|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|||
Minimum Disturbance Direct Seeding in Semi-Arid OregonJack J. Hay, Farmer The total farm size is 4000 acres. 2200 acres is tillable. Most of the operation is leased with 1000 acres owned. The farm is spread 26 miles apart and ranges in elevation from 2600 feet in the South to 400 in the North. The land in the South is heavy clay and rocky. Fortunately only 500 acres is here. The rest is in North Wasco County, which are generally deep sandy soils. The slope ranges up to 44% with 880 acres being very steep. The rainfall varies some but generally is in the 10 to 14 inch range. The soils in the south generally fill with winter rains and then erode in the spring. The northern areas are deeper soils and rarely become saturated to depth. All land is considered highly erodeable by NRCS. Crops grown on the farm are all cereals. Wheat, Barley, Triticale, with Wheat being the dominate crop historically fall planted in a summer-fallow rotation. The Economic Reality In 1997 I had the opportunity to travel to the wheat and corn research facility at Obregon Mexico. The facility is CYMITT, a worldwide research organization developing new varieties of wheat and corn that can be grown under different environmental conditions. Once new germ plasim is developed it is then distributed to other regional research farms where they refined and re-selected for local traits. At the going away party a researcher from Europe ask the group how we Americans felt about us teaching the rest of the world how to grow grains and thus creating our own competition ruining our own markets. During the trip we toured off station, visiting a grower cooperative. There in the Yaki valley we saw 1,200,000 acres all flat as a pool table. They used the best science. Planted Durham in 20 cm rows and placed the fertilizer between the rows after the plants were 8 inches tall. They used 90% less herbicides and 50% less fertilizer. They shifted from crop to crop depending on which was more economical. Wheat is the low cost crop to produce. Next we visited the local cooperative. There were long lines of trucks waiting to dump. Employees were probing each truck and bining the loads as per grade. They were segregating for end-use quality. The coop offered the growers lending, crop insurance, fuel, fertilizer, herbicide, services. They marketed the grain and exported it to Italy. All done with the financial and marketing expertise of Cargill. I then wondered how I, as a dryland wheat producer was going to compete in a fluid worldwide grain market that produces 60% of its wheat under irrigation. This allows the producers to rotate between crops that offer the greatest economic incentive. These Mexican farmers were driving new John Deere's. They had better trucks than I and were applying better science and marketing skills. These boys also cropped twice a year. I had to do something! It was just a matter of time. My farming situation Each farm in the operation varies greatly from one to the other. The farm in the south was too wet for early spring planting. Tillage several times, then fertilizer etc. just made the timing all wrong for traditional spring cropping. Early May planting just didn't work because there wasn't enough growing season left to properly mature grain before the hot dry summer. Since the soil profile filled nearly every year, the thought of annual cropping has long been a goal. A major problem has been to establish a fall crop on a timely basis. Control of annual weeds and re-crop contamination made for additional challenges even with traditional farming methods. The other farms presented varying problems but economically how could I increase production, at lower cost with less time and energy as inputs. The bottom line is how I can make a profit at the posted county price. The PCP for Wasco County is $2.95 per bushel. Why this price? It's my marketing USDA price floor. If I can make a profit here then surly I can make a profit at a greater price. The Economics A friend and I started bouncing off each other different farming scenarios. We basically farmed the same. Having converted earlier from traditional inversion techniques. Moldboard plowing from 8-12 inches, field cultivation, rodweeding three times, fertilizing, and seeding to more conservation techniques. We chiseled twice or disc once and chiseled once, cultivated once or culti-weeded then fertilized, rodweeded several times and seeded. Seven, eight or even nine trips across the fields depending on the year. We added up the operations and were conservative on the costs. We talked with other neighbors doing similar studies. We used detailed analysis comparing and including depreciation schedules, Insurance costs, and many other factors. We compared studies that considered everything as opposed to operational economics that were simple concept based. We decided that the keep it simple stupid method worked best. We spent the next two years talking every single day about the system and how it could apply best to us. In the end (as expected) he uses a different drill than I, the hook as opposed to the disc, but farmers just can't agree on everything. The point is … talk to your neighbors. Bounce ideas off each other. It's easy to get side tracked on a tangent and forget a fatal flaw. Before we spent a dime we worked the numbers for two years. Even then we made mistakes… (Neither one of us will admit to them). Equipment Decisions Conceptually I wanted a drill that would go both ways. I needed a machine that I could use if no-till didn't work. I didn't want equipment that was dedicated to a particular system. I opted for a disc system that would press a furrow behind the seed row. I wanted the firm furrow bottom that would aid germination in marginal moisture conditions. I felt I needed to place fertilizer in an optimum orientation to the seed. At this point the systems use would be beneficial for both conventional and no-till systems. I began looking at different disc drills. The first drill I tried was a Great Plains DD air drill. It was a nice drill but it weighed more than my Challenger 45. I didn't want to re-tractor… remember the economics. I believe that my farming window for direct seeding was greater for fall planted crops. The farms to the north are lower elevation ranches. They have a longer growing season and warmer winters. My goal was to get a drill that I could use all winter long, rain or shine. Since I farm very steep slopes I need a drill that was gravity friendly. A drill that weighed 10,000 pounds more than I did just wasn't going to work. If you have problems… it isn't going to be on the nice ground. Fixing a mess on steep hills in winter is another problem. I needed a drill that was lighter. I opted for a 20 foot Krause fixed frame 10" DD drill. I then built a cross cart that I pulled behind the drill so I could see clearly any plugging problems that may develop. I created a tool bar up front and placed the fertilizer with Yetter coulters. I used both the side injectors and rear knifes both fluted and straight blades. I placed the fertilizer between the rows and in the rows. I eventually abandoned the system because the method of fertilizer delivery was unsatisfactory and the drill wasn't flexible enough to seed around terraces on steep hills. The next year I purchased a Krause 5400 three-fold 36' DD drill. I mounted a 400-gal tank on the drill and re-configured the cross-cart to pull the drill with an additional 750 gallons of solution 32. This gives me a total of 1150 gallons fertilizer and a range comparable to the seeding rate that I use. I was suprised to find that the system pulls as easy as the 20' drill. My weight is back to exceeding the tractor but I can control how much I carry. Fertilizer placement is accomplished by using a small Tee-Jet straight stream nozzle directly behind the DD opener and before the packer-wheel presses the furrow. I vary the pressure from 10 to 60+ psi depending on nozzle size, speed and rate. I use a micro-trac system and a small hypro roller pump. I plumbed the hydraulics to run the pump when the drill is in the down detent position. The nozzles all squirt directly in the seed row. I have not seen a damage at all. I have gone to over 120 pounds of N in the row and down to as little as 10 pounds without any unusual effects. I began wondering about the ability of placing fertilizer with disc and coulters after seeing the GP drill seed across a small draw. It all was placed together anyway. I then looked for any deleterious side effects during the next crop year and could see none. When I used the 20 Krause I placed the fertilizer between the seed rows. I did notice the weeds and volunteer grew great but the planted wheat may never get to the fertilizer row. I quit that right away and went to placing all N in the seed row. I've done it in spring, and fall, with no side effects. I want to stress the importance of keeping the 32 away from the drill DD disc and parts. When I placed the fertilizer in front of the disc's I made everything sticky… then rusty … then nothing… except parts bills. Plastic packer wheels won't rust but the bearings do go if not properly sealed with silicone. The choice of packer wheels is important. If the wheel is too wide and flat it will bridge the furrow and not pack the seed properly. The first drill had three-inch wheels and I did not receive proper seed compression. My newest drill has 2-inch wheels and I make sure that it compresses the furrow sidewall left by the disc. Costs and Comparisons When I traded for the first drill I knew from the mid-west experience that if I expected to get value out of my old equipment I had to trade as fast as possible. I have gotten rid of most of my high valued tillage equipment. I culled down to my lower cost and less desirable tools. I sold my good unitized bottom plow and kept the two 6 bottoms with less clearance. I sold the new chisel with treaders and kelp the older late model 30' Hesston. I made my own 60' suspended boom pac sprayer. This year I purchased a 90' Brandt. In the learning process I lost money on the Yetter coulters. I also lost on the first drill but I gained a great deal of information. All in all I broke about even on trades. The true cost saving has been in ware and tear on the Cat and Time for me. I think that in the end I will save 60% of my farming time. I have dropped my tractor hours by at least 60%. I haven't added harvest hours because I haven't had anything to harvest… thanks the droubt. We just haven't had any spring rains after the last of March for three years. The winters haven't been that great either and last year we had 7.5 inches in the total growing season…. It's a heck of a time to start a new system. When I was making decisions about which system to use I ask a lots of questions of mid-west manufactures. They indicated the evolution that had taken place in different areas. These included the type of drill, method and kind of fertilizer, placement, points, etc. I couldn't get enough information I wanted a drill that would go both ways, deliver the seed to the location without plugging and simple to use. Maintenance was not high on my agenda. I complain now about the cost and time it takes to maintain the drill, but it does the job. I save on all other
operations. No plows, chisels, cultivators. I save on fuel, at least 60%
on tractor fuel. I plant nearly twice the acreage. Direct seeding is so
cost effective that I can't imagine that I will ever go back to traditional
fallow. Chem-fallow is more the viable alternative. New products should
allow for two sprayings and this process should be cost effective. At
present I believe that a full complement of chemicals 3-4 In the end no-till, direct seeding allows for greater positive environmental conditions all across the board. Greater, faster moisture capacity, greater yields potential, and increased soil stability. I believe that much higher residues allow higher average soil temps allowing for less cold tolerant varieties. Varieties that aren't dormant all winter offer greater competition for cheat, and goat grass. I placed soil temp monitoring equipment at 6", 2" and ambient air, and sun light time. I found that within 20 minutes of sunshine the 6" depth warmed to equal the 2" depth. If you think about why we plant shallow late in the year, our hope was that the shallower we planted the warmer the soil would be and thus faster emergence. I also believe that when the soil does feeeze it doesn't freeze as solid or hard because that is more residues on the surface and allows for additional moisture incorporation. I can't recall if an ARS hydrologist has done measured event studies for exact calculations, but it should be high on the list. In closing I don't have enough information on the systems of direct seed, no-till, chemical fallow to adequately evaluate success of a system. I do not believe that annual cropping will work in all circumstances. I have come to believe that producers must remain flexible in his plan. His rotations, if any, his system design, and wheat, barley planting dates should all be flexible. Build flexibility into the system. When I look back on why grandfather chose moldboard plowing and summer-fallow he probably chose the system because it was the only system that afforded an opportunity to control weeds and disease problems. If we have enough tools in the chest to control these to culprits we'll be successful. Science should support research that helps the industry to be economically sustainable. Focus research only on systems that are economically sustainable. Research dollars are increasingly scarce and we must maximize our investment. Can herbicides be tank mixed with Sol 32 and be applied at seeding and reduce cost? Can we use less nutrition when placing and banding with the seed? Can we raise more wheat with less fertilizer in and annual cropping situation? How can we quantify accurately our agronomic zones? Can we breed new wheat and barley varieties that offer far greater disease resistance and less winter dormancy so they can compete with the grasses? Lately I've been reading the Capitol Presses articles on the rues that growers are pulling on the crop insurance companies. Insinuating that annual cropping through direct seeding isn't a viable option. Well be careful of the broad-brush approach. Crop Insurance tends to be a one shoe fits all industry. An example of this narrow-minded policy is a rule that a grower must insure all property the same in each county. After all the growing conditions in each county are the same. Well perhaps in the mid-west where there are ninety counties per state and the state is as flat as a board that is true. This rule doesn't work here and if we tamper with the rules we'll get something unfair to our neighbors. I know growers in arid areas that have 6 years experience and they now average very close to their summer-fallow yields and at far less cost. Those critics haven't invested 100, 200 or 300 thousand trying to make a system work that is backed and promoted by the Federal Government as well as the scientific community. I am sure my Grandfather didn't learn to summer-fallow in one or two years. I think we'll be lucky to do a credible job after a decade. Personally we'll be lucky to stay in business using the best science. If we are compete globally we must use the best equipment, science AND the best risk management insurance. |
||||
 Contact
us: Hans Kok, (208)885-5971
|
Accessibility | Copyright
| Policies | WebStats | STEEP Acknowledgement |
||||
