and change is verrrrrry sloooooow. Many farm operations are the same as in the day of their grandfathers except the equipment is newer, larger and faster.
So, why should farmers no-till? The simple answer is, --WE HAVE TO! Survival in the coming political climate will depend on it. No-till is not the answer in itself, but it is the base on which to build. Minimizing soil disturbance allows for management decisions that will build soil structure, build soil surface armor, build soil organic matter, build soil biology, and minimize soil displacement. Continued use of cultivation in our Palouse environment can not accomplish these needed changes. These are all critical to improving soil health and reducing environmental degradation derived from farm operations. No-till also holds potential for sinking carbon which is beneficial to the soil and atmosphere. Our soils are carbon deficient, and carbon is a driving force in the plant kingdom. No-tilling is a WIN-WIN proposition. The trick is learning to manage the no-till system to reap the benefits and avoid the pitfalls.
Minimizing soil disturbance through no-till allows management decisions that will reduce erosion too zero or near zero. As we gain a better understanding of soil biology we will control weed species and insect predation with less chemistry. As our understanding increases about how fungal networks transports information, nutrients, and water throughout the plant community, and how soil microbes extract nutrients and make them available to plants from organic matter, dirt and rocks, we will be able to manage our crops using ever lessening synthetic inputs. The more minimal the soil disturbance the better the environment for these natural processes to develop.
Many issues surrounding SOIL HEALTH are not well understood, but there is intense research going on by private and public institutions, and farmer experimentation since around 2000. I read/listen/look at a lot of material and find myself discounting information that is more than 3-5 years old. One researcher told me that if your education in soil biology was prior to 1985 it was mostly wrong. I'm long in the tooth, but find it exciting to be part of the process. The way things are progressing, I think I will be able to experience some of the fruits associated with improved soil health before I fade away. In fact, I'm already seeing some of this happening through farm test plots but it's going to be a while before the processes are understood well enough to apply field wide. Five years ago, if someone would have asked me when we would start seeing some positive results from improved soil health I would have said, maybe my children or grandchildren.
This post is prompted from watching a disaster in transitioning a CRP field back to cropping. If you want to retain the soil benefits gained during the years in CRP, the takeout process is not simple. Timing for each operation, weather, CRP cultivars in the field, crop choice, and long term goal for the field are among the factors that need consideration. Cultivating the hell out of it and planting wheat as quickly as possible puts the field back nearly to conditions prior to CRP. I'm sure the initial interest of this farmer was to save the benefits that accumulated over the years of CRP by doing a no-till conversion. This property needed the CRP benefit. It contains 6 soil types, and has a lot of shallow depth soil and suffered from OM loss through many years of cultivation and associated erosion. The mistake in my opinion was wanting to seed a cash crop too quickly without sanitizing the field. It is a very common and strong emotional pull, --to get the field producing. The takeout process started with poor fall regrowth of CRP cultivars making it impossible to get good chemical uptake. The following spring the field was chemicaled and seeded to spring barley. Seeding a grass cash crop as the first crop into an unsanitized 10 year old grass field is not a good no-till practice. The second year crop was garbanzo beans. That was OK, it gave crop diversity, except CRP cultivars were still numerous, garbs are a high moisture user, and the moisture recharge was poor. The third crop is winter wheat that was seeded very late following extensive (but not whole field) discing to remove the worst of the CRP cultivars, in a moisture depleted field. The field is still contaminated in many areas with unwanted weedy cultivars growing with the sparse stand of winter wheat. The soil structure and other soil related benefits that were built up over the years in CRP has been severely damaged. People watching this field will come to one of two conclusions depending on their preconceived attitude, (1) that no-till does not work, or (2) this field was not properly prepared for no-till.
Successful long term no-tilling requires (1) patience, (2) field sanitation, (3) crop selection to fit the conditions and limitations you have at the moment, (4) crop diversity, (5) good timing for all field operations.
Since 2002 we have taken out 4 fields of CRP. Of the four, we got the last one right. That field was given the time for proper sanitation. Other than roughness, mainly do to rodent mounds built over the years, the field is in excellent shape, with normal CRP and weedy species gone. The 2" of worm castings that make up the surface layer of the soil, soil structure and most of the other benefits developed over the years of CRP are intact. The first crop, winter wheat, was planted following an extended period of chemical fallow (sanitation period). The field was seeded with the CrossSlot drill to winter wheat looked beautiful, it was clean, and had an excellent yield. We had a companion field converted at the same time, where we spring seeded a five cultivar cover crop instead of continuing with chemical fallow. The sanitation rule for successful no-tilling was not followed and we have weed and rodent issues on that field. The field yielded approximately 10bu/ac less, which in this case was still excellent at nearly 100 bu/ac. This takeout method had two problems. (1) --was a great environment for rodents with good food source and great housing and protection from predators. They harmed numerous areas during the winter that never recovered completely leaving the field looking ragged. (2) --a number of weedy cultivars grew with the crop and increased the seed bank. Other than the abundance of rattail fescue, I'm not overly concerned about the weedy cultivars. The worm castings and soil structure are still intact from the years in CRP, and we were able to keep living roots in the ground to feed the micro biology for most of the non crop time. The question is, --over time will the benefits from this cover crop outweigh the problems that remain. [update: 9/23/19] We have found out the hard way that weeds, where it is necessary to use harsh chemicals like Tordon (Picloram), or Stinger (clopyralid), need to be removed during the time the field is in CRP. Harsh chemicals will likely limit the cultivars available for cash cropping because of plant back issues. One of these weeds is Rush Skeleton Weed. This weed has infested thousands of acres of pasture land and CRP fields. It becomes deep rooted. There are leaves only on the ground hugging rosette. While you can reduce seed production by burning off the branching tops, you will not control it by a burn down method. Cultivation breaks up the root system and increases the density and area of infestation. The key to control is timing of application so the plant will take some of the chemistry into the root, --notably in late fall after a frost. A number of chemistries will control new plantsbefore they establish a root system. Good control of established plants will require repeated chemical applications.
This post is a bit off of my normal beat, but weather and how we understand it has a direct bearing on how we farm, now and in the future. The pic shows a comparison with vegetation and land being a net carbon sink. Agriculture has the capability to dramatically increasing carbon in the soil. I ran into these videos featuring: David Icke on climate change - hoax (17:38), David Icke is, along with other professions, a professional conspiracy theorist. He comments on many issues around this juggernaut, "climate change", where I have reservations. This is a very controversial subject with the two sides being well entrenched. We are hammered, daily about our dependency on fossil fuels and being the cause of global climate change. This video led me to: Climate Change Fact/Fiction? (47:32), by Atmospheric Physicist, Richard Lindzen at MIT. Richard Lindzen has been researching and writing opinions on climate change since 1961. Lindzen is a very low key presenter. In this forum he talks about temperatures, sea levels, CO2 emissions, the climate data, activists, political response. He doesn't see anything to be alarmed about.
"Climategate"(4:59), featuring Richard A Muller, Professor of Physics at University of California at Berkeley. This short presentation talks about climate data that a team of researchers falsified to stay in line with expectations. Another presentation I found interesting is one by Steven F. Hayward given in 2014.
A Funny Thing.....Climate Change (1:01:56) Hayward is a scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley. He gives some background on how this phenomena developed into the political animal of today. One other presentation that I will list here is:
How To Green the Worlds Deserts (22:19), by a researcher of Biological Science, Allan Savory. This presentation explains that increasing desertification is playing a big part in warming the earth and causing Climate Change. Savory's presentation lines up well with information that I have been gathering for years, and is part of my interest in replacing chemical fallow or cultivated fallow with green fallow (cover crop).
Currently, my position is:
---I believe in "climate change". Our world is dynamic. Climate is continuously transitioning.
---I do believe that humans have some influence on climate. I believe that normal farming practices of yesterday and today are a negative influence. Tillage, with every pass, releases CO2 and moisture to the atmosphere. This has been known for 40+ years, but early on it wasn't associated with climate change. Human activity is denuding the earth of plant material ranging from the destruction of tropical forests to us leaving land fallow. When vegetation is removed, the buffer is removed, so the earth warms. Add to this, population growth and associated expansion of urban areas and the infrastructure supporting that expansion. Allan Savory has a compelling story of concern, action and results from different land management practices.
---I do believe there are groups/organizations that influence societies behavior. I remember a quote by Senator Lyndon Johnson (before he became President Johnson), --"in politics there are no accidents. If something happens it is because someone wanted it to happen." Johnson was a very powerful, and manipulative Senator at the time. I don't remember the specific event that prompted this statement but it was my introduction to "power politics", and the ability to manage/manipulate public attitude. So, I do see a purposeful, one sided agenda here. The previous mentioned videos make mention of several underplayed factors. Fossil fuels are only a part of the perceived problem and probably a minor part. My post of March 17, 20017 titled CLIMATE CHANGE goes into much more detail on cycles and phenomena effecting the earth's climate where we have no control. Climate activists discount these cycles and events as insignificant. I think they don't fit the agenda.
Nothing makes me think more about the value of our stripper header than watching snow blow across the landscape. When you grow crops in arid climates without irrigation and most of your moisture comes in the winter months, snow is something of great value. February 9 of 2019, was a brutal 24 hrs of 30mph wind gusting to 52mph with temperatures 14º to 17ºF, and snowing. Accuracy is questionable because of the conditions, but I melted 0.52" of water out of that event. Since then I have gathered a total of 2.72" of water in snow storage. Except where we have tall residue left after harvest, most of the fields have only a fraction of this as potentially usable moisture. Much of this potential is in drifts of various sizes and not be a positive influence on the 2019 fall or spring seeded crops. Where we have stubble standing behind the stripper header, both wheat and canola, we have kept the snow in place and also caught extra snow migrating off other fields. Now, that the snow is gone, with surprisingly little damage to cultivated fields (with exceptions), we have witnessed, in my mind, a miracle two years in a row. Our winter crop isn't going too benefit from all the snow we received in February and March, but our spring crop will potentially benefit from an additional 1"-2" of moisture held in the tall canola and winter wheat stubble left behind the stripper header. [CROPS HARVESTED - History] We have used the Shelbourne stripper header for seven harvest seasons now, --almost exclusively (we still have the original rigid 24ft). Previous postings give more detail on various crops, so this is a brief summary. We have harvested wheat, barley, mustard, spring canola, billy beans, and dry green peas. We had 10% seed coat damage on the peas, but it's possible that we could make adjustments to bring that down to the norm. In our hills, harvesting a short crop like lentils, with a 32' ridged header will create excess loss from any header. Many of the low pods on Billy Beans were lost with the rigid 32' header. We run a high risk of rotor finger damage on the hills with the wide header hugging the ground. Auto height and lateral tilt control would help harvesting low growing crops and reduce expensive repairs. On level ground these harvesting aids may not have value. [VALUE OF TALL RESIDUE] You can find more detail on each of these points in past posts; however, here is a summary of what we are finding with the stripper header along with some representative pic's.
a--- increases snow catch: Tall residue allows a more even distribution of moisture across the field. Either flat or hilly ground greatly benefits from that distribution.
<---showing left to right, is snow displaced from a short cut (6") winter wheat field across to a "stripped" (30") winter wheat field. Several snow events, some with wind, occurred before this pic. My observations over the years have shown that it takes at least 4" of standing residue to reduce air velocity to the point of depositing material.
b---controls snow melt: Notice the holes and cones surrounding the stems. Exposed residue gathers radiant energy and transmits that energy down the stem to the ground . I've noticed that the snow pack in standing stubble shrinks quicker than areas without exposed residue.
c---moderates soil temperature: This pic shows an eleven month test using HOBO temperature sensors. There are five comparisons,-- bare ground, --an isolated area (sealed under the white 4'x4' board), --a heavy residue mat, --a standing stubble with 100% ground cover, --and standing stubble with light ground cover. The study was fraught with bird issues, taking flags and sensors, resulting in some inconsistencies in the data. This is important enough that I should redo the study. An earlier post gives more detail, --as a summary here: The more surface armor the better. The combination of residue (tall/flat), moderated the soil temperature. The heavy surface residue lowered seed zone temperature >20ºF in the summer, and raised the temperature in the winter >3ºF.
d---slows air velocity: Tall residue works all year long to lower the air velocity across the soil surface. The taller and thicker the residue the calmer the surface. If there is 100% surface cover, along with the tall stubble, --all the better. At the soil surface there exists a layer of air that has 100% humidity termed the "boundary layer". That boundary layer will be replaced until the soil profile is too dry to support it. The calm air combined with the lower soil surface temperature, reduces the frequency the "boundary layer" has to be replaced, thus, slowing moisture loss from the soil profile.
e---tall stubble results in less tire damage/wear from stalks. Stalks contact the tire higher on the tread, reducing the angle of contact resulting in less stabbing of the tire. Canola stalks tend to rebound behind the tire better than grain stubble.
f--reduces compaction: Residue distributes machinery weight across more ground surface compared to bare ground. The longer the stems the better.
g--reduces weed competition: I normally associate reduced weed competition with a mat of residue on the ground. Research is showing that intercepting sunlight with standing stubble impacts cultivar growth. We are really harvesting sunlight. Drilling into tall stubble opens the canopy allowing the seeded crop to access more sunlight than a broadcasted crop. There is a balance here between potential moisture saving while the crop is growing, and potential reduced use of the suns energy. Currently, I'm of the opinion that it's best to have residue standing in front of the drill and flat behind the drill.
Recently I have become aware of Dr. Christine Jones, a soil scientist from Australia. Her schtick is (CMN) "common mycorrhizal network" and (SC) "soil carbon". She has a website: amazingcarbon.com. She is a popular conference speaker and has a compelling message of hope that our depleted soils can be restored in a short period of time. She has youtube presentations going back more than 10 years; however, her more recent work (<2yrs) is probably more useful because of the rapid increase of the knowledge base of the soil biome the last couple of years.
Dr. Jones' presentations and articles put a lot of pieces together that I have been having difficulty linking. Although my knowledge base is wanting, I now have a better understanding about how to improve soil health.
<---Pic of a wheat field in Australia. This field was originally grass, divided by a fence, and has never been tilled. For the past 30 years the field was no-tilled with a rotation of fallow/wheat. The fence was recently removed along with it's diverse cover of mostly weedy species cultivars. The old fence line shows no drought symptoms where the remainder of the wheat field is dead from moisture stress. This indicates that no-till, and good soil structure by themselves do not provide sufficient moisture for a monoculture crop in times of drought. An intact mycorrhizal network in the old fence line provided sufficient moisture and nutrients for that strip of wheat to successfully mature with grain.
A FEW POINTS / STATEMENTS OF PARTICULAR INTEREST: (from her presentation)
----life on earth is carbon based. (a reminder statement)
----as farmers, we first and foremost harvest sunlight. (a true statement but who thinks that way)
----all life centers around photosynthate, a simple sugar manufactured in the chloroplasts of green leaves. (I think there are a few exceptions to this statement, --but I accept as generally true.)
----building soil carbon depends on quantity and efficiency of harvested sunlight.
----diversity of cultivars improve efficiency of harvested sunlight. (just starting to be understood)
----many of the processes that take place in the soil are either not known, or not well understood.
----all fungicides, herbicides, synthetic fertilizers - particularly N, and synthetic seed treats, lower the efficiency of harvested sunlight and result in being detrimental to soil biota, making it more difficult to restore our depleted soil carbon.
----soils can be either a source or sink for CO2.
----all cultivation, and bare soils are sources for CO2 in the atmosphere. Farming practices, world wide, contribute more CO2 to the atmosphere than all the fossil fuel burned. (an astounding statement)
----in the last 150yrs, the worlds prime ag lands have lost between 30% - 75% of their carbon to the atmosphere.
----mineral depletion in food between 1940-1991 is significant: Today, we need twice the meat, three times the fruit, and 4-5 times the vegetables to equal the nutrition of 1940. (This is astounding to me, and until recently, -- simply unbelievable. It takes time, and a lot of reading to get ones mind to accept new ideas.)
----carbon conversion efficiency (CCE) is much higher in root derived, than in top growth derived biomass.
----mycorrhizal networks transport, water, nutrients, and carbon.
----mycorrhizal networks increase resistance to diseases and insects increasing plant vigor.
----mycorrhizal networks improve soil biological health.
----the magic number for a cover crop seems to be eight or more cultivars for vary rapid development of soil carbon.
<--In New Zealand a field consisting of volcanic ash that has been no-tilled 30yrs to a rye/clover mix for grazing cattle. The pic shows ~5" of dark soil formed over ash bed in that time frame. The dark color is indicative of carbon.
<--5 acres of that field, shown above, was seeded with a mix of ~12 cultivars. FIVE MONTHS later, this spade depth of dark soil showed the result. There is > 8"of dark carbon rich soil that developed over that entire 5ac plot. (The finger points to the light colored ash ground below the dark carbon rich soil.) I wouldn't expect this dramatic result in our climate, but I think an important part of the puzzle is expressed in these pic's.
JONES' --- FIVE PRINCIPLES FOR SOIL RESTORATION --- Light Farming ---
1----Green is good! (Year long green is better )
2----Microbes matter! (Plant/Microbe bridge is being increasingly recognized)
3----Plant Diversity is not Dispensable! (Every plant have different Exudates)
4----Limit Chemical Use! (All synthetic chemistry harms the soil Biome)
5----Animal Integration! (Not imperative but highly beneficial)
This is an article that I copied and pasted to this post from an online source of the Successful Farming magazine. The link is as follows: Is Tillage Stealing Soil. This is damning research done and reported on fields that aren't nearly as vulnerable as the Palouse Hills. I don't think that farmers really appreciate the damage they do with tillage. It's just something we do, it has been done for generations, and many are not interested in changing. I'm convinced we can stop eroding our fields and can actually rebuild the productivity of our soils. We just have to break with tradition and learn to farm using new technology and ideas.
_____________________________________________
IS TILLAGE STEALING YOUR SOIL?
TILLAGE IS A STEALTHY ERODER THAT ROBS YOUR PRECIOUS TOPSOIL. HERE’S HOW TO FIX IT.
In 2014, Jodi DeJong- Hughes prepared a field day exhibit with other University of Minnesota (U of M) researchers.
“We created a soil with alternating layers of sand and clay through which we ran a disk ripper,” recalls the U of M Extension soil scientist.
As the disk ripper steamed through the soil, something caught their eye, akin to a shiny penny at the bottom of a swimming pool.
“We could see the soil moving 8 to 10 feet in front of the disk ripper,” she says. “I knew the disk ripper moved soil, but I didn’t think it moved it that far.”
On the surface, that short distance seems insignificant. Yet, soil movement keyed by hundreds of tillage trips year after year adds up. Erosion by tillage takes on a disturbing tone in areas with glaciated hilly landscapes.
“Over time, severe soil losses result from soil moving off hilltops to lower ground through tillage,” says David Lobb, a University of Manitoba soil scientist.
Soil erosion often conjures up visions of blinding dust storms or soil mired in tar-like gullies. Yet, soil loss keyed by tillage can dwarf those of wind and water erosion. A 1994 erosion analysis by Lobb and other researchers in southwestern Ontario found tillage erosion accounted for at least 70% of total soil loss.
‘‘More soil is moved by tillage erosion than by wind and water erosion combined,’’ says Jodi DeJong-Hughes.
STEALTHY ERODER
Tillage erosion surfaced long before the moldboard plow was just a gleam in the eye of John Deere. When man first tilled with a hoe, soil moved.
“The soil was always pulled downslope, never upslope,” says Lobb.
Over time, tillage – whether by hoe or machine – strips topsoil away, particularly on sloping land. Ever notice those yellow to white hues on hilltops before crops mask them? This indicates tillage that has stripped an elevated area right down to the subsoil.
Tillage erosion can even impact the pancake-flat ground of the Red River Valley of North Dakota and Minnesota.
“Even on so-called flat land, tillage will fill surface drains in the field with soil,” says Lobb. “Google Earth or aerial images can show diagonal ridges in those fields where soil has been moved by tillage.”
Soil losses incurred by tillage erosion can be staggering. DeJong-Hughes cites a 2002-2006 USDA-ARS study at Morris, Minnesota, where a moldboard plow tilled highly erodible land (HEL) slopes.
In 2003, the tillage erosion loss of 27 tons per acre per year was nearly 5½ times as much as the natural 5 tons per acre loss per year. Tillage erosion can then trigger wind and water erosion.
“Once tillage occurs, wind and rain can move the soil as it becomes detached,” says Dave White, who served as NRCS chief from 2009 to 2013. This negatively affects both flat and hilly land.
That’s what happened in the USDA-ARS study.
“When water in the gully area (of the field) moved in, erosion increased another 9 tons per acre,” says DeJong-Hughes. “So, 36 tons per acre of soil per year were moved. In these areas, we were getting 45-bushel-per-acre wheat. The farmer was basically farming the subsoil. The phosphorus, potassium, and organic matter in those eroded areas also decreased.”
One perk surfaced. “On low-lying areas, 90 bushels per acre wheat was harvested,” she says.
Increased yields on lower areas don’t always result, though. On a typical slope, tillage erosion can deposit topsoil up to a meter deep, Lobb says.
“The crop often can’t benefit from that,” he says. It just can’t use that much topsoil.”
NO QUICK FIX
Granted, moldboard plowing HEL soils these days is akin to robbing a bank. Conservation tillage is now seen as the panacea to all that ails soil. Some conservation tillage tools, though, worsen erosion. Chisel plowing at high speeds can move more soil than moldboard plowing, says Lobb.
“It’s like taking a road grader over the field,” he says.
No-till works better. Just don’t expect it to work miracles on high eroded areas.
“Just stopping tillage will not change the situation,” says Lobb. “It just stops it from getting worse.”
Despite its name, no-till uses some tillage to clear a seed path.
High-disturbance openers, such as hoes and sweeps and injection units, key tillage that leaves at least 50% of the soil surface exposed to subsequent wind and water erosion, says Lobb.
“With high-disturbance seeding, we still scrape off topsoil,” says Lobb. He notes some early Canadian no-tillers were surprised that higher yields didn’t result on these areas.
“Improving yields on eroded hilltops means rebuilding the soil,” says Lobb. “There was no biological capacity in those areas to build up the soil with more organic matter. The topsoil was scraped off.”
WHAT TO DO?
Farmers still have to farm using some form of tillage, whether it’s conventional tillage or the slight tillage incurred under no-till.
Still, chin up. The following steps can minimize tillage erosion. In the case of tools like cover crops, farmers may even begin to rebuild tillage-eroded areas.
Study yield monitors and maps. Yield monitors and maps can pinpoint where tillage erosion occurs. “If you see the same (lower) yield pattern year after year on those areas, they can help you determine if tillage erosion is the problem,” says Lobb.
Slow down. Quicksilver planting and tillage rapidly speeds fieldwork, but they trigger tillage erosion. ‘‘Going up and down hilltops at particularly high speeds, such as 10 to 15 mph, will devastate landscapes,’’ says Lobb.
Steady your speed. “When you see great variation of field speeds, massive soil losses can result,” says Lobb. That’s easier said than done on rolling ground. Tilling or planting uphill slows implement speed. Meanwhile, tilling or planting downhill boosts it. “You’re always going to move more soil going downhill,” Lobb says. Compounding this is the fact that power ratings for tillage implements are often evaluated on flat ground, Lobb says. In the real world of rolling ground, ratings run askew, he says. Technology helps. GPS tools can help pinpoint varying speeds. “You can see if you are creating problems when moving up and down field dips,” Lobb says. Farmers can use this real-time data to better maintain a steady speed, he adds.
Vary tillage depth. That’s the premise behind John Deere’s TruSet Tillage technology. TruSet draws data from field and yield maps to create a tillage prescription that automatically adjusts tillage depth. TruSet can automatically adjust for less intense tillage on slopes and deeper tillage on heavier soils and high-residue areas, says Jarred Karnei, John Deere product marketing manager.
TruSet fits eight of Deere’s units that till soil via ripping, field cultivating, mulch finishing, disking, vertical tilling, and nutrient applying.
Move residue, not soil. Although no-till can’t restore or fix topsoil-devoid areas, it can preserve existing topsoil. No-till using double-disk openers combined with trash whippers works best, says Lobb. Pay special attention to row cleaner settings, says Steve Berger, a Wellman, Iowa, farmer. “When running row cleaners, move the residue and not the soil,” he says. “A lot of erosion occurs from not correctly setting row cleaners.”
Rebuild the soil. “After you stop stirring up the soil through tillage, grow cover crops to increase organic matter,” says Berger. He started dabbling with no-till and cover crops back in the 1970s. “With no-till and cover crops, I have a whole new environment underneath the soil,” he says. This approach has spurred hyphae (hair-like projections) of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in soil and roots to produce a sticky substance called glomalin. High glomalin concentrations help stabilize soil aggregates and boost soil structure. This helps soils better function to grow crops, says Berger.
DON’T GIVE UP
Mother Nature took centuries to build topsoil. It won’t come back overnight. Recognizing that tillage erosion occurs is the first step to reclaiming soil.
“If you do things right, the soil can bounce back,” says DeJong-Hughes.
RESTORING LANDSCAPES
Chinese farmers historically managed tillage erosion in moving soil from low areas to higher ones by bucket brigade.
North American farmers can use the same concept. “Just like in China, this entails moving soil up from the bottom to the top,” says David Lobb, a University of Manitoba soil scientist. “This just does it mechanically.”
Soil landscape restoration uses road construction scrapers to move topsoil at the bottom of slopes to top slopes and hilltops. In many cases, a $5,000 to $10,000 scraper pulled behind a field tractor does the job, says Lobb.
MOVING ON UP
Ivan and Brian DeJong, two brothers who own Youngfield Farms Ltd. near Nestleton in southern Ontario, were first tipped off to declining yields on sidehills by combine yield monitors. Readings indicated yields on sidehills eroded by tillage were 50% that of the average field yield.
So, using a scraper hooked to a tractor, they moved 2 to 3 inches of topsoil at the bottom of hills to the sidehills. Yield average on mitigated slopes zoomed from 60% of field average to 90% of field averages after four years on their wheat, corn, and soybeans.
“We are so convinced that it works, we plan to use this method whenever we pick up new farms,” says Ivan DeJong.
The DeJongs typically move soil following wheat harvest in early August. “That is a time when it is normally drier and we do less (compaction) damage,” he says.
Risk exists. “Heavy rains can wash the soil back down the hill,” says DeJong. The brothers reduce this risk by nurturing a cover crop of volunteer wheat, tillage radishes, and Austrian winter peas.
The DeJongs’ experience concurs with findings Lobb and other soil scientists have made. A 2004 to 2006 large-scale field study in rolling fields in southwestern Manitoba compared four fields in which soil restoration was compared with control areas. Tillage-eroded sidehills to which 4 inches of bottom-lying topsoil were added had:
Quicker crop emergence.
Greater plant populations – 60% greater.
Larger yields ranging from a 31% increase the first year to 64% the next in one primary site.
In three secondary sites, yield increase ranged from 10% to 133% compared with control plots.
Decreased yields in areas where topsoil is removed is a risk. In the Manitoba study, though, this occurred in just one of three sites where this was monitored. Overall, field yield averages were higher in renovated sites than controlled ones, says Lobb.
“It is one of the most cost-effective land management practices we have,” says Lobb.
This is a 15 minute presentation that I was suppose to give recently, but ended up in a snow bank. I looked it over and decided that it was a pretty good representation and decided I would post it.
A 30 year Journey To Improve Soil Health
_______________________________________________
My name is Tracy Eriksen. My wife, April, and I farm as a family corporation. My son Kye, joined us in 1994. Most of our land in the 14-16” rainfall area between St.John and Ewan. The remainder is in the 18-20” rainfall zone near Thornton.
My journey started in 1975. One hot summer day, riding a noisy steel tracked tractor with no cab, making one of those mindless passes round the field pulling a rod weeder, I come to realize that I just can’t do this any longer. At that point in time I had already spent more than two decades doing that same operation, making that same pass, and watching the dirt flow down the hill. Tillage erosion became real to me at that point.
My farming experience has totaled more than six decades. Two of those decades were spent farming like my grandfather and father farmed.
[pic-erosion 4]--This could have been our field but was not. I never saw erosion on our place quite this bad. The next three decades were spent with only one goal, —STOP EROSION!,—salvage what top soil we had left. During that period there was never any consideration of building topsoil. The information stating that it took 100 years for natural processes to build 1” of soil was accepted. I no longer accept that statement. My belief is that we now have the knowledge to build soils much faster if we stop degrading our soils and fix the biology. Articles printed back in the mid 1970’s described the wonders of the Palouse, and how soil erosion was destroying those deep rich soils. Soil erosion in the 1930’s -40’s -50’s -60’s, and into the 70’s was bad, and not infrequently,—horrendous, as pictured here.
Have we changed our farming practices so as to not revisit those bad old days??.. Some of us have, … but there is still a lot of vulnerable land in the region showing those scars regularly. A miracle saved our region last winter. Do we get two in a row?? Looking outside it appears we are set up for serious runoff with a lot of drifted snow on frozen ground late in the season. Our climate appears to be in an erratic cycle with more extremes. My hope is that the ground we steward is prepared for some serious rainfall and runoff event. We are not yet prepared for a serious drought. Our soil biological health is just not good enough.
My early attempts to reduce soil erosion took a four prong approach.
—-the first prong was to mulch till. I called it trashy fallow.
—-the second prong was having a strict three year rotation that included winter wheat, spring barley and fallow or peas. That was pretty common rotation for the day. A two year rotation of wheat fallow was problematic.
—-the third prong was to strip out each field according to NRCS guidelines and put all three crop types in each field annually. The extra moving time proved significant, but was done for many years.
—-the fourth prong was to modify the equipment to combine operations, and size to fit the strips, and also, be easily moved from field to field. Since my interest, and education was in engineering I enjoyed those challenges that consumed most of two decades. Some of the projects were to complex to be practical for long days in the field. They were generally modified after a couple of years. This was a time of continual evolution. Today, computers and software are doing what I was doing manually with switches and levers.
Everything that I had put in place to stop erosion at that point in time was marginally successful. Come spring the fields still looked bad from erosion. Dennis Roe, who, many of you know, would figuratively hold my hand from time to time and assure me that those few ditches carried less dirt than the rilled and sheet eroded fields that were so prevalent. I was never completely convinced.
By the 1990’s no-till technology had made significant advancements. Glyphosate, available since 1974, was more reasonably priced. There were several types drills being marketed. Guy Swannson regularly sponsored seminars supporting the value of no-till and various soil topics. He brought speakers in from all over the country, and Canada.
In the mid 1980’s I started doing some no-tilling. For several years I had Dwayne Blankenship custom drill winter wheat into my pea ground. I rented disc drills to seed my chem fallow ground for a few years. In 1992 I bought an AgPro hoe drill. We modified and reconfigured that drill many times.
Around the year 2000, while touring the long term field plots at Oregon State University’s Pendleton Station I learned that no-tilling, with fallow in the rotation was not building soil health. The fallow year degraded our soil more than the two crop years could build. No-tilling was obviously saving soil. Our chem fallow looked a lot better than the fields at Pendleton, so our response was to improve the residue on our fallow ground. By this point in time I come to realize that even using no-till, if the soil was loosened and the surface exposed, there would be erosion. Our response was to build and preserve more residue.
From the beginning, I and then, we, continually fought with residue. There were days I spent more time under the drill than in the tractor seat. When entering a field we were never confident we would be able seed it. We always did, —but some of it didn’t look pretty. Every winter, and summer we would modify the drill and finally, the fall of 2009 we hit the residue wall. A decision had to be made, —do we go back to doing some strategic burning, or use a different type of drill. Burning was a huge step backward, —not acceptable.
Starting the spring of 2010, we hired custom operators that used the CrossSlot technology. All our residue issues went away. By 2014 we completely retooled, going to ULD (ultra-low disturbance) system. We use the CrossSlot drill to minimize soil disturbance, and we are able to drill through any residue. We have a GVM sprayer to minimize field tracks and be more timely, and we bought a Shelbourne stripper header to maximize snow capture, and reduce wind velocity across the ground surface. What have we accomplished by going this route?
1—Soil erosion has disappeared, —but we are still losing some water. The armor is protecting the soil, but water, and all the bushels it represents is still escaping. The fields look a lot better without rills and gullies.
2—Weedy cultivars are fewer and less competitive. The mat of residue we have on most of our ground makes a very hostile environment. Seed needs to contact earth to grow competitively. Drilling with minimum disturbance minimizes the planting of weed seed. If we could remove wheel tracks we would do even better.
3—Soil temperatures have moderated both in the summer and winter. In 2015 and 2016, I used HOBO sensors to measure temperatures at seed depth. Ground with good armor is 3-5º warmer than bare ground in the winter, —and 20-25º cooler in the heat of summer.
Early spring planting has not been a problem. Our seed depth temperatures are 1-3º cooler than in cultivated ground at seeding time. Once seeded though, within 2-3 days the armored field reaches the same temperature as the cultivated field. Soil armor helps support and spread the weight of our equipment, reducing compaction.
4—The drill technology has given us good emergence and stand count for a variety of crops in very difficult seeding conditions.
Are we at the point where we are improving our soil health, building soil organic matter and related carbon? I would say YES …. and NO!
Soil health has many parameters. The physical parameters of our soils have improved dramatically, but the biological parameters are definitely not where they should be.
Over the years we have included more crop diversity in our cropping rotation. Crop diversity has certainly helped make no-till successful, but the biological soil component has not gained a perceptible amount.
The next step appears to be the introduction of cover crops. Inter-seeding holds some promise. This will be a new and challenging experience.
At this point we have been replacing some of our fallow ground with a mixture of cover crop species, —making it green fallow. In the short run green fallow is showing a yield drag because of the late emergence of our winter wheat crop. My hope is that this yield drag disappears when we can get the right biology in the ground to provide the nutritional elements needed for a stronger, faster growing plant. That sounded crazy a few years ago, but we now have a better understanding of plant nutrition and the problems that arrive from imbalances. We are still trying to figure out what species and how many species need to be in cover crop mixes. There are lots of ideas about that.
Seeding radish with our winter wheat will be pursued. It’s cheap and holds promise. The idea here is for the radish to develop a finger size tuber that extends below the frost layer before winter sets in. When the radish dies, it shrinks quickly leaving a hole in the frozen ground for surface water to enter the soil profile. I first saw the possibility in February of 2017, while walking a field during the spring flush. I noticed that water was visibly moving across all of our winter wheat field except where we had grown the cover crop. This observation supported earlier soil tests where our cover crops were using 3” of moisture, but nearly all of that moisture was replaced by the following spring. I believe radish played a big part in that. Except for radish all the other cover crop cultivars die leaving roots or tubers intact through the winter.
Seeding a perma-cover of a short statured perennial legume intrigues me. I visualize seeding them onto our eroded hill tops. This will help armor those vulnerable areas. It will displace weedy cultivars. It will add nitrogen, for a cash crop that will be seeded into it.
I am currently part of a small group that is looking at soil additives, testing methods, composting, and application of compost teas and extracts to our soils and crops. The purpose is to enhance the soil biota, and eventually reduce dependency on commercial inputs of fertilizer and chemistry.
We are living in exciting times, and the future will be more so. Since the mid 1980’s a great deal of work has been done on soil biology and how that component interacts with plants. After hearing, Dr. Elaine Ingham’s story on how to rebuild soil health, I have been fascinated with the subject. The more I delve into it, the more complex it becomes, but it holds hope where there was none before. I doubt that there will ever be a play book on how to put all of this together, —but similar to the set of principals established for successful no-tilling, I envision a set of principals to be developed that a farmer can follow for successfully developing a biologically healthy soil.
This concludes my presentation. I pray it invokes some thought about the future of FARMING THE PALOUSE.
