TILLAGE vs NO TILLAGE

      We have recently taken on some land with conventional fallow to seed this fall.  We have not dealt with conventional fallow for 25 years, and are no longer equipped for that condition.  This field has well over a 100 year history of tillage.  In our area, do to the geological history, that includes the Great Missoula Floods, most fields have several soil types.  [ Missoula Floods is a 3:50 minute animated video showing some history of our Palouse Hill landscape. ]  By the time fall seeding takes place, a cultivated field has had several tillage operations, and it's usual to have areas that powder and flow down slope in front of an implement.  It's hard to hold seed at the desired depth in that situation.  The pic shows a raindrop impacting bare soil.  When rain falls, soils on cultivated fields tend to seal up due to poor structure left by impacting raindrops and tillage.  With these conditions, the most successful tillage systems I have observed, are those that reduce the number of tillage passes to reduce aggravating powder development, and for the last pass prior to seeding, use a spiral packer to firm up the ground for the drill opener gauge wheel.
      A decision had to be made on how to get this cultivated fallow field seeded.  Rather then take the time to round up equipment to prepare this field for conventional seeding practice, Kye decided to take his chances with our heavy no-till CrossSlot drill, follow it with a tine harrow, and hope for the best, --expecting to do some reseeding later.  Conditions allowed the crop to emerge and reseeding was unnecessary.  Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
       Some fields, or areas within fields, may require 3-5 years of no tillage to stop the seal over effect of the soil left from years of intense cultivation.  We hope with our no-till experience, we can shorten that time frame without giving our landlord a hemorrhage.
      When we started no-tilling there were problems that needed to be worked out.  In our early no-till years there was no path for success developed through many years of experience, as there was with the conventional tillage system.  That is behind us now, and transition can be shortened by years.
      Now, --what do I see as significant between the two systems (tillage - no tillage) that exist side by side sharing a 3/4 mile long border, in our Palouse Hills region.  We have had only a few months to deal with the cultivated ground but a few things have stood out.
      ---The no-till fallow ground is firm with good armor and operations create little or no dust.  There was no dust coming off the field during windy conditions.
      ---The tilled fallow ground has deep (2-4") soft dirt with no armor and it was very dusty from any operation performed.  The exposed surface did produce dust from wind when it blew before the surface sealed.
      ---This mild winter, allowed us to walk all over our no-tilled field without sinking.  With care, I seldom got mud up the side of my boots.  That was not the case with the tilled/winter wheat field.  Walking in that field always left your boots a mess and you left deep tracks where you walked.
      ---The no-till fallow/winter wheat ground did not seal the surface when rainfall occurs.
      ---The tilled fallow/winter wheat ground sealed over immediately from light rainfall.  Fortunately most of the winter wheat had emerged by the time measurable rain events arrived, and what wasn't emerged, was very shallow and able to push through the thin weak crust that formed on the soil surface.
      ---In early February, when scouting the fields, as I walked down our steep (20-40% slopes), there was no noticeable increased squishiness in the no-till fields.  Our no-till fields have a very high infiltration rate and no tillage pan to restrict water movement through the upper profile.  There was noticeable squishiness as I progressed down the slope in the conventional fallow/winter wheat field.  This condition is when water moves slowly under the surface, on or near the restricting tillage transition zone from high to low elevations.  Surface erosion was expected, but did not show in the conventional tilled field.
      There is much that I could say to support no-tilling over tillage; however, this post is to utilize the rare opportunity to compare side by side effects between no tillage and tillage as we experienced them.

Climate & Water Vapor

     Throughout this past year there has been numerous reports of rainfall in excessive amounts in many different locations throughout the US.  It seems like reports have come in from everywhere except the Inland Northwest, --us.   In October there were reports of flooding along the Snoqualmie river in western Washington.  Now it is no surprise to hear that the Snoqualmie floods.  That's an annual spring event when the snow pack starts melting off the western slopes of the Cascade Mts, --but in October!!!(???), that's most unusual.  Last fall I read where there were 10's of thousands acres of farmland flooded along the Missouri River this past year and that currently there are thirty thousand acres of farmland still under water and expected to stay underwater until April when the 2020 flood season normally starts.  In recent years I have been watching/listening to reports of heavy rainfalls throughout the US.  They use to be associated with thunder storms on the Great Plains and the areas around the southeast and the gulf hit with the occasional hurricane.  Not any more.  Heavy rainfall events are now being reported west of the Rockies with southern California receiving heavy rainfall events as well as along the Oregon coast and now maybe the Washington coast. West of the Cascade Mts., particularly Seattle (the Emerald City) is noted for it's rainy weather, and of coarse, the Olympic Rainforest is a historical feature of Washington, so rain is not a new phenomenon; however, the amounts and in the time received may be changing.  I can't even imagine the damage to our farmland should we start receiving rains that measure in the inches per hour.  These thoughts  play a part for the passion I have to armor our fields and increase moisture infiltration.  How long will it be before we have to endure one of these high volume rain events?  There was a time that I thought our location between the Rocky and Cascade mountains would shield us from any devastating weather event, but, I'm not so sure any more.
      Atmospheric rivers (of water) seem to be more prevalent around the globe.  We mostly hear about what is going on in the US, but other places are getting similar weather events.  In one of her presentations, Dr. Christine Jones, makes reference to the excessive atmospheric moisture, and questions why more attention is not given to that greenhouse pollutant.  I did a quick google search of atmospheric pollutants and found that neither CO2 or moisture was listed as a pollutant.  There are caveats, to these and other elements, depending on the authors specific mindset.  The media gives us the impression that the debate is over, but what I see in the weeds, is that the debate is anything but over.  There is a lot more than CO2 involved with our climate and we don't understand what that is.

CLIMATE

     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.

2018 Wheat University

I recently attended the WSU Wheat University.  They had  a diverse agenda of subject matter, with presentations from researchers at Washington State University, Oregon State University, and University of Idaho.  Concurrent classes were going, and I didn't get to all the presentations.  From those that I did attend there were several things that I found important, hence, chronicle here.
     Water Movement:   --Soil type effects rate of moisture infiltration, shown by a demonstration using Walla Walla and Ritzville soil types.           --Soil particles are quickly transported by surface water and block passages into the soil profile, sealing the surface.  Runoff begins at that point.  No-till fields have more channels into the soil profile than cultivated fields and usually more surface residue.   --Surface residue retards water flowing across the soil surface.  The more residue the better.       Even though some moisture is trapped and evaporated from the residue, more residue translates to more moisture in the profile.   --The demo. in the pic above, shows a Ritzville soil with two containers of soils from a cultivated field.  One container had surface residue, the other did not.  The third container of Ritzville soil is from a no-till field.  The no-till container had no water loss from the simulated rain event.   The cultivated containers both had water loss but the container with residue had less loss and notably less soil loss.    --Water is held under tension until a path or condition breaks the tension.  Water is attracted to surfaces, going down the sides of channels into the soil profile.

      Nutrients in straw:   --A ton of wheat straw ranges from $10-$19 in nutrient value.  Straw nutrients vary depending on nutrient level found in the soil plus the  amount applied, and the value placed on the various nutrients.    --Rough estimate for straw residue is 100# per bushel of grain.    --Swath and bale removes approximately 50% of the residue.  Feeding baler directly from combine increases the loss of leaves and chaff raising the total loss a  couple of percentage points.  (A 100bu/ac yield translates to ~$25 to $47 per acre loss of nutrients).     --When a field is burned, you lose nearly all the C-N-S, and less of the remaining elements if the ash has not blown away.    --K & P can be washed out of the residue from rainfall or irrigation.
        Crop Insects:   
              --Wire worms: come in three species (Great Basin - Western - Sugar beet).    --The are identified by the shape of the little pincer type protrusion on their tail.    --The Western feeds actively in April & May.     --Sugar beet variety feeds later in the season.   --You may not encounter the Great Basin variety at economic levels.   --Seed treatment works pretty good on the Western.     --Check edges of bare areas for dead and dying new leaves on cereal plants, then dig around plant crowns.      --Wire worms prefer spring wheat over winter wheat.  It is probably a worm life cycle issue.    --They are found mostly in bottom land and may not need treating on hills.   --Wire worms are attracted to cereal grains, with the exception of oats.      --They have little attraction to Pulses, Brassica's, or chemical fallow.    --Wireworms may feed in chem fallow fields but they will not lay eggs.                    --Proximity to CRP fields will likely increase wireworm pressure.    -- ≥ 45ºF worms will be active.
             --Hession Fly: The female population is what does the damage.  She lays the eggs in the stem.   --The fly does not move far.     --The fly overwinters in grain (not oat) residue.    --Cereal plant resistance to Hession Fly is declining.  We need to pay attention to cultural practices like expanding crop rotation to help keep losses from this fly to a minimum.
             --Weevils:  Pea Weevil (not a true weevil because it has no elbow in it's antenna), Pea Leaf Weevil, Cabbage Seedpod Weevil are the three main types that cause economic damage in peas and canola.  The pea weevil scallops the lower leaves weakening the plant making it more susceptible to aphid attack.  These don't seem to be as prevalent as the pea leaf weevil.  The cabbage seedpod weevil lays eggs in the pea and canola seedpods.  In canola the pods become misshapen when attacked.
            --Aphid:  They tend to attack weakened plants/stands due to nutrition deficiencies or weevil attack.    --Scout field edges for infestations.  It's possible you will only have to treat the border which will minimize damage to beneficial insects.    --When possible spray late in the day to minimize impact on beneficial insects (specifically bees).

RAINFALL -- 1998 to 2018

        This pic  updates the original post of Feb 1, 2016 under the title [OUR FARMS HISTORIC RAINFALL] to include 2016-2017 year totals along with the corresponding line graph.
        For 2018 we appear to be above average in rainfall again.  Are we experiencing a long term trend of higher than average rainfall?  Maybe, but I wouldn't bet on it!  Back in 2006, you can see that we had 4 years with above average rainfall and then 2007 brought us back to reality, bouncing around, from a high in 2006 to a low in 2013, then making a steady gain to our all time high in 2017. This variation should indicate that you can't make cropping decisions on what happened last year.  It would be better to develop a diverse rotation that includes, legume, brassica, cereal cultivars; then tweek between high and low water use cultivars within those categories to address your best guess as to what the weather will bring.  It is my contention that future financial survivability will depend on our soils biological and structural health, and that means reduce tillage, increase crop diversity, and keep the soil surface covered, --as the beginning.  More rapid improvement in soil health will probably require application of compost "extracts" to add fungal, protozoa, and beneficial nematode life forms to our depleted soil, and multi-species covers to support them beyond our normal crop cultivars.  How to do this in an unstable, low moisture environment is the challenge, --but one that needs to be faced.
       As I read/listen to the news it seems that our weather is getting more unpredictable and more extreme, --I wonder how long it will be before one of those storms heavily laden with moisture will reach our area.   While admitting that my mindset has been riveted on how to minimize the loss of moisture we currently receive, it is becoming a nagging concern as to how well our farming system would hold up under a barrage of rain.  With all my comments on the amount of residue we have, and able to seed into, our most vulnerable ground (high, steep and eroded) is still exposed.  Now that we are comfortable seeding into high volume residue, we need to concentrate on better protection of vulnerable areas by replacing the cash crop with covers specific to build surface protection and soil structure for a year or two.

2018 Crop Year -- Rainfall - SJ/Ewan

                                  CROP YEAR (AUG/JULY)
August 2017 --> 0.00",  September 2017 --> 0.69",  October 2017 --> 1.98"
November 2017 --> 2.96",  December 2017 --> 3.16",  January 2018 --> 2.42"
February 2018 --> 1.58",  March 2018 --> 1.45",  April 2018 --> 1.99"
May 2018 --> 1.07",  June 2018 (6/11) ≠ 0.40",  July 2018 =?
                                    TOTAL TO DATE: = 17.70"
We are nearly 3.0" ahead of our long term average for the year.  The remainder of June, July and August normally add little to our year's total.

2017 Rainfall Summary for SJ/Ewan

     By reviewing my posts I see that I never updated our rainfall for 2017.  View the post of July 16th, 2017 for update by months.  [ Click on "rainfall" in labels and scroll down to post.] 
                   The totals are listed here.
2017 Crop Yr:          (August / July) ----------  Total = 20.67"
2017 Calendar Yr:   (January / December) --- Total = 21.05"

Comparisons using Rain Simulator

     There are a lot of rainfall simulators on the net; however, this one is one of the best.  It's a clear demonstration of differences with five types of management, and well narrated.  The comparisons are, --conventional tillage, no-tillage, mixed species cover crop, compacted overgrazed rangeland, and well managed rangeland.  Watch for the water splash on the conventional tilled ground.
     This video was taken in the North Central part of South Dakota about 10 miles east of the Missouri River in a 16" rainfall zone, in a slightly rolling landscape.
                                      Rainfall simulator in SD (17:46min)
     All the simulators I have observed applies rain in a short amount of time on terrain that is relatively level.  Simulators have application rates of 1.5"-2" of rainfall in 10-20 minutes.  Many areas in the world would find these rates as moderate, but for our hills it would be devastating.   Fields with surfaces disturbed would be washed away.  When I started this quest to improve our resource conservation ethic in the early/mid 1970's that's what I envisioned.  At the time, we were receiving a lot of snow on frozen ground and received downpours from summer thunder storms fairly regular.  Severe erosion annually was the rule, not the exception, and no-till was a new term to be learned.  Fortunately for our fields, by the mid 80's we were designated  as in a drought condition, and erosion rates have fallen dramatically to this day.  Now, severe erosion is more the exception than the rule, even on cultivated ground.  However, this fall, our area has received two events that have left some fields in an eroded state.  The pattern is set for serious erosion on unprotected land in 2018, as it was in 2017.  Is this going to be a new trend, ?????, time will tell.  The fields that we steward are prepared, --bring it on!

Conservation from different "No-Tills"

     Over time "No Till" has taken on different meanings for different people.  I'm hearing the term no-till linked with as many as three operations on a field.  Mostly the tools are identified as, drill, shank fertilizer applicator, harrow and/or packer.  Whether one or three pass, the ground is left in better condition than a conventional cultivation system, --HOWEVER, there is a significant difference in the potential soil health between 2-3pass "no-till", high disturbance no-till and ultra low disturbance no-till.   Conditions where water is allowed to move across the ground surface is erosive, regardless of residue volume or ground firmness, --it's only a matter of the degree of erosion.  Water flowing across the ground will contain particulates of dirt, pesticides, and fertilizer.  These in turn overload low areas of the field or go off site into the public domain.

      What can we do to minimize this loss?   -- Farm in a manner that least disturbs the ground surface.  Surface disturbance destroys the channels made by roots, worms, and other organisms that allow rapid movement of water into the soil profile.  Also, every operation creates some "fines" that are redeposited and seal spaces between soil particles.  Harrows are notorious for "fining up" the ground.

 --Every operation reduces the surface cover, and degrades the ability to intercept and dissipate the explosive energy of a rain drop.  Above is a  magnified pic of a raindrop impacting the ground surface with no intercepting residue.  This condition is very destructive to soil aggregates and seals the soil surface quickly.  There are a number of good online videos that show this happening.

     [Some old history] --  This story is to make the point that leaving channels undisturbed, uncovered, exposing them to the surface is very important for moisture intake.   In the 1970's, WSU experimented on ways to enhance rain moving into the soil profile.  One experiment consisted of using a baler frame, modified to stuff wheat residue into a slot.  Their experiments looked so promising that I kept an old baler to make the machine.  The machine was clever and simple.   The pickup and conveyer mechanism was left intact.   A deep ripper shank was located where the gearbox for the plunger would be, and a large wheel mechanism was mounted in the area of the bale chamber to pick off the residue coming from the opening that fed the bale chamber.   The wheel would push the residue into the slot left by the ripper shank filling the slot and leaving material at/above the ground surface.  The concept was proved do-able and was very successful.  With the slot open to the surface, rainfall was intercepted and fed into the soil profile.  The slots needed to be spaced so they would intercept the flowing water before noticeable erosion developed.  Depending on the steepness of the slope these slots could get fairly close, 5' to 20' intervals.  --THE RESIDUE IN THE SLOT concept ultimately failed because once the slots were covered from tillage operations they didn't work.    Without the slot being exposed to the surface, rainwater flowed right across the slot continuing down the slope as if it never existed.  The slots, in effect, had to be installed annually, and this proved too burdensome to be a viable conservation management practice.  

     The issue has not changed with time.  Any surface disturbance closes the natural channels made by decayed roots, worms and other organisms.  This in turn slows the movement of rainwater into the soil profile and promotes more surface water movement.  In my estimation, this is the reason we see better infiltration at 5 years than we do after one year of no-till.  Plants, worms and other burrowing organisms keep adding new channels over the years, where it takes only one pass of a farm tool to wipe them out.

     There are a lot of options available today for single pass no-till (direct seed) drills.  Everything from the maxi-disturbance (Anderson opener style), to the ultra low disturbance (CrossSlot opener style).

     I don't consider any two pass operation as no-till regardless of the drill type used.  Those operations will never move the needle from soil destruction to soil building in the environment of the Palouse.

      

2017 CROP YEAR --- RAINFALL

     The total rainfall shows this to be a great year.  The crop does have potential but there are caveats.  We had a long period where the ground was frozen, and a lot of moisture ran off the fields.  We had a later than normal start for spring planting which has put those crops behind.  This spring we had our usual random low temperature nights.  The extent of the damage, if any, is not known.  We have had two short periods (3-4 days) of high temperatures (98-100+).  These have shortened our canola bloom.  What other damage the heat may have caused is unknown to me.
St. John / Ewan,  Rainfall (including a lot of snow) record on our farm for 2017 Crop Year.
       August 2016 ---> 0.16", September 2016 ---> 0.45",  October ---> 4.86",  November ---> 1.92",  December--->1.02",  January 2017 ---> 1.40",  February ---> 3.91",  March --> 3.81",  April ---> 1.58", May ---> 0.84",  June ---> 0.72",  July 2017 ---> 0.00,
       [ Crop year 2017 (Aug/July) = 20.67"]
   
     At Thornton, the business that was keeping a loose record of the rainfall quit December 2016.
 [update June 2018]    For the calendar year 2017:  August = 0.00, September = 0.69", October = 1.98", November = 2.96", December = 3.16".
                     [ Calendar year total 2017 ---> 21.05"]

WEATHER FORECAST 2017

      Every year one of the highlights of the Farm Forum is to hear what Dr. Art Douglas has to say about the weather, local, national, world, and how that translates into agriculture production.  He always includes some statements on the climate and what drives our weather.  This year he went into more detail about climate change and the driving forces behind it, including human contribution.  I'll address his presentation on Climate Change in another post.  

       Dr. Art Douglas is an emeritus professor of meteorology in the Atmospheric Science Department at Creighton University, and has been part of Spokane Farm Forum since 1978, except for one year.  He is the Long-Range Weather Consultant to the Mexican Government, Cattlefax and ConAgra.

           Local Forecast:   Last year's forecast was "spot on" for our operation.  El Nino appears to be coming back.  For us in the PNW that means drying and warming trend.  It's predicted that spring and summer will be a little below average rainfall and a little above average temperatures.  Our WW should be fine.  No more arctic outbreaks are expected.  Spring crops may be iffy depending on location.  Getting WW for the 2018 crop seeded timely may be challenging do to low rainfall conditions this summer and fall.  I think we will be seeding early.
           These are the conditions that we have planned for with our ULD-DS system.  Gather, and hold every drop of rain possible, using heavy ground cover,  tall residue, and minimal ground disturbance.
           It sounded like the only places in the world that may have stressed crops for 2017 will be Australia and possibly spring crops in the PNW.

2017 Spring Runoff --> ULD-DS vs Tillage

      This last week we have been losing our snow.  It started out with light freezing rain, turning to light rain, then, temperatures going to the mid 40's during the day and down to 29 at night.

      A couple of weeks ago, it was predicted that we were going to get 1.5-2" of rain.  I fully expected massive runoff from our fields.  It didn't happen.  We are losing some water during the latter part of the day, but no huge amounts.  The creek in front of our house has risen to < 1/2 it's capacity.

     Our ULD-DS fields are handling the thaw quite well.  Nothing seems to be displaced on our stubble ground.  We have two WW fields west of St. John.  One is seeded on CC ground that included radish, mustard, canola and other cultivars (see earlier post).  I could not determine whether we were losing water or not.  There was definitely displacement, but runoff from a cultivated field was going through our field, and I could not determine if we were adding to that flow.  It appeared that the displacement wasn't more than 20-30' before the water disappeared.  There are exceptions, --seeding vertically.  I don't think you can stop water movement seeding vertically on a slope.  Even as narrow as our slot is with the cross-slot (pic on the right).  Maybe an exception would be where stubble was plentiful enough to hairpin it into the slot to slow the velocity.  Our CC or WP ground definitely did not have that condition.  The WW on WP ground was losing some water.  There were no deep rooted, fast deteriorating radish plants in that field.
      The jar on the right was taken at our WW on WP field border.  It is nearly clear and I see no sediment showing on the bottom.   I will be sending a sample to a lab to see what polluting elements may be present.  Obviously sediment is not one of them.
      The jar on the left was taken at the outflow of a conventional tilled field, and sediment does settle out.

      At Thornton, the WW seeded into SP residue looks terrific.  Except for the drifts, which are large, the snow has pretty well disappeared.  Again, without vertical blockage snow is displaced and drifts form.   This condition is yield robbing, even if the water doesn't leave the field.  There are areas that are short ≈2"moisture, and areas that have excess moisture but losing sunlight energy.

      The pic on the left shows disappearing snow and a good WW crop exposed.  The pic on the right is Thorn Creek.  Our property is not contributing to this flow.  Our property scores very well on the Slake test which is helping us with moisture infiltration.
       I'm including a 7min (YouTube) video by Ray Archuleta explaining the Slake Test and it's meaning.

PHOTOGRAPHERS PARADISE

      The climate is very dynamic.  I don't remember the last time we have had weather that would develop such a spectacular sight of hoarfrost.  This morning is was 7degrees, 82% humidity and looked like a fairyland in our yard with all of the trees heavily laden.  My little Lumix doesn't do it justice.
      It has been two weeks since we have been above freezing temperatures.  Temperatures have been ranging from (-4) to (18).  If we could tell, I think we have ≈16" of snow.  The days with 15-25mph winds have moved everything around where there isn't sufficient vertical blockage.
      The stripper headed crops are showing their value with the snow catch.  Snow catch is huge.
       It's predicted that in about three days we will have temperatures in the 40's and a lot of rain.  If that comes about, erosion of unprotected fields will be devastating.   Our fields are well protected.  The question is, --will our WW seeded into covercrop (a lot of radish plants) allow the water to enter the frozen ground.

 

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.

2016 CROP YEAR -- RAINFALL

 [Update 1/16/17]  I have recently been informed that the THORNTON rainfall record does not reflect snow catch.  This is a discrepancy that may be large or small depending on the snow fall.  The St. John rainfall record attempts to include snow fall.  At times the wind probably distorts that record a little.  
  [Update 10/13/16]  I have added in the remainder rainfall totals for the cropping year.  Thornton, WA. had significantly less rainfall for the year than normal.  The Thornton rain belt is ≈17"- 19"and 2016 showed 13.78".                                                                The SJ-E (my gauge) rain belt is14.67" 2016 showed 16.95".
      The Thornton area crops were generally quite good.  Our spring standup peas were fantastic.
      The SJ-E area crops were spotty ranging from fantastic to a little above average.
      There are many examples that indicate there is more to yield than rainfall total.  Weather, as it plays across a field can make or break a yield.  We experienced a frost in April and June that had differing effects on fields.
I'm going to start posting rainfall for the two regions we farm.  It's very surprising to me, and most unusual that this crop year shows St.John/Ewan area with more moisture than Thornton.   Micro climates are certainly playing a part to have this happen.  Brackets show a running total for the crop year which starts September 1st.
Thornton Rainfall Records for the crop year 2016:  Cropping year Sept-->Aug.  [13.78"]
        Sept. ---->0.23(0.23),  Oct. ---->0.02(0.25),  Nov. ---->1.77(2.02),  Dec. ---->2.22 ( ),  Jan. ---->1.98 (6.23),  Feb. ---->1.10 (7.33),  Mar. ---->3.42(10.75),  April --->0.79 (11.54),  May -->1.18 (12.72 ),  June -->0.40 (13.12 ),  July -->0.26 (13.38 ),  Aug. --> 0.40 (13.78 ).
St. John Rainfall Records for the crop year 2016:  Cropping year Sept-->Aug.    [16.95"]
        Sept. ---->0.55(0.55),  Oct. ---->1.00(1.55),  Nov. ---->1.35(2.90),  Dec. ---->3.83(6.73),  Jan. ---->2.26(8.99),  Feb. ---->1.31(10.3),  Mar. ---->3.89(14.19),  April -->0.58 (14.77 ),  May -->1.05 (15.82 ),  June -->0.64 (16.46 ),  July -->0.33 (16.79 ),  Aug. -->0.16 (16.95 ).
       

2016 CROP YEAR -- RAINFALL

     [Update 10/13/16]  I have added in the remainder rainfall totals for the cropping year.  Thornton, WA. had significantly less rainfall for the year than normal.  The Thornton rain belt is ≈17"- 19"and 2016 showed 13.78".  The SJ-E (my gauge) rain belt is14.67" 2016 showed 16.95".
      The Thornton area crops were generally quite good.  Our spring standup peas were fantastic.
      The SJ-E area crops were spotty, ranging from fantastic to a little above average.
      There are many examples that indicate there is more to yield than rainfall total.  Weather, as it plays across a field can make or break a yield.  We experienced a frost in April and June that had differing effects on fields.

I'm going to start posting rainfall for the two regions we farm.  It's very surprising to me, and most unusual that this crop year shows St.John/Ewan area with more moisture than Thornton.   Micro climates are certainly playing a part to have this happen.  Brackets show a running total for the crop year which starts September 1st.
Thornton Rainfall Records for the crop year 2016:  Cropping year Sept-->Aug.  [13.78"]
        September 2015---->0.23(0.23),  Oct. ---->0.02(0.25),  Nov. ---->1.77(2.02),  Dec. ---->2.22 ( ),  January 2016---->1.98 (6.23),  Feb. ---->1.10 (7.33),  Mar. ---->3.42(10.75),  April --->0.79 (11.54),  May -->1.18 (12.72 ),  June -->0.40 (13.12 ),  July -->0.26 (13.38 ),  Aug. --> 0.40 (13.78 ).
St. John Rainfall Records for the crop year 2016:  Cropping year Sept-->Aug.    [16.95"]
        September 2015 ---->0.55(0.55),  Oct. ---->1.00(1.55),  Nov. ---->1.35(2.90),  Dec. ---->3.83(6.73),  January 2016 ---->2.26(8.99),  Feb. ---->1.31(10.3),  Mar. ---->3.89(14.19),  April -->0.58 (14.77 ),  May -->1.05 (15.82 ),  June -->0.64 (16.46 ),  July -->0.33 (16.79 ),  Aug. -->0.16 (16.95 ).
       

Our Farms Historic Rainfall

I have recently put 18 years of rainfall data in a spreadsheet ( 1998 - 2015).
---14.67"  is what it turns out to be our average yearly rainfall over the years, --with 9 years at or above, and 10 years at or below. (one point was counted in both, above/below).  The graph indicates our Ewan/St.John farm is in the 13-16" rainfall zone, instead of the 15-17" as most maps have us.  (Is this a real change from 1940-1970's)???
---Our lowest rainfall total was in 2002 with 10.31 inches.
---Our highest rainfall total was in 2006 with 18.35 inches
---Two years, 2015 & 2003, June received a trace, or no rain.  June is a benchmark for us.  Good rains normally translate to good yields, little rain translates to not so good yields.
---Six years, July received no rain.
---Five years, August had a trace, or no rain.
---June with more than 1.5 inches were (2014, 2013, 2012, 2010, 2005 ).  These were great crop years, or, had the potential had not other climatic forces become involved, --for example, Nov. of 2013 had an event where high winds accompanied by a sudden drop in temperature severely damaged the 2014 winter wheat through out the Palouse.  Most people had patches of good wheat, but the general yield was down approximately 25-30%,
---Our ULD system that incorporates the Shelbourne header and the CrossSlot drill is an attempt to lessen dependency on good June rains by reducing moisture loss through runoff and evaporation.  2014 was a great year to test the theory, but alas, the June 12 freeze ruined the potential of all our crops, both winter and spring.  All surviving crops were delayed in maturity, and the unusually high heat of July & August caused further damage.  The CrossSlot did all it was advertised to do, and the crops got a great start, but circumstances beyond our, or it's control lowered yields.
---Our rainfall tends to cycle up for three years, then, down for three years.  (+/- ?)
---If that pattern holds we may rise through the average precipitation line in 2016, and give us, depending on the June rains, a good crop, both winter and spring.
---The charts below use the same data, but the lines attempt to show three different aspects:  June rain,  total rain received, average monthly rain received.

Conclusions (?):  When I started this post three days ago, the goal was to state a few obvious points that stuck out in the 18 years of data, but as I got more into it, the more intriguing it became.  I'm not going into any more detail than what's been stated above; other than to say that,  I'm extremely glad we chose to upgrade to a ULD system.  In the short time (4 years), I can visually see it is paying off.  We are, and always have been in climate change.  What that means for the future is argued daily.  I'm convinced the Shelbourne and CrossSlot is the best option for meeting the challenges in the future.

Soil Moisture

[Update: Jan 5/15] --- Web search shows several studies, ( Canada, Nebraska, Colorado, Washington) where the 13-14m fallow period in a wheat-fallow rotation store a low of <20% to as high as 34% of the moisture received.  The more I discover the more I'm becoming convinced that fallow is a loser.  Even cropping environments with 6" annual rainfall would be better off developing a crop rotation that includes building biomass and growing tall residue with annual cropping.  The other 66-80% of the precipitation received is lost, primarily through evaporation.
[Update: 5/22/14] --- Summary of a Summary ------  The bottom Line:  
      a)--Where rainfall goes (average over 10 years of a two year moisture cycle): 1% deep penetration, 4% runoff, 12% transpiration through the crop, 83% evaporation off soil surface.
      b)--In a wheat/fallow rotation, the fallow year provides only 34% more moisture for the winter crop.  In short, we lose  the equivalent of 2/3 of one years precipitation growing one winter crop.
      c)-- That long term study showed no statistical difference in moisture retention between moldboard plowing, disc plowing, para-plowing, or chiseling.
      d)--Best moisture retention is attained by keeping soils as cool as possible in the summer, and the air at the soil surface as calm as possible all year long.

 SUMMARY:  I feel there is value in this old research project (below) done in the 1970's.  The four conclusions stated at the conference need to be altered in my opinion in light of the technology available to us today. All are still valid for a tilled field, but can be improved through a DS system; and, leaving long cut standing stubble following harvest.

 More Detail:    

        Above is a study that was done in the late 1970's on soil moisture and what combination of tillage operations were best in conserving it in the fallow period.  There are some interesting findings and conclusions.  Direct Seeding was not on the radar when this study was done.  The following are a dressed up set of my notes from an education event attended in the spring 1989.   Below, I make conclusions/comments on this study as it may relate to Direct Seeding.  Two separate studies were conducted with this research project. 

       1)-- Comparison of four primary tillage operations for holding moisture.

       2)-- Determining the moisture use in a two year cropping cycle that included fallow.

#1 SUMMARY----The four primary practices were: A)--moldboard plow, B)--paraplow, C)-- Chisel, D)--Disc.  The great disappointment at the end of this study was that there was no statistically significant difference in moisture retention between any of the operations. 

#2 SUMMARY----The statements showing on the image insert are "from the time".  Using DS, --- are these still valid statements??  What has intrigued me over the years, and is the reason for me hanging onto this information is the section:  -- "where rainfall goes".  

     With todays bank of knowledge, the use of rotations in cropping, and using DS,  I am confident that we can eliminate the 1% loss through deep penetration.  

      I'm certain that we can eliminate, or nearly eliminate 4% loss from runoff.  (this summer our fallow took in the 6.5"event reported for that area without showing signs of runoff (no displaced residue or mudded over residue.  In the bottom of the drainages there were the usual small cut channel; however, I couldn't tell whether they were from the winter/spring flush of snow, or from this event.)  The conventional fallow around us was gutted to the depth of cultivation[4"-6"].)  

      This study shows we are raising our crops on 12% of the moisture received (through transpiration).  Is this still a valid number?  Just think of the potential!

      This study shows that, of the rainfall we receive, 83% is lost through evaporation from the soil surface.  Just think of the potential here if we reduce that number.

      The numbers shown for seasonal variations,-- 1st winter @+66%, 1st summer @-20, and 2nd winter @ +41% are not to be construed as netting the 34% showing for the increase of fallow moisture over that of annual cropped ground.  This image is poorly expressed.  The study was on a winter wheat - fallow - winter wheat crop rotation.  The correct interpretation of these numbers is:  

                                   The first winter following a winter wheat crop, the ground collects 66% of the moisture of it's two year cycle.  Why?--The crop just harvested depleted the moisture in the soil profile so the hydraulic pull is strong and will accept all or most of the moisture that first winter, even with frozen ground.  There was probably a primary tillage operation (moldboard plow, chisel, disc, paraplow) done to the ground prior to winter.  Evaporation was probably the largest user.  Some transpiration from weeds and volunteer.  Some runoff is possible.

                                  The "1st" summer [fallow period], the ground loses a net of 20% of the moisture collected over the two year cycle.  (Why?-- Evaporation -- heat and wind movement across the soil surface are strong forces that hydraulically pull moisture up and off the soil surface.  In our climate where most of our moisture comes in the winter, any and all summer moisture is over-ridden by evaporation.  Also included is tillage where each pass across the ground stirs and aerates to the depth of 4-6 inches. This accelerates the loss by evaporation for that depth of soil.  Traditionally there is little or no residue left on the soil surface, and certainly no residue left standing.  This gives sun and wind high access to moisture through evaporation.)

                                 The 2nd winter, that ground only gains an additional 41% instead of the 66% the first winter.  (Why?-- The hydraulic pull is less the second winter because the soil profile has significant amount of moisture.   The ground has been tilled a number of times since the previous crop, and the new crop has been seeded.  The natural channels into the soil have been destroyed and most fields have the look of a garden with finely textured soil and no, or little residue remain.  When that 2nd winter comes, moisture encounters a soil surface that quickly seals off allowing a high percentage of the moisture to flow across the soil surface to drainages varying with climatic conditions present.  There is also a growing crop, and I don't remember how that complexity was explained.

                                  The 2nd spring/summer, the soil profile is depleted of moisture.  (Why?-- early on, evaporation is significant.  Later in the season, as the crop grows and covers the ground, the evaporation forces decrease; however, the Transpiration force (growing crop) is very strong and will normally take the moisture down to the wilting point for the crop.

        This study has influenced me for what has been done on this farm.  In the 70-80's I recognized that tillage was destroying the long term productivity of our ground and began combining operations to reduce trips over the field.  I also divided the slopes where there was crop on either top or bottom, and something else on the other.  This shortened the run for water compared to the whole hill being one crop.  From the 90's on, we have been in one form of notill/DS mode or another, trying to take advantage of what could possibly be attained from the above study. 

                                                      Where are we today?: 

        Deep penetrating moisture:  We haven't addressed this because of the low return on deep rooted crops like mustard and canola.  That appears to be changing and those crops are looking more attractive. 

        Runoff:  We have this element mostly controled.  Including canola or mustard in our crop rotation will add a safety factor.

        Transpiration:  I don't know where we are on that one.  I think the new commercial cultivars are more efficient in the use of, fertilizer and moisture.  We are not fertilizing nearly to the level that the (currently used, but old) research states we need for the yields we are getting. 

        Evaporation:  That, we are aggressively working on.  The success, or not, will show in the future.  My gauge for this will be when our 15"-17" rainfall zone can be annual cropped with results mirroring our current 18"-19" rainfall zone.  We are addressing it two ways: 

a)  We have bought a Shelbourne stripper header.  The first harvest (2012) is a raving success in wheat, barley and mustard.   The winter wheat stubble (Brundage 96) is 38-40" tall with good density. This is the first barley stubble we have ever left that shows some capability to reduce air velocity on the soil surface.  Instead of being about 4-6"tall, it is 22-24" and some areas taller.  Since the barley and mustard ground will be fallow next year, we hope this will help decrease the evaporation. We have good surface residue cover on the barley.  The mustard ground has less cover.  

b)--We are building or refitting our DS drill with Cross-slot openers and associated technology.  This is the ultimate low disturbance opener.  We hope to have it ready for spring 2013.  This fall (2012), we are renting that technology to seed the fall crop, but the frame designe significantly reduces the integrity of the technology built into the opener.  The frame is designed for AB line operation on a flat, rectangular field.