If you would like a printed copy of any of our back issues, then they can be purchased on Farm Marketplace. You can also download the PDFs or read online from links below.
-
How To Start Drilling For £8K
Clive Bailye’s seed drill of choice is his 6m John Deere 750A , which has been used exclusively for 3-4 seasons. Last year, with an increased acreage, the founder and publisher of this Direct Driller magazine thought a second seed drill was necessary. Having just the one machine was a risk and in a difficult season would mean drilling was delayed. He looked around and found a good condition Horsch CO6 tine drill advertised in Germany.
Words and pictures by Mike Donovan
After delivery he rebuilt the coulters to a narrow profile so as to reduce soil disturbance. He says the tine drill is very useful driling after straw crops such as osr and also through the straw on second crop cereals.
Buying the drill from a German farmer was not particularly complicated, and provided him with a higher spec machine than Horsh sell in the UK. The seed dart tyres are much wider, and the machine is fitted with blockage monitors as well as full width front packers and also a liquid fert application system.
A sheaf of photos were taken, and Clive then asked for some of specific parts to show wear. The deal was done at under £5,000 which Clive says is the market value of these machines which are too large for small farmers to buy. Original owners like to buy new and sell when the machine is still in good condition.
Narrow tines with wear tiles
@Clive knew he wanted to make changes, substituting the Horsch tines and coulters for something far narrower, and has ended up getting his own design of tine made, which has a wear tile made from Ferobide, far harder than tungsten. The drill is on the farm primarily for osr and 2nd crop cereals drilled into chopped straw and the 25cm spacing is okay for these crops.
Comments on Clive’s on-line forum, TFF, said the drill many not be so good with beans, as the slot is a mere 12mm wide. And in barley the spacing may well be too wide as it needs to be thick. Clive points out that the seed pipe can actually be a bit wider than 12mm as it is in the shadow of the point. It would be good to have the option of using it for beans.
Above left: The cheap CO6 is being calibrated ready for its first outing
Above right: The adapted Horsch is being filled by the home built drill logistics trailer with seed and liquid starter fert.
Getting around the German instructions
The Horsch came, of course, with a control box and instructions in German. More on-line discussion revealed that English instructions were available on the Horsch website, and another explained that Horsch was sourcing some of these parts from Agton in Canada anyway. Zealman from New Zealand explained that the button marked with callipers should be held down for around 5 seconds. The menu is where you adjust the tramline sequence, valve layout and row numbers.
Ball hitch is a continental standard and provides a positive connection between tractor and drill
The Stocks Wizard has a rotor modified for Avadex which otherwise leaks everywhere
A Stocks Wizard is on the back of the drill and used for Avadex. Here again the knowledge of actual farmers is helpful. Alistair Nelson warned that the rotor and the surrounding shroud need to be changed, and he got good advice “from Rick at Stocks”. Clive has the same setup on the 750A and says that the Avadex leaks everywhere unless the modification is made. The drill was acquired and modified in 2016 and the results have been excellent.
The machine went through the residue without many problems and having the second drill has meant more timely planting. Clive has shown that moving into No-Till is not the expensive exercise so many farmers think it might be. The total cost, after modifications which included replacing all tines and coulters, was under £8,000.
Author Mike Donovan writes: we have featured a number of home made direct drills in @Practical Farm Ideas, and are always interested in seeing more. Please contact mike editor@farmideas.co.uk or 07778877514.
-
Farmer Focus – Julian Gold
September 2024
Harvest 24 has been surprisingly good. We were blessed with fairly good weather conditions for cutting most crops and yields have been respectable ( Mostly around our 5 yr rolling average yields) Most pleasing crop was the Oilseed Rape; The whole 134 Ha was really even from day one and ripened so evenly that none of it was desiccated. Average yield across the whole area should be comfortably above 4 t/ha ,all in all, probably the most successful crop of OSR I have ever grown ( Have been growing it for 42 years )
This years crop got away well but we are now losing areas to slugs and flea beetles so the OSR roller coaster continues………
Other take home messages from harvest are that drilling late in spring is not necessarily catastrophic as both our Spring Barley and Spring beans yielded respectably from mid April planting ( Approx. 7t/Ha and approx. . 5 T/Ha respectively ) We also found that our wheat variety blends have tended to yield better than straight varieties. ( Main blend for Harvest 24 was Graham/Gleam/Champion )
We continued with lots of tramline trials again this year. NUE trials in Wheat looked at R leaf, SR3 ,Blue N and QLF Boost.
R Leaf , SR3 and Blue N all seemed to give very slight yield increases compared with control strips when used individually but when I layered them all together there was no additive effect which was disappointing.
For the second year running QLF Boost gave a yield increase with the best result from a single application of 60 L/Ha around GS 31.
A growth regulator trial in OSR gave positive results for a second year with yield and Harvestability both improved by use of a specific growth regulator during flowering.
The clover understorey trial field was a success with the spring oats yielding just over 6t/ha with minimal inputs. Clover will be grazed with weaned lambs and then further knocked back by low rate glyphosate before being direct drilled with Wheat.
The area of cover crops has been reduced this year as we have dropped Spring Beans in favour of NUM 3 Legume fallows put in for two years. This should give us a comparable or better margin than Spring Beans and at the same time should give us improvements in soil health through the rotation ( Am concerned that mediocre overwinter cover crops are not in the ground long enough to give real benefits to soil health )
Our only cover crops are now in front of Spring Barley. The two blocks of cover crops we planted this year were planted a week apart on 5th and 12th of August and it has reminded me what a massive difference a few days in early August makes to establishment and growth ( See photo ) A good reminder to be always chasing the combine out of the field when planting cover crops!
The latest SFI roll out is soaking up a lot of management thinking time. The original SFI intermediate level scheme we entered in 2022 was very straightforward . We then started a 2023 scheme in early ‘24 and am trying to put together a 2024 scheme which may start in 2025 ! ( At the same time we are running a countryside stewardship mid tier scheme )
Maybe I am stupid but quite frankly I am getting more and more confused with all the schemes and rules and unfair discrimination caused by the RPA not being able to cope fairly with multiple features in fields encompassing countryside stewardship and SFI schemes. The flexibility of the scheme rules and the ability to start schemes at any time of the year is also causing me a lot of head scratching as to how to enter options in the application ( e.g. Depending on agreement start date do you enter overwinter cover crops that are in the ground or ones that you are going to plant in next 12 months etc )
I am starting to see SFI as a combination of “ The tail wagging the dog” and “ trying to chase the elusive pot of gold at the end of the Rainbow “
It’s a shame , particularly because the RPA have tried to make the environmental schemes more accessible for farmers.
Another problem with SFI is that the flexible and “ wishy washy” rules enable Farmers to play the system for financial gain against the spirit of the scheme. For example, where farmers are planting NUM3 in spring and taking it out in September to plant wheat, or where companion cropping consists of sprinkling a few winter beans in a winter wheat crop and removing them at the earliest opportunity in spring , clearly not what the RPA intended with the options.
Off the soapbox and back to practical farming ; We organised a demo plough this year and ploughed a field for probably the first time in about 20 years. It is a field with a little patch of stubborn blackgrass and it will be interesting to see if the plough “ Reset Button” will fix the problem .
I know the die hard Regen Aggers will throw their hands up in horror but I can seriously see a return to rotational ploughing as a useful tool to re-instate in our farming system. I cannot see that occasional ploughing in a farm system that is concentrating on soil health and building OM is much worse than using multiple Glyphosate applications and spending around £100/Ha on herbicides to just kill blackgrass.
For the last 4 or 5 years we have been running a trial trying to compare a lower N and lower fungicide approach against our farm standard, i.e. looking to see what would happen if we moved the slider even further down the scale from industrial agriculture to organic farming than we are currently. ( Trial is 15Ha in the middle of a 46Ha field and stays in the same place to analyse all crops in the rotation )
Results have been very interesting and it is apparent that crops can be grown with much lower fungicide inputs and remain clean if attention is paid to nutrition (+/- Biological amendments. ) and Nitrogen applications are not excessive. Every year the trial area has a lower spend on Nitrogen and fungicides and a higher spend on trace elements and biological treatments than the farm standard but yields are always lower. Unfortunately every year the farm standard has performed better financially because Nitrogen and Fungicides are very cost effective inputs.
Where does that leave us?
Philosophically I want to farm in a sustainable way and minimise the impact of my farming on the natural environment I am working in, but I am employed as a Farm Manager to try to maximise profit. ( if I was a farm owner I could take a view that a lower profit and minimal environmental damage was an acceptable business objective )
From my experience , It is hard to see how mainstream agriculture can move en masse to a regenerative system unless the dice is loaded more in favour of sustainable farming.
This needs to be multi pronged : We need carrots and sticks from Government ( For example, better SFI schemes as carrots, Nitrogen and Pesticide taxes to reflect the carbon footprint and negative environmental profiles of these inputs as sticks ) I realise that legislation to reduce inputs is a bit naive as we are not in control of third country legislation and would put ourselves on an unlevel playing field but it is nice to dream…….
We also need a concerted effort to educate consumers so that they may be willing to pay a premium for “ half way house “ produce which is not organic but better than Industrial ag products. It is great to see Schemes such as Wildfarmed and the Green Farm Collective starting to reward regen ag farmers so that we are better able to stomach the slightly lower yields.
-
Agent in Focus – Peter Roberts
Integrating Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) actions into Arable Contract Farming Agreements provides a number of challenges for agreements moving forward.
Peter Roberts, Associate Partner in the Agribusiness team at leading property consultancy Fisher German, discusses the considerations ahead for farmers deciding on their best options now that Defra has launched SFI 24.
With the decline in Basic Payment Scheme (BPS) payments, many growers are now looking at the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) as a way to ‘claw back’ subsidies in a different form and also to make improvements where possible to help improve soil organic matter and reduce inputs.
Contract Farming Agreements (CFA) structures have differed with BPS either in or out of the agreement, meaning in most cases farmers’ prior charge has altered usually with a larger first charge, where BPS income has been included in the agreement.
With the BPS de-linked payment continuing its staged decline to zero by 2028, this has – and will continue to – prompt a review of the CFA structure, particularly surrounding the level of prior charge and the split of the divisible surplus.
Bubbling away in the background, contractors’ costs have also risen in recent years, particularly on fuel. Many agreements are now structured with a fuel multiplier as an addition to the contract fee to support the contractors’ remuneration.
SFI income in the form of the expanded SFI 24 offer that was released this August by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra), provides a number of options that support various actions, and these need to be considered carefully to weigh up the positives and negatives.
The challenges and discussions now surround whether the SFI options should be included within the CFA, or, if they are included, whether the CFA terms need to be amended.
farmer checking his cattle It is really important that farmers give this careful consideration and don’t make a swift decision without considering various factors.
That is crucial because we are likely to see more CFA agreements in years to come. With the backdrop of a poor harvest in 2023 and similar predictions this year due to the weather we have experienced, profit and particularly cashflow are both impacted. Machinery inflation continues and with asset finance now more expensive, economies of scale are now more important than ever in arable farming.
Those businesses with no solution or those who haven’t considered future succession, particularly where this is looming, may look more favourably towards CFAs since it will offer reduced risk but they will still have the ability to retain their farming status and the tax benefits that this brings.
It is important to reflect on SFI CFA integration. A good approach is to breakdown the SFI actions (in this case those which are eligible for arable land) into the following categories:
- Management plan options
- Boundary options & smaller in field options
- Whole field options – Used as Break Crop Replacements
- Static Whole Field Options
The management plan options such as CIPM1 (integrated pest management plan) will most likely already be done annually by the contractor or by the agronomist and should be included within the CFA and any costs associated with it
Boundary options and small plots of environmental crops need to be reviewed, especially where they have little impact on cropped areas, and it might be wise to remove the more marginal bits from cropping anyway, it would be better if they are excluded from the agreement.
The farmer will then take the income for these in the N01 account and pay the contractor or another party separately for operations required to manage the options, which will be similar to the management of hedgerows which is typically outside the CFA.
Then there are whole field options which may affect yields, such as not applying insecticide or those that support the growing of a crop, such as a companion crop – typically impacting the contractor – potentially leading to an extra operation. The income and costs for these would go into the CFA.
For farmers with whole field options – break crop replacements, there are a number of factors to consider.
There are options such as CNUM3 – Legume fallow, which now looks favourable again since the latest Defra announcement has now made it rotational once more.
Options such as this can provide benefits over other break crops like Oil Seed Rape (OSR). At current OSR prices we are seeing break-even yields around the 1.3 t/ac mark over CNUM3 legume fallow. That means if farmers can’t grow OSR above 1.3 t/ac and the rotation limits greater inclusion of other more profitable break crops, CNUM3 could be considered as a lower risk alternative.
With the option being rotational and supporting entry to first wheats, the income should be included within the CFA.
But consideration should also be given to what level of the contract fee should be charged compared to other crops. A reduced rate fee and separate fuel multiplier to take account of no combining and less spraying should be considered.
Then there are the whole field options – Static Options (three years) where the existing rules allow for 25% area limit for some options – such as the CAHL2 – Winter Bird food option, which can be used as a static option, at £900/ha plus income with the inclusion of stacking options. This does offer a good margin without the yield risk versus the farmers’ return out of CFA and could be looked at being treated differently to a break crop option.
Taking land out in this way will not be popular with contractors, and consideration should be given depending on how big the 25% is and how it would affect the contractors’ business because many of their costs will still continue to be incurred.
There will be more weighting where a CFA is being retendered and the farmer opts to take out up to 25% with plenty of notice, rather than part way through the term and many agreements will have a permanent withdrawal limit, which will need cross checking.
Farmer working in field with tractor agriculture So, in summary, historically the BPS, with values back in 2020 at £93/ac has helped prop up farmers’ returns in poorer farming years, whether the BPS is in or out of a CFA agreement.
With this now going, many more farmers in CFAs should look at:
- Firstly, entering into an SFI agreement to generate income, in most cases for activities that are already being done.
- Many of the actions require the contractor’s input and, in most cases, bar boundary features, the income should go into the agreement.
- If the farmer is offering such income, it will support their level of prior charge.
- Larger removal of land into whole field static options out of the CFA needs assessing carefully, particularly if a farmer is part way through an agreement.
- But with the existing working capital required to fund combinable crops, and the difficulty of the last two seasons, larger scale static SFIs on the more marginal land could be considered if it is appropriate with the farmer’s relationship with the contractor.
All of this may seem complicated and with Government advice being updated, it is important for farmers to gain expert advice to make sure they are making the right decision for the short and long-term future of their businesses.
-
BASE UK
We are the premier organisation, dedicated to promoting independent, farmer led, regenerative agricultural knowledge across the UK.
Our mission is to enhance soil health, increase biodiversity, and support businesses by embracing sustainable farming practices that benefit both farmers and the environment.
BASE-UK are pleased to announce the sponsorship of Joe Collins and the Harper Adams Conservation Agriculture Systems Experiment. Sponsorship of this experiment ensures the continuation of this Farmer-led on-farm project, therefore building on the existing dataset, which is useful to farmers in aiding and advising on the transition to conservation (regenerative) agriculture.
Joe is a final-year PhD candidate funded by the Midlands Integrative Biosciences Training Partnership (MIBTP) and a Senior Research Associate at the Earth Rover Program. He has an MSc in Sustainable Crop Production from the University of Warwick and a BSc (Hons) in Agriculture with Crop Management from Harper Adams University. He has over ten years of experience working in the agricultural industry in the UK and abroad.
Joe’s PhD research is titled “A Systems-Level Evaluation of Conservation Agriculture in the UK” which involves multi-disciplinary research on agronomy, soil science, economics, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Traditionally, many scientific studies in this area only use data from a single site collected over one or two years but evidence suggests that to identify the true effects of transition to a CA system, these need to run for a longer period in order to provide better economic and physical data to assist farmers.
To find out more about Joe’s project and his recent presentation at the World Congress of Conservation Agriculture held in Cape Town, South Africa, visit our website – www.base-uk.co.uk. Joe will be presenting his latest data at our Annual Conference.
Annual Conference 2025
“Robust Farming in a Changing Climate”.
Wednesday 12th and Thursday 13th February 2025 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, Stephenson Quarter, Newcastle. Speakers include Dr Kris Nichols, Frederik Larson, Prof Wendy Russell, John Sansome, Roger Davis and more speakers still to be confirmed. Members will receive booking information via email, and details are available on the website. Tickets start from £99. Student and Under 25’s subsidised ticket offer also available.
Look out for our newsletter! We have just launched our first quarterly edition, sent to all our members and available to anyone interested in learning more about what we do. To subscribe, contact rebecca@base-uk.co.uk
Upcoming events: from October to March, we endeavour to run webinars and weather permitting, farm walks and visits. To find out more about our program check out our website calendar.
- 17th October – Alix Ritchie, Farmstrong, Scotland – webinar.
- 22nd and 23rd November – LandAlive Conference, Bath & West Showground – Join us at this inaugural event to connect with our members, some of whom will be speaking at the conference.
- 27th and 28th November – Croptec, NAEC, Stoneleigh.
- 15th and 16th January 2025 – LAMMA, NEC, Birmingham.
- 12th and 13th February 2025 – Annual Conference.
Become a member:
BASE-UK is a welcoming and dynamic network where you can continuously learn from both peers and industry specialists whilst enjoying the camaraderie of a supportive community.
As a BASE-UK member, you will enjoy a range of benefits, including:
- Access to exclusive meetings, webinars, events, and farm walks.
- Networking opportunities with like-minded people.
- Our Annual Conference – our premier event to learn and network.
- Educational resources.
- Research – connections with Rothamsted Research, James Hutton Institute, Harper Adams University and several other research groups and universities latest research and updates on conservation and regenerative agriculture.
- Ongoing sponsorship for research undertaken by Joe Collins, PhD student at Harper Adams University.
- Forum – a private forum for discussions available only to members.
- Earn BASIS and NRoSO points annually just by being a member as well as from some of the events organised by us.
For more information about how to join visit our website www.base-uk.co.uk
-
Adapting nitrogen at Strategic Cereal Farms
Senior Knowledge Transfer Manager Henny Lowth introduces the nitrogen trials at AHDB Strategic Cereal Farms, ahead of the release of this year’s results in November.
How nitrogen behaves in farming systems is often variable and hard to pin down. With nitrogen prices stuck above pre-Ukraine-war and pre-energy-crisis levels, there is an emphasis on the nutrient in trials at our Strategic Cereal Farms.
Strategic Cereal Farm North
David Blacker, who hosts Strategic Cereal Farm North (Shipton, York), had clear ideas about what he wanted to get out of his harvest 2024 crops. But, as they say, man plans, God laughs. The UK went on to experience one of the wettest growing seasons since records began. Not good news for David’s winter wheat, which was earmarked for nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) trials.
David wants to optimise nitrogen use without unacceptable yield/quality penalties or generating lush biomass that could encourage foliar disease. The initial plan was to test the efficiency of foliar-applied liquid nitrogen compared to soil-applied nitrogen and study the impact on disease pressure.
With crop condition and growth patchy and very high soil moisture levels in the spring, the replicated tramline trials were deemed unlikely to provide a fair test of the treatments. Additionally, the crop failed to show signs of a response to the 70 kg of nitrogen applied at the first split. Even after three weeks, the crop stayed yellow and was losing tillers. A soil mineral nitrogen (SMN) test suggested that most of this nitrogen was probably lost to the atmosphere by denitrification or in drainage water.
To help “rescue” the crop, we shifted the trial approach to help the remaining nitrogen applications hit the mark. We put more focus on a slow-release foliar product, which has potential to reduce the total nitrogen dose. With roots compromised after sitting wet, the season provided a fantastic opportunity to assess the merit of foliar applications.
The farm standard nitrogen treatment was 200 kg/ha, applied to soil across three splits (adjusted for expected yield, as per RB209 guidance). Two foliar treatments were also tested. Both received 70 kg of soil-applied nitrogen at the first split, with a further 50 kg/ha applied at either the second or third split. When a split had no soil-applied nitrogen, the equivalent of 40 kg/ha of foliar-applied nitrogen was applied instead. The total applied nitrogen in the foliar approach was equivalent to 160 kg/ha. The approach was reviewed throughout the season, taking crop demand and nitrogen limits (N-max) into account.
Strategic Cereal Farm East
Our latest Strategic Cereal Farm in the East is at Morley Farms in Norfolk. The Morley Agricultural Foundation (tmaf.co.uk), which owns the land, invests in agricultural research and educational initiatives for farmers and students. The farm has hosted trials since 1965.
Host David Jones now wants to dive even deeper into trialling, with the reduction of inputs a top priority. In addition to targeting herbicides (especially to manage the farm’s rye-grass populations) and pesticides (to fine-tune the aphid/BYDV management plan), he wants to reduce nitrogen use.
Like many farms, economic optimal nitrogen application rates, NUE and yields are highly variable at Morley. David wants to pinpoint the causes of variation. Thankfully, the farm has Morley Soil and Agronomic Monitoring Study (SAMS) sites to hand. Each site is about 150 m2, with the network covering areas with high, low and variable yields (and headland sites). They are a treasure trove of data, providing long-term (2018–23) information on soil assessment results, grain nutrients, yield and management records for 29 arable sites.
NUE is already assessed at eight sites, with Old Hall Piece Field particularly interesting. It was the only SAMS field (with five SAMS sites) in winter wheat for harvest 2024 and has historically variable yields and soil electrical conductivity (EC). EC is a useful measure because it can help estimate soil texture, which is linked with NUE and yield variation. The field is hosting replicated nitrogen response trials in three contrasting management zones.
The farm will also compare variable-rate approaches (against the farm standard). Many farmers now use N-sensors, which often apply more nitrogen to areas associated with lower biomass. The theory is that this will boost growth and level the playing field. As this may not be the best universal approach, the trial will examine the best way to exploit such technologies.
Like our farm in the North, comparisons of foliar-applied, controlled-release nitrogen with a traditional soil-applied nitrogen dose at the final split have also been made. A replicated tramline trial is building on this work to unpick nitrogen responses and deliver the greatest NUE. The research will investigate all elements of NUE and consider other major nutrients (phosphorus and potassium).
Strategic Cereal Farm Scotland
In its fourth year of a six-year tenure, Strategic Cereal Farm Scotland (located near Fife) is currently the longest-running farm on our books. Host farmer David Aglen also uses multi-season trials to compare foliar nutrition with ammonium nitrate applications. Additionally, he uses in-crop measurements – derived from a Brix meter (measures plant sugar status) and SPAD (measures leaf nitrogen status) – to tailor nitrogen. A no-fungicide treatment has been successfully overlayed in these trials, which will provide valuable data on the impact of tailored nutrition on disease levels.
Releasing results
Each autumn, we release the latest results from the farm network. This year, the findings will be launched at the inaugural Strategic Cereal Farm Conference (near York on 7 November 2024). We will discuss 14 trials from across the network, including those at Strategic Cereal Farm South, which leaves the network this year. On-farm experience will be used to answer many key questions, including:
- How can nitrogen be reduced without unacceptable yield/quality penalties?
- How useful is the mechanical weed control of grass weeds?
- What is the best way to establish and destroy cover crops?
If you are unable to join us, don’t worry – our website and social channels will provide the main takeaway messages.
The 16-strong Monitor Farm network also features several NUE trials – from adapting RB209 recommendations to using foliar nitrogen, micronutrients, ‘miracle’ products and grain nutrient data. We are also currently looking at how best to exploit sensor technologies, from soil sensors to hyperspectral satellites. There will be lot to debate during this winter’s meetings.
Our new cover crops champion network is also on a NUE journey. Supported by AHDB, the champions will follow on-farm trial design principles to assess the impact of the various cover crop approaches. We will share their journeys, from establishment to termination (and beyond) online. We have also commissioned a review to help update cover crop guidance, which will consider the longer-term impacts of cover crops on soil health, including nutrient availability.
Finally, we have conducted a strategic review of RB209 in 2024, with several hundred people suggesting how to improve the guide’s format and content. NUE is a key theme (as it was in the recent review of the Recommended Lists). There is a hunger for information to help tailor nitrogen recommendations to specific systems, farms and fields. Perceived information gaps identified include nutrient availability (from soils and organic materials), optimum application strategies, as well as the use and interpretation of in-season nutrient tests and analyses.
There was also interest in broadening the scope of RB209 to include more crops, more detailed nutrient data (beyond the high-profile N, P and K, such as micronutrients) and to help calculate the carbon footprint of fertilisers. Options on how to improve the guidance will be considered by the RB209 review committee at the end of the year.
Nutrient management is one of the most important areas for AHDB investment. This is clear from farmer responses to our new research process, which receives ideas from levy-payers and turns them into projects. In fact, it has been one of the most frequently cited topics.
Our investment will continue to evolve RB209 and on-farm practice. With more projects around the corner, it is an exciting time for nutrient management.
Further information
ahdb.org.uk/strategic-cereal-farms
ahdb.org.uk/monitor-farms
ahdb.org.uk/cover-crop-champions
ahdb.org.uk/rb209-review
ahdb.org.uk/research-ideas
-
Drill Manufacturer – Amazone and Ian Partridge
Based in Aberdeenshire, Ian Partridge owns and runs, along with the family, 800 acres of mixed farming with around 550 acres dedicated to cereals and the rest put over to 200 head of cattle and 12,000 chickens. Looking to streamline his crop establishment practice and work the soil less, Ian has recently shifted away from a plough-based system and adopted a mix of both min-till and no-till techniques.
The move to an alternative establishment system was also partly driven by a change of staff and so Ian had a demonstration of an AMAZONE Cirrus trailed cultivator drill and was impressed with its build quality, the ease of maintenance and, above all, its operator-friendliness. “The conditions when we had the demonstration at the back end of the year were far from ideal, but the crops came through amazingly well and are looking quite good now”, comments Ian.
Shortly after this demonstration, Ian invested in a twin-hopper, Cirrus 4003-2C with the Minimum TillDisc system up-front. These straight-running, wavey profile discs cut a narrow slot in front of, and in line, with each coulter, allowing it to be used as well as a direct drill. ‘We can really sink the front discs in deep, especially if it’s tough going, and this enables us to form a clean, straw-free root zone for the seed’, adds Ian. In these situations, the front discs are set to depth of 4” to 5” without impacting the seeding depth which is maintained at a consistent 1” – 2” via the TwinTeC+ coulters, “This makes it easier for the root structure to develop and, as the water can drain away, it means that the seed row doesn’t sit wet”.
The possibility of being able to adjust the front disc depth from the cab was another big positive for Ian, ‘With one of our previous machines, when we added more pressure to the front discs it just lifted the whole tool carriage out of work”. Furthermore, being able to adjust the coulter pressure from the cab was an added bonus, Now, when changing between fields with different soil types, planting depth can still be maintained. When switching seed types, the seeding depth has also proved to be an easy adjustment, being a case of just going round to the rear of the drill and turning the 3 depth adjustment handles against a scale.
Ian’s previous drill combination was equipped with RoTeC pro coulters but, with the new Cirrus, the decision was made to change to the double disc, TwinTeC+ coulter. “The change to TwinTeC+ means that we are achieving a superior consistency of seeding depth, greater penetration and also better seed coverage”, Ian goes on to say. With an increase from 55 kg to 100 kg of coulter pressure along with the hard-wearing, zero maintenance discs, the benefits are fairly obvious, especially when simplicity and ease of maintenance and operation are some of the farm’s top priorities.
Regarding the calibration, Ian found the external TwinTerminal “just brilliant”. Being able to do everything from a small screen next to the metering system allows for quick calibration without the need to clamber back and forth up to the cab. In fact, states Ian, “Just about everything is done from down here, priming the metering roller, running the calibration test and then weighing it out, you never need to leave the platform. You can have everything done in minutes”.
The 60:40 split, 4,000 litre hopper on the Cirrus-2C, means that drill can handle both seed and fertiliser simultaneously with both media going down to the TwinTeC+ coulters. Upgrading up to the Cirrus-2CC adds the additional FerTeC coulters meaning that the fertiliser can be placed separately to the seed (DoubleShoot), with the seed (SingleShoot), or a mixture of both. The drill can also be equipped with the GreenDrill catch crop seeder box if required.
The investment in the Cirrus, coupled with the recent addition to the fleet of a 3 metre, AMAZONE Ceus 3000-TX trailed disc and tine cultivator, means the farm now has a streamlined approach to crop establishment; either a pass with the cultivator then followed by the drill or, for no-till, just a pass with the drill on its own.
The switch over to the AMAZONE Cirrus has resulted in a much more cost-effective method of establishment than conventional drilling systems often found in the area.
-
Rotational complexity increases cropping system output
A summary of the paper published in One Earth, Volume 7, Issue 9, 20 September 2024, Pages 1638-1654 – https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.07.008
Agriculture faces increasing challenges from unpredictable weather. Diversifying crops over space and time can help maintain productivity and enhance the resilience of agroecosystems by enabling farmers to adapt to environmental risks. We quantified crop output under different rotations using 20 long-term datasets. By examining crops and complete rotations, we quantified the portfolio effect under various growing conditions. Assessing outcomes using multiple metrics, soil types, and cropping systems reduces uncertainty about adopting more diverse rotations, crucial under increasing production risks from adverse weather. This will inform stakeholders—from farmers to policymakers to lenders—in supporting cropping systems, policies, or programs that reduce risk. Moving forward, our efforts can enhance our understanding of the value of diverse crop rotations and insights connecting agricultural practices to societal outcomes from farm economic performance to consumer nutritional choices.
Summary
Growing multiple crops in rotation can increase the sustainability of agricultural systems and reduce risks from increasingly adverse weather. However, widespread adoption of diverse rotations is limited by economic uncertainty, lack of incentives, and limited information about long-term outcomes. Here, we combined 36,000 yield observations from 20 North American long-term cropping experiments (434 site-years) to assess how greater crop diversity impacts productivity of complete rotations and their component crops under varying growing conditions. Maize and soybean output increased as the number of species and rotation length increased, while results for complete rotations varied by site depending on which crops were present. Diverse rotations reduced rotation-level output at eight sites due to the addition of lower-output crops such as small grains, illustrating trade-offs. Diverse rotations positively impacted rotation-level output under poor growing conditions, which illustrates how diverse cropping systems can reduce the risk of crop loss in a changing climate.
Introduction
Crop diversification through rotations is a key strategy to improve agroecosystem resilience under climate uncertainty. Diverse rotations, incorporating annual, perennial, or cover crops, support ecosystem services like carbon sequestration, pest control, and water protection, and can increase yields. However, long-term data is crucial to understand the full impact, and previous studies have focused on individual crops, missing broader rotational benefits. This study, analyzing data from multiple North American sites, found that while individual crops like maize and soybean benefit from rotational complexity, results for complete rotations depend on composition. Complex rotations also reduce crop loss risks in poor conditions. The study highlights that diversifying rotations may not harm yields and can help mitigate losses in challenging climates.
Results
Despite the dominance of simplified crop rotations in North American agriculture, the findings suggest that increasing rotational complexity can maintain or improve crop-level output with minimal trade-offs at the rotation level. By quantifying output on a financial basis, the study highlights the influence of highly productive crops and market valuation, shaped by government policies such as subsidies for maize-based biofuels and confined animal feed operations. Alternative metrics, including net returns, nutritive value, or environmental impact, may not favour simple rotations of just one or two crops. Measuring output in financial terms also reveals potential trade-offs, particularly during the establishment year for perennial forages, which sometimes leads to mixed results. These trade-offs should be considered when adopting more diverse rotations, especially without wider policy changes. Although the approach favours simplified systems, the findings show that under poor growing conditions, simplified rotations can perform worse than more complex ones, reflecting their reliance on subsidised crop insurance in the US.
Barriers to adopting more complex rotations include increased management complexity, the need for new equipment, and economic or psychological hurdles associated with growing less profitable crops on prime land. Limited local markets for crops such as small grains and perennial forages also discourage diversification. However, adoption could be promoted by building stakeholder networks that support diversification, along with broader strategies such as crop breeding and institutional reforms to remove economic barriers. New organisational forms, such as partnerships and legal frameworks, as well as growing interest in ecosystem services or carbon markets, could also support this transition, though the lack of consensus on environmental accounting remains a challenge.
Scaling up complex rotations requires policy reform. While the study shows mixed results at the rotation level using a financial approach, factoring in production costs and the environmental impacts of high-input systems could make lower-value crops more economically attractive. Additionally, higher market prices for perennial crops, such as those used for bioenergy or carbon capture, would further improve the outcomes of more complex rotations.
-
Turning soil, crop and cow health around on tricky land
A move towards biological farming is setting one mixed farm up for a better future. Sara Gregson reports
Flood water in the lowest lying fields of Brook Farm, Repton in the East Midlands can hang around for months at a time and is a challenge for crops and animals alike.
Father Andrew Sread with his wife Tina and his sons Martin, in charge of the arable side of the business and James who manages the dairy, are fourth and fifth generation farmers, moving to Repton 18 years ago. The farms cover 571ha (1400 acres) with 122ha (300 acres) owned. The average annual rainfall is more than 900mm (35.4 inches).
On the banks of the River Trent, flood water can come up to the top of five barred gates and ducks can be seen swimming down the tramlines. In one flash flood in May, when Martin went to rescue a new-born calf that was stranded, he was astounded to see voles and mice swimming towards him trying to find dry land.
“Flooding is inevitable here and some low-lying hollows maybe underwater for five months,” he says. “They don’t dredge the river anymore and housing developments and the building of the A50 mean rainfall comes rushing down to our fields. And the water is dirty and oily, not great for growing crops or grazing animals.”
Change of direction
Four years ago, the family was becoming frustrated with ever increasing input bills and declining outputs, in both the arable crops and the dairy herd. They changed their agronomist to Daniel Lievesley from DJL Agriculture based in Derby.
Having worked for an agrochemical distributor, Daniel felt that growing crops relying on chemical and synthetic fertilisers was not the way he wanted to work. He now spends his time transitioning growers towards a biological approach, as he believes this benefits everyone, economically and environmentally.
“We are impressed with Dan’s approach,” says Martin. “He has a completely different mindset to our old agronomist – who only ever wanted to use a different chemical. Dan has taken us back to basics and it is working. Soil organic matter has risen from 2.2% to 3.4% in just four years.
Martin (left) and Daniel in last year’s crop of hybrid rye “Three years ago we walked 55 acres looking for earth worms in the soil. There should have been three worms per spadeful, but there were none. Now we can do the same walk and there are many more than three worms and spirals of soil where the worms are pulling it down. We have stopped using insecticides and there are a lot more beetles and other insects too.”
Dan’s approach is also having an effect on the bank balance, with half the fertiliser, half the fungicides and no plant growth regulators used on the cereal crops last year. This has reduced input costs by at least £75/ha.
The Sreads have changed the cereal varieties they grow to ones which may not be so high yielding but have greater resistance to diseases such as septoria and yellow rust. They now do one fungicide spray at T 1.5, rather than three. For example, Extase has yielded 11t/ha but the inputs have more than halved, so the margins are better.
Tackling blackgrass
One of the main problems on the arable side of the business is blackgrass. Dan has advocated different cultivation methods and following a wider rotation.
“In the past we used to plough and use a combi-drill to sow the seeds. When we power harrowed, the soil was a purple/brown colour and it looked dead. Now, after minimal cultivations, it looks crumblier and the structure is definitely opening up and improving.
“We take as much care as possible. We use a low disturbance subsoiler if compaction is a problem, all the tractors have flotation tyres and the combine is on tracks. When it is wet, we never sink into the ground or make deep ruts like we used to.”
Two years ago the Sreads invested in an Amazone Cayena 6001 trailed seed drill, which has saved 60% in fuel usage when establishing crops. They also use a John Deere scruffler and Mzuri straw rake to chit blackgrass weed seeds 2cm below the drill. This also cuts slug activity, which in wet years like 2024, can be a problem.
Daniel’s new automated soil sampling kit The Sreads are now growing a much wider range of crops, including short term grass and clover and longer-term herbal leys.
“We use Oliver Seeds with all our clients because their mixtures are flexible and fit so well with our approach,” says Dan.
“At Brook Farm, Martin is using Crimson Tide, a fast-growing westerwold with crimson clover for a one year cutting ley. This is good for helping to control blackgrass and provides high dry matter silage in spring which contributes to the dairy cow diet. Winter wheat is then direct drilled into it.
Similarly a three-year herbal ley made up of a variety of Oliver Seeds species including chicory, plantain, legumes such as white and red clover, sainfoin, birdsfoot trefoil and a range of grasses including perennial ryegrass, timothy and festulolium, is being grown for the cows to graze, before being direct drilled back into wheat after three years.
For a dual-purpose grazing and cutting ley, the Sreads have sown Broadsword, made up of high performing hybrid ryegrasses such as Tetragraze, Perseus festulolium and intermediate perennial ryegrasses.
The silage fields are an intrinsic part of the arable rotation and in most years three cuts are taken, weather and soil conditions permitting.
Forty hectares (98 acres) of maize is also grown for silage. Instead of leaving the soil bare over winter, as used to happen, a fast-growing cover crop is now sown, including forage oats and vetches, and used for an early cut of silage. Once harvested, farmyard manure is spread before the next maize seed is drilled in April or May.
Martin also grows oats to feed the cows and tried hybrid rye last year on lighter land, as another crop to tackle blackgrass. Oilseed rape is grown with a companion crop of buckwheat, and beans and oats are being grown as a bicrop for the first time this year.
Crop nutrition
Dan carries out sap tests, which measure the nutrient concentrations and has them analysed by independent laboratories. This, together with soil sampling, using automated kit on a utility task vehicle (UTV) which is new to Dan’s business this year, gives detailed information on the nutrient composition of the soils.
“Some of the soils at Brook Farm have a high pH and are also high in magnesium,” says Dan. “I have advised Martin to spread humates and fulvates that feed the soil and naturally increase uptake of nutrients in plants. Also to spread boron at crop establishment in fields with excessive levels of calcium, as this prevents boron deficiency later. Applications of sulphur are also needed to help with nitrogen uptake.
Martin (left) and James in one of the grazing fields – showing where grass was overseeded last autumn “Foliar feeds containing magnesium, calcium and potassium are also made up and sprayed onto the crops. Adding nutrients that are shown to be needed, do many jobs – including adding strength to the cereal straw so no PGRs are required, and also help overcome disease and pest pressure.
“High calcium fertilisers are applied to the cow pastures which has reduced the cost of bought-in nitrogen by 20%.”
Dairy cows
The dairy herd is also going through transition, as James is moving away from pure Holsteins to a smaller, more resilient cow.
“We are looking to have a stronger, healthier animal that has good feet. She may have slightly less output, but she will also have less problems.” says James. “We introduced a Lineback bull, a rare American breed, three years ago and are now back-crossing to Shorthorn, Montbeliarde and Ayrshire.”
The 200-cow closed herd calves all year round and has an annual average milk yield of 7,500 litres. All the calves are reared on pasteurised whole milk and creep feed. The males are sold at Melton Mowbray and Leek markets and all the females are kept as replacements.
The cows are loose housed in winter on straw from the arable side of the business. This is put back to the arable fields as farmyard manure.
One hundred tonnes of home-grown winter cereals are milled, added to the various winter forages and fed as a total mixed ration (TMR). Bought-in cake is also fed in the parlour.
The cows graze 61ha (150 acres) of permanent pasture which has never been ploughed. Extended flooding in some of these fields left bare patches which were overseeded last autumn.
The milk is sold to Arla on a high animal welfare contract. The Sreads have also recently started to sell milk and milk shakes to the public through a vending machine in the farmyard under their Mercia brand.
“We are continually adapting our management of the whole farm – treating the soils, the arable crops, the grazing ground and the cows as a whole,” says Martin. “We are still in the transition phase, but we know the direction we want to be travelling in and Dan is helping us achieve this. Despite the challenges we face, we are now definitely in a much better place.”
DJL Agriculture promotes biological farming solutions to ensure farming success and profitability by putting life back into farmers’ soils. Daniel Lievesley concentrates on the cropping side of clients’ businesses, while his father David works with dairy, beef and sheep producers delivering holistic nutrition consultancy.
David recently wrote a poem about where he sees farming has gone wrong in the past, and where a regenerative approach and a focus on soil health, can take farmers in the future.
Soil
The soil as the answer
To make our daily bread,
Big Pharma took it over
To fill its banks instead
They filled it full of poison
To feed the growing crowd,
But how they call it progress
Is nothing to be proud.
There’s an army down below us
That works beneath our feet,
It has a balanced system
To make out food complete.
Things go round in circles
History tells us so,
Carbon is not something new.
Take a look in the hedgerows
Has no one ever seen
Nature does not grow in pretty rows
With nothing in between.
When we talk about our soil
Let’s think about our health
Not just bulging bank accounts and
Companies growing wealth.
The soil has the answer
Let’s treat it with respect,
Embrace our regenerative farming
And our planet will protect.
By David John Lievesley
djl@djlagriculture.co.uk
-
Farmer Focus – Tom Sewell
September 2024
Is 2024 the year to forget?
Three weeks ago Chris asked me to write another article for DD and at the time we were still busy combining so I marked the email as unread and started to think about what to write!
And to be honest for the past three weeks it has been very difficult to find much positive to say about this past 6 months.
I know I’m not alone in feeling disappointed/deflated/frustrated/tired/perplexed (name your adjective!) at what’s been thrown at us this past year. From the 6 months of virtually continual rain starting last October to reducing commodity prices and increasing input prices particularly fungicides and machinery. Then to further disappoint we chose to apply Nufol to our promising group 1 blend (Nelson, Extase & Edgar) only for it to satisfy every milling criteria apart from Protein content. Then when we started cutting wheat in August there was Ergot to be found in certain samples which will require colour sorting.
Our combine, which was serviced extensively, didn’t really perform as its parts & labour bill would have you assume either! Stupid time consuming breakdowns added to the building frustration in the first few days of harvest which would see us cut 3000 acres between out 2 combines in nearly as many fields!
The Great British (Kent) public seem to have even less patience and tolerance of anything slowing their journey as they speed through the back lanes at break-neck speeds in their white Audis, even though they seem enthused by the first 3 series of Clarksons Farm!!
To add to my cheerful demeanour we agreed to take on an extra 13ha of land that had lavender beds in it and another 20ha which is recently grubbed apple orchards. The relevance of this is that the lavender is grown under plastic and anyone who has ever grubbed orchards will know that invariably there are roots, wire and stakes left behind!!
We also decided to bale most of our straw this year. For the past, well forever really, we’ve always chopped our straw but with strong P & K levels and an apparent shortage and demand for straw this year we/I decided to lay everything down in rows and sell to a local contractor. This worked splendidly with our local contractor FGS Agri sending in a brand new high density baler to follow the 2 combines at speeds of up to 20kph at times! This worked well and with a bale chaser following behind the fields were cleared quickly. That was until we got to our 120ha of spring oats which when cut at 13% moisture left the straw in the row/bale at 40%. The Polish baler driver Michael, after saying lots of rude words beginning with F, told us to leave it a week to dry out and he’d be back to bale it all up. With 120 ha of wet oat straw waiting for warm sunny weather it proceeded to rain for about 10 days!! The rows collapsed from sitting nicely on top of the stubble to hugging the floor and were soaked!! The weather eventually warmed up and we finished the last few fields of harvest, blew down the combines, had a beer or two with the harvest team and then I woke up in the middle of the night with the realisation that my entire first wheat area was made up of grubbed apple orchards, lavender under plastic and 300 acres of wet oat straw in rows on about 23 fields!!
It was at this time that I started thinking of alternative career choices! A call to my agronomist Tom Reynolds (affectionately known as Roundup Reynolds) is always good at these times of stress and desperation. He knows when to laugh and when to come up with some helpful advice! We agreed that the straw needed to come off the fields as trying to chop it up with toppers or flails would just leave us a potential slug haven. So yesterday my Polish baler driving friend returned, said lots of words beginning with F and duly baled 17 fields in an afternoon & evening!(Michael you are an effing superstar!)
Some of the bales weighed over 1000kg and tomorrows jobs is to work out what to do with 291 bales! (120×90 HD)
When looking back over the past few months the only real thing I can get excited about is the people I get to work with. To be honest I’m not excited by new tractors or machinery any more, but good staff who you can laugh, get upset and share our frustrations with are so important.
This year we joined up with my good friend Guy Eckley to cut our combined area together with our 2 combines. Whilst the machinery let us down at times the working relationships between us was what got us through a difficult and disappointing harvest. We were assisted by Guys sons and brothers George and Will Edmonds whose witty banter and expletive laden commentary on the CB as we took 2 combines with headers through Maidstone town centre kept our spirits high, and sometimes when you want to cry having a laugh is the best medicine!
For those of you interested in yields; disappointing in terms of quality but good quantity and the fact that its been almost all cut dry were bonuses. The wheat price continues to baffle me and some wheat and oats have been sold pre Christmas to help cash flow. We have some countryside stewardship capital works to do with concreting yards and putting in rainwater harvesting tanks which will need some cash to pay for before we can reclaim the monies.
With harvest now behind us we have that period before drilling that seems to get busier every year. Dealing with bales, topping CSS and SFI parcels, hedge cutting, muck/compost spreading and now drilling legume fallows all adds to the never ending to-do list.
The rare sight of two combines both working on the same day The aims for the upcoming weeks and months are to get everything planted into good seedbeds. It’s really encouraging after 10 years no-till that I don’t have to burn lots of diesel and put hundreds if not thousands of hours on tractors cultivating soils that are already well structured with established worms burrows and no ruts on any tramlines to worry about. My trusty 18 year old tractor continues to purr along pulling the 12m Horsch Avatar drill and I really cant see anything I’d rather have to establish crops in our situation.
To finish I’d like to encourage you all, in the words of Plato (and Caroline Flack)
“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle”
Take time to check on your farming friends and neighbours because farming at any time can be hard lonely and thankless. This year seems to be a stinker!
-
Green Farm Collective Regenerative Agriculture Conference 2024
The Regenerative Agriculture Conference 2024, organised by the Green Farm Collective, brought together industry experts, Nuffield scholars, and innovative growers at Church Farm near Wolverhampton. Hosted by Michael Kavanagh, the event on 22 May 2024, was a landmark gathering focused on sustainable agricultural practices, attracting around 200 participants.
Soil Health and Sustainable Practices
Neil Fuller’s presentation on carbon and nutrient density emphasised the critical role of soil health in boosting crop nutritional value. Fuller advocates for practices that increase organic matter, which sequesters carbon and enhances soil structure and fertility.
One of the more controversial yet insightful discussions was led by Professor Andy Neal of Rothamsted Research, who explored the impacts of glyphosate use versus traditional tillage on soil health. Neal presented data from various studies, including those from the North Wyke Farm Platform, illustrating the trade-offs between these practices. He highlighted that while glyphosate can reduce the need for tillage, its application must be carefully managed to avoid long-term soil degradation. Neal noted, “Glyphosate breaks down much more rapidly in aerobic conditions,” emphasising the importance of maintaining a soil structure rich in organic matter and pore space to support oxygen availability.
Innovations and Practical Applications
A significant development highlighted at the conference was the progress in regenerative wheat supply chains. The Green Farm Collective, in collaboration with Eurostar Commodities, is set to launch two brands of regenerative flour sourced entirely from its farms. This initiative aims to establish new standards with Food Integrity Assurance, focusing on critical areas such as soil protection, crop rotation, reduction in synthetic chemical use, and enhancement of biodiversity.
Stephen Sanderson introduced the FIA GFC Regenerative Standards, guidelines designed to support the Collective’s mission. These standards are outcome-based, promoting consistency and integrity in regenerative practices. Diane Crabtree’s presentation on regenerative flour markets highlighted the growing demand for sustainably produced flour driven by ethical consumerism. Crabtree noted the increasing prioritisation of products offering health benefits and environmental sustainability by consumers and retailers.
Integrating Animal Health and Ecosystem Services
The conference also featured sessions on integrating livestock management with regenerative principles. Lee Truelove, Head of Regenerative Farming, shared insights from the regenerative dairy sector, emphasising the benefits of rotational grazing. His data showed significant increases in soil organic matter and carbon sequestration on farms adopting these practices. Claire Whittle’s session on natural capital for animal health explored the concept of viewing farms as ecosystems, advocating for disease management practices that enhance the resilience of both livestock and ecosystems.
Crop Innovation: Breeding for a Sustainable Future
Ron Granger’s presentation on regenerative crop varieties highlighted advancements in crop breeding. The Limagrain Initiative aims to develop wheat varieties suited to regenerative farming systems, focusing on traits such as high disease resistance, robust rooting ability, and adaptability to reduced input systems. Granger’s findings indicated a strong preference among growers for these traits, aligning breeding efforts with the needs of regenerative agriculture.
Green Innovation Award
A notable highlight was the announcement of the first-ever Green Innovation Award. The £10,000 prize was awarded to Sarah Dusgate, a tenant farmer in Monmouthshire, for her project using pigs to establish herbal leys. This innovative approach aims to enhance soil health and biodiversity through integrated livestock and crop systems.
The conference concluded with interactive Q&A sessions, allowing participants to engage directly with experts. Discussions ranged from the economic viability of regenerative practices to the challenges of transitioning from conventional farming methods. The consensus was clear: regenerative agriculture offers a path toward a more sustainable and resilient future, requiring a collective effort and ongoing innovation.
Save the date for next year’s conference on 21 May 2025, promising another round of insightful discussions and groundbreaking innovations in sustainable farming.
To find out more about the Green Farm Collective, visit greenfarmcollective.com
-
Agronomist in Focus – Hannah Foxall
The 2023/4 seasons weather has presented significant challenges.
Despite these difficulties, Winter crops sown in August and September 2023 held up relatively well. The OSR drilled in early August looked strong and mostly survived CSFB.
Premium Crops contract HEAR (high erucic acid rapeseed) and HOLL (high oleic low linolenic) OSR varieties, which carry a premium over 00 OSR. HEAR rapeseed is used for industrial purposes. HOLL rapeseed on the other hand is destined for human consumption markets.
Most Winter linseed was drilled in September, although the weather delayed some sowing into October. A new EAMU for Katamaran was obtained, providing a valuable addition for pre-emergence broadleaf weed control. Many minor crops lack authorisation for PPPs (plant protection products). Premium Crops actively lobbies on behalf of their growers to ensure they have access to the resources needed to grow successful crops. At any one time, it is not unusual to have 2-4 EAMU’s in progress. Partnerships with many major trials companies across the UK ensure a range of trials to test varieties, PPPs and growing practises under different soil and weather conditions.
Spring Crops and Their Performance
Canary seed The unpredictable Autumn weather caused delays in planting and in some cases, crop failures, leading to an increased focus on Spring crops. Canary Seed proved a popular option due to its low input requirements and cost-effectiveness. Canary Seed is grown for the domestic bird seed industry, replacing Canadian imports.
The break-crop qualities of linseed have long recognised. Long, lateral roots provide excellent soil conditioning as well as a greatly helping to reduce slug populations in following wheats. Many failed OSR crops were replaced successfully by Winter Linseed if actioned early enough in the Autumn. Once the cut-off point was reached (October) growers switched to Spring Linseed. This allowed rotations to be maintained and provided a strong entry to a wheat crop. Linseed’s variety of end-uses (human consumption seed/oil, enhanced nutrition animal feed etc) has kept demand and value high.
The wet weather disrupted herbicide application timings, resulting in higher levels of blackgrass in some winter crops. Fortunately, Spring linseed, Canary Seed, and borage allowed for delayed drilling, helping farmers achieve effective stale seedbeds. Canary seed has shown itself to be very competitive, with farmers commenting on how well it shades out blackgrass, contributing positively to their grass weed control strategy.
It’s crucial to always keep the broader rotation in mind, as the impact of a crop on weed control isn’t always factored into gross margins. The benefits to the following crop, such as reduced herbicide use or lower competition, are important but often overlooked.
Trials and Agronomy Efforts
A record year for Premium Crops kept their technical team extremely busy. Over a thousand trial plots for Harvest 2024 were commissioned! Variety trials are held for Winter Linseed, Spring Linseed and HEAR on multiple sites, as well as agronomy trials (such as herbicide screenings, seed rate, sowing date, etc) across our crop portfolio. Testing timings and rates in minor crops is vital to ensure crop safety as there is very limited data of herbicides for minor crops
Sustainable Farming and Environmental Practices
The introduction of Sustainable Farming Incentives (SFI) led to great change in agriculture. Minor crops now compete with wildflowers and legume fallows in the rotation.
Linseed Premium Crops are keen to assist farmers in other areas of SFI application, particularly SAM2 over-winter cover crops (tailored to increase following spring crop performance), IPM3 companion cropping and IPM4 “no use of insecticide” schemes. Winter Linseed and Canary Seed’s lack of pests are perfect for those applying to IPM4 schemes.
Two cover crops mixes were introduced, bespoke to soil type, as were companion crop options for Winter Linseed and HEAR/HOLL.
Cover crops sown in September saw delayed germination, but the mild winter allowed sufficient establishment.
The mixes are deliberately designed to avoid large biomass, ensuring the following crops can establish properly. Phacelia and buckwheat components scavenge nutrients and prevent leaching, while legumes like clover and vetch fix nitrogen in the soil aiding the next crop.
Linseed roots through the soil cracks Given how much rain fell on fields over the Winter, having cover crops reduced soil erosion and kept living roots in the soil which is beneficial to soil health.
Business Initiatives and Partnerships
Premium Crops’ owner Cefetra continues to expand its move into more specialist areas with the formation of Cefetra Premium Oils (CPO). Through cooperation with CPO, Premium Crops has ventured into contract borage production. Borage is rich in gamma-linolenic acid (GLA) which is utilised in the health supplement market. Borage is a 90-day crop that requires careful swathing due to its indeterminate nature. Premium Crops works closely with contractors to provide swathing services to growers for harvest. Bees are essential for borage pollination, and the honey they produce is a very distinctive and sought after. One farmer reported that 100 jars of honey were made from just one hive.
HEAR variety Rocca- Warwickshire Cefetra launched CES (Cefetra Ecoservices) in partnership with Soil Capital, offering carbon payments to farmers. Unlike other schemes, CES allows farmers the flexibility to choose practices that best suit their farms, rather than following a prescribed program. Farms are benchmarked based on past practices and soil samples, giving them insights into how they can improve soils health and get rewarded for it.
Looking forward
During the Winter, trials results will be evaluated and any findings incorporated into agronomy advice which will help farmers improve crop performance.
The weather has been challenging, however, we look forward to starting a new season of Harvest 2025 and with it hope for better weather. ‘Hope springs eternal’ as the saying goes.
-
Enhancing Crop Establishment: The Advantages of Wider Seed Bands in Modern Agriculture
Written by Ian Clayton-Bailey from BTT UK
At Bentfield Bury Farms, the winter wheat and barley were meticulously sown using specially imported Bourgault Tillage Tools 6-inch openers, a departure from the standard 4-inch versions commonly seen across the UK.
This decision, made by Farm Manager James Mayes, reflects our unwavering commitment to innovation and efficiency in agriculture. With approximately 800 hectares of combinable crops thriving on predominantly heavy soils, optimizing our seeding equipment is paramount to our success.
James’s decision to transition from the standard duet coulters on the farm’s 2009 Horsch 6m Sprinter drill to the Bourgault Tillage Tools versatile opener system (VOS) 4-inch coulters in 2017 was driven by a strategic imperative to reduce cultivation efforts and mitigate moisture loss. This strategy allows us to adapt our drilling techniques, whether it’s direct drilling into stubble or onto pre-cultivated land, to prevailing conditions for optimal crop establishment.
As a family farming partnership, with active participation from the owners, we continually seek to enhance our operations. The appointment of Sentry Farms as a managing consultant in 2015, with James Mayes at the helm overseeing farm operations, has further enriched our knowledge base. With James’s extensive experience spanning over two decades and a keen understanding of agronomic policies, we’re well-equipped to leverage the full potential of Bourgault Tillage Tools cutting-edge technology.
Whilst wheat remains a staple crop for our operation, recent accolades, such as the East Anglia gold awards for exceptional yield and potential achieved in 2023, underscore our dedication to excellence. Bourgault Tillage Tools VOS coulters, with their paired row tips, play a pivotal role in our success by ensuring precise seed placement and maximizing seed-to-soil contact for robust germination and crop establishment.
The transition to Bourgault Tillage Tools 6-inch coulters marks a significant milestone for us. These wider coulters enable seeds to be deposited in broader paired bands, facilitating better spatial distribution and ultimately leading to a more consolidated crop canopy. This consolidation is instrumental in maximizing photosynthesis potential, particularly when we approach a spring season.
Early results have shown promising results, affirming the viability of Bourgault’s wider seed bands. Initial trials, conducted with three 3-D printed synthetic coulters in autumn 2020, provided valuable insights, paving the way for larger-scale trials. A full set of Bourgault Tillage Tools 6-inch coulters, supplied by the Canadian manufacturer, was integrated into our drill last autumn, further validating their efficacy.
The transition to wider seed bands promises multiple benefits, as articulated by James and confirmed by our experiences. By facilitating better spatial distribution and a more consolidated crop canopy, these wider coulters have the potential to enhance yield potential while minimizing surface disturbance and retaining soil moisture—a boon for soil health and disease management.
Looking ahead, as we contemplate the potential investment in transitioning our entire fleet to 6-inch coulters, the feedback from our drill operator, Danny Hawkes, is encouraging. With no discernible increase in power or fuel requirements, and minimal drawbacks, the advantages of Bourgault Tillage Tools wider seed bands are clear.
In conclusion, the adoption of wider seed bands represents a significant step forward for Bentfield Bury Farms. With Bourgault Tillage Tools cutting-edge technology, we’re poised to achieve greater efficiency, productivity, and sustainability in our agricultural practices, reaffirming our commitment to excellence in farming.
-
BYDV-resistant wheats prove their worth in a difficult season
Written by Robert Harris for RAGT
Perceived as niche when introduced five years ago, RAGT’s BYDV-resistant wheats are now catching the attention of a significant number of farmers.
Marketed under the Genserus (Genetic Security Virus) brand, these wheats offer season-long control of BYDV, removing the management headaches of autumn aphid control, eliminating the risk of resistance and protecting the environment.
Direct Driller caught up with two growers who tried different varieties last season to see if they lived up to expectations.
Switch to RGT Grouse pays off in Suffolk
After a five-year battle against barley yellow dwarf virus, Michael Gooderham believes he has found a permanent solution by employing genetics rather than unreliable insecticide sprays to control the disease in wheat.
Much of the arable land Michael and son Darren rent at Red House Farm near Eye borders large blocks of woodland and grass, creating a sheltered habitat for aphid vectors of BYDV.
“After the demise of Redigo Deter we really struggled with the disease, so we’ve been under pressure to get everything sprayed,” says Michael. “We saw RGT Grouse advertised as a resistant variety and, after doing our own research at various open days, decided to try some last autumn. It has paid off big time.”
Conventional varieties on the farm received one insecticide spray last autumn, but a second application was shelved after more than 100mm of rain fell in late October. “By late spring, BYDV was evident in our other varieties, particularly in second wheat which suffered badly,” says Michael.
Gleam made up the bulk of second wheat, along with 14ha of feed wheat RGT Grouse, both drilled in early October. Gleam produced a ‘disappointing’ 8.4t/ha, while Grouse yielded 10.3t/ha.
“I was more than pleasantly surprised,” says Michael. “The difference was not entirely down to BYDV, as the Gleam had poorer headlands, but I could see BYDV clearly when spraying at T2 – the flag leaves were discoloured and going purple in places.”
RGT Grouse was also grown as a first wheat after beans, drilled in late September. The 51ha crop averaged 10.8t/ha, edging Dawsum after sugar beet which missed the main aphid migration.
“The variety has done very well as a first and second wheat and we’ve put it into the IPM 4 insecticide-free crop option under SFI, which earns an additional £45/ha,” says Michael. “It certainly looks to be a good fit for our farm.”
RGT Goldfinch delivers the goods in Northants
“A real step forward. Awesome is the only way to describe it.” Northamptonshire grower Andrew Pitts’ first experience with new quality wheat RGT Goldfinch has, to say the least, gone very well.
“Goldfinch is resistant to BYDV and orange wheat blossom midge and it has the best disease resistance profile out there,” he says. “It’s produced high yields and great milling quality, ticking all the boxes in a very difficult year.”
The 40ha seed crop was direct-drilled at the end of September after peas on medium-bodied land at The Grange, Mears Ashby. “It looked good from the outset and tillered prolifically,” says Andrew.
The ground was too wet to travel to apply a T0, so the first PGR application was applied at GS31. Moddus was applied then and at GS32, followed by 1 litre/ha of Terpal at GS37.
“The field is our most lodging-prone field, so this was a tremendous test for the Goldfinch. Of the 100 acres we planted, only one acre on the most exposed slope leaned, but it remained easy to harvest.”
A robust fungicide programme was applied to the pre-basic seed crop – had it been a commercial crop Andrew says he would have only applied a T2 due to the variety’s excellent disease resistance.
The Goldfinch averaged 10.1 t/ha and exceeded full milling specification. “This year especially, that’s a really good performance, particularly the protein at 13.7%. If this isn’t a Group 1 milling wheat I don’t know what is.”
Andrew believes RAGT’s Genserus wheat breeding programme marks a major step forward in wheat production. “I think this trait is critical. If we can have wheats that require no insecticide at all, that is IPM at its absolute best.
“This has been a low-insect year here, yet Goldfinch has still delivered financially. I estimate I’m £60/ha better off in terms of production costs, and it’s hit milling spec across the board with plenty of yield.”
-
Farmer Focus – Philip Bradshaw
September 2024
A year since my last article here and it has been an interesting period.
With our 6m Weaving GD drill we acquired last summer we managed to plant all our planned autumn crops in 2023. The ones following catch crops were easiest travelling on the green, the ones after beans on stubble were more challenging, and everywhere I had a few more blocked coulters than usual due to the wet conditions, and some were later planted than expected.
Generally, they emerged well, but then had to endure months of heavy rain, and our normally well-functioning soils had areas that struggled due to waterlogging this year.
In the spring we planted our mustard crop, and this struggled due to more heavy rain, and incredible pigeon pressure. Normally I have peas growing around the farm by neighbours which draw the pigeons away from our mustard in the spring, but with no peas nearby this year our already struggling mustard suffered horribly, despite huge efforts to protect it.
We also planted our new Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) options in later spring. The extra grass strips and wild bird seed plots did well, but the Pollinator mixes were very variable. Some were good, but other areas struggled for various reasons. We re-drilled the worse areas which has a cost, but they have looked fabulous through the late summer.
As summer progressed, our first wheats seemed to grow well despite the previous wet time and approached harvest looking decent. The second wheat was less impressive and for the first time since we started growing it regularly it looked poor compared to the first wheats.
The mustard continued to disappoint, and we wrote off one field after minimal expenditure and left it as a cover crop, and we also wrote off 3 ha of another field, taking the opportunity to clean up some blackgrass, and then plant a late summer flower mix which has been a joy to see, and adds rooting diversity to the soil.
Jayne and I had a fabulous few days in our camper van at the excellent Groundswell Show in June. We met up with friends old and new, and enjoyed some amazing seminars, as well as the evening entertainment!
Harvest started with the Winter Barley trial plots which are time consuming, with the associated sampling and yield data recording. We then made a start on wheat with our small area of second wheat, all Extase. As I feared it was not great, only yielding a little over 6t/ha which is substantially lower than our usual 9-10 t/ha.
We then moved onto first wheats, Extase which scraped 10t/ha, followed by Skyfall at 9.25 t/ha and lastly the Zyatt which also just nudged 10 t/ha. With our below average yields, one might expect amazing proteins, but these were inconsistent with some lower than our normal.
With the difficult wet conditions early in the crops life we should probably be happy with a slightly below average harvest, but it was disappointing, with only a few loads at full milling specification. Thankfully our low cost, reduced input system helps to maintain margins.
We again did a tramline trial of nitrogen use on some first wheat Extase, with a total N applied varying from 104kg/ha down to just 7kg/ha. The yields (Full Combine Header) varied from 11.35t/ha down to 10.34t/ha with the protein also decreasing slightly with the reduction in N use. This is not surprising, but different to last year’s result.
This is not a proper replicated trial, but it does suggest we can achieve a respectable yield with lower Nitrogen use, but there is a margin over cost if we stick to near the farm standard of 100-120 kg/ha, which is lower than we applied some years ago. It is also possible that in a year of crop stress when uptake is reduced and less efficient, we should have added another foliar N dose to help with yield and especially proteins.
The mustard of course was a disappointment, although not surprising. I cut more of it than I expected, but it is not as good as last year.
I pressed on after harvest and quickly planted some more pollinator mixes and catch/cover crops. Some have come well with rain soon after drilling. Field inspections showed that most fields have some compaction at 150-200mm depth due to the weight and effect of the rain.
I have therefore been loosening most of the farm with the Low Disturbance Subsoiler bought last year. I am still a fan of our paraplows, but with a lot to do, and with the new machine having a built in packer it has been the soil loosener of choice this year.
I would like to finish with a tribute to a good friend and colleague, Andrew Jacobs, who sadly passed away following a Cardiac arrest just a few days after his 61st birthday in July.
He was well known in farming circles having been a chairman and board member of various organisations, and loved his rugby and golf, and of course his family.
We worked together for over 20 years, initially as a machinery sharing arrangement, and latterly he was my contractor on the land away from our Whittlesey farm. We were different in our approach sometimes, but we enjoyed a fantastic working relationship and became great friends.
We ventured into No till together with demonstrations of various drills about 10 years ago, and he bought a Weaving Big Disc and started doing some No till establishment for both of us from around 2014. He was an early adopter of strip tillage, investing in a Sly Strip Cat machine and has been using it for over 10 years to prepare land for Sugar Beet, and as a drill for Mustard and Oilseed Rape.
His farming legacy will continue in the capable hands of his wonderful family but all of us who knew him will miss him terribly. RIP Andrew.
-
Why scientific credibility and standards compliance are vital for farming and rural communities
Find out why scientific credibility and standards compliant natural capital analytics are critical for farming and rural communities
Written by Anna Woodley from Trinity AgTech
Agriculture is evolving in ways we’ve never seen before, needing to address both challenges and exciting opportunities. It’s been made crucial for us to rethink how we approach these changes. Clinging to old perspectives and methods won’t cut it anymore; we need a fresh outlook and new ways that truly reflects the realities we’re all facing. We know that navigating the unknown can be intimidating, and it’s natural to want familiarity. Some of us might consider taking the easier route or stick to old ways, hoping things will just get better on their own. But history shows us that we can’t go back to simpler times; big change is here, and now part of our journey. By embracing these complexities with open minds, we will adapt and agricultural business can thrive.
At Trinity, we believe in aiming high rather than settling for less. Our focus is on utilising rigorous, yet user-friendly analytics grounded in the latest credible science and standards rather than choosing short-cuts and cutting corners. The answer lies in the complexity of farming itself. Agriculture is a dynamic web where soil health, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and water cycles are intricately connected, each influencing the others and impacting broader ecosystem services. For farmers and stakeholders, overlooking these complexities can lead to poor decisions, wasted resources, and missed opportunities for profitable and sustainable farming.
By adopting a systems-thinking approach, we recognise that farms natural assets, each with its own intricacies, don’t operate in isolation. It’s vital to understand how changes in soil carbon, for example, can affect biodiversity, water retention and yields. Without applying rigorous science to credibly evaluate, measure and monitor these dynamics and interdependencies, our hopes for effective and efficient outcomes for farming and rural communities will fall flat.
While it’s tempting to gravitate toward short-cuts; vanity project and box-ticking will do injustice to the inherent complexity of agriculture and will ultimately compromise the livelihood of our farming communities. The rigor and credibility of the science we use and the rigor and consistency of our methods across a farm’s natural assets, provide the necessary foundation to unlock the full potential of on-farm production now and confidently bestow a healthy legacy to the future generations. Without it, we risk everything, undermining the resilience of our farms, hindering cost management, and limiting investment opportunities, all of which are essential for securing our food and farming future.
Why are standards so critically important when assessing on-farm carbon and natural capital?
There’s a common misconception that natural capital assessments, particularly for carbon, lack standardised methods. This is simply not true and is a perpetuated falsehood which often stems from an unwillingness to work through the complexity, scientific delivery and digital mechanisms required to appropriately meet the requirement of those high standards. In reality, globally recognised standards—like ISO 14064-2, ISO 14067, and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol’s Land Sector and Removals Guidance—play a crucial role in ensuring that carbon and ecosystem service assessments are robust and comparable. These frameworks provide a solid scientific foundation, allowing the natural capital space to grow with integrity.
For instance, by aligning with initiatives like the Taskforce on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) and the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), we can create the certainty needed to attract private sector investment in agriculture. These standards help bridge the gap between agronomic realities and financial markets, enabling investors to make informed decisions about where to allocate their resources. This means farmers can access the tools they need to improve their operations, while stakeholders throughout the food supply chain can trust that the farm’s productive health as well as sustainability efforts are based on credible analytics. As we know, ultimately, adhering to high-quality standards isn’t just a technical necessity—it’s essential for building at-scale trust, credibility, and investment.
Businesses across the food supply chain are increasingly committing to these standards, with ALDI recently announcing their support for SBTi FLAG. National and international standards ensure that any analysis of natural capital aligns with the latest science and methodologies, guaranteeing high quality and integrity. Trinity’s Sandy platform stands out as the only carbon and natural capital assessment tool that adheres to all these standards and reporting requirements.
Internal Health and Performance of Farm Businesses
In today’s complex and volatile environment, farmers urgently need credible insights into the health of their businesses, particularly regarding their natural capital utilization, its overall health and value, and their income-generating capacity. We now understand that assessing the health of a farm isn’t just about tracking traditional financial metrics; it’s also about evaluating natural assets—like soil, water, and biodiversity—that are crucial for productivity. Natural capital provides essential ecosystem services for food production, from pollination to water filtration. Farmers need reliable assessments of these assets to manage risks, optimise inputs, and maintain resilient, productive farming systems.
A systems-thinking approach helps us see how a farm’s natural capital health is closely linked to its economic health. For example, poor soil health can lower yields, increasing reliance on synthetic inputs that may degrade biodiversity and water quality. By taking a holistic view of business health that considers these interconnections, farmers can enhance their long-term sustainability and resilience against challenges like soil erosion and flood risk.
Accurately assessing a farm’s natural capital—covering carbon, soil health, biodiversity, and water—is essential for farmers to gain a clear picture of their operations, manage risks effectively, and make informed decisions. With farm businesses facing unprecedented vulnerabilities, optimizing decision-making for resilience in our food supply chain and financially thriving rural communities is more crucial than ever.
Transparency and Disclosure in Environmental Reporting
Maintaining scientific credibility, recognised standards, and consistency across natural assets provides the necessary integrity and assurance for all stakeholders to benefit. Aligning with globally recognised standards, such as those outlined in Defra’s ‘Harmonisation of Carbon Accounting Tools’ report, is a vital step. This alignment fosters collaboration among stakeholders—banks, private investors, retailers, farmers, and policymakers—allowing us to tackle challenges at scale, unlock investment in agriculture, and achieve positive outcomes for everyone.
Transparency is key to facilitating capital flow into agriculture. Private investors, policymakers, and other stakeholders need to know that their investments are driving measurable, verifiable, and scalable results, effectively mitigating the risk of greenwashing. Together, we can build a stronger, more sustainable agricultural future!
If we rely on vanity reporting and use low-quality natural capital data and analytics, we expose ourselves to significant risks:
- Slower Capital Flow into Agriculture: To meet the global demand for nature-based solutions by 2050, we need a staggering $11 trillion—$2 trillion by 2030 and another $9 trillion from 2030 to 2050. While governments have a role to play, they can only cover about 85% of this funding gap. Private sector investment is crucial, but without reliable analytics backed by the latest standards, investors won’t feel confident enough to contribute the necessary capital.
- Compromised Farm Futures: Misguided decisions and a lack of investment in agriculture could lead to farm closures and the decline of rural communities. This would be a tragic outcome for our food systems and those who depend on them.
- Nature-Based Solutions Will Struggle to Scale: We’re relying heavily on nature-based solutions to tackle urgent environmental issues like climate change, biodiversity loss, and ecosystem degradation. However, these solutions are failing to gain traction due to insufficient collaboration and a lack of confidence in the underlying data.
- Weaker Retailer Commitments and Resilience: Retailers in the food supply chain need high-quality Scope 3 information to enhance their sustainability efforts. We’re at a critical juncture—if farmers don’t engage soon, the supply chain may conclude that capturing reliable data is too difficult and seek alternatives. This could undermine farmers’ negotiating power and reduce opportunities. Retailers are eager to reward farmers for their environmental advancements, but they need solid evidence to do so.
- Diminished Consumer Commitment to British Produce: If we rely on weak data and analysis to support our environmental claims, we risk losing consumer trust and confidence. This could lead to greater commoditisation, shrinking margins, and decreased investment from farmers in environmental initiatives.
A Natural Capital, Systems Thinking Approach to Agriculture and Food Production
While the challenges we face are significant and complex, they are absolutely solvable. By adopting a systems thinking approach and recognising that key elements of farm systems—such as soil, carbon, biodiversity, and water—are interconnected, we can create impactful solutions. Trinity AgTech’s Sandy is designed to be at the heart of this transformation. With a blend of scientific rigor, trusted standards, and a holistic perspective, we can cultivate the conditions necessary for a resilient, sustainable agricultural sector and thriving rural communities to flourish at scale!
To find out more about our unique approach to nature-based solutions, contact our team.
-
Adapting to the Unpredictable: The Importance of Soil Resilience
Written by Louise Penn from Ceres Rural
As much as I’d like to avoid discussing the weather after this challenging season, it continues to demand our attention. I am writing this after nearly 230mm of rain has fallen in 48 hours in my local area! Houses are flooded and roads impassable where I have never seen water before. Consequently, here I am writing about everyone’s least favourite subject but the one that is on everyone’s minds.
My immediate worry is the upcoming drilling campaign. After a difficult year, many growers are eager to get started, and I can’t blame them. Until recently, it’s been dry in my area—so much so that I’ve had to write off failed oilseed rape crops due to a lack of moisture. These past few weeks have been spent reminding growers why we shouldn’t rush to drill early. One of the primary reasons is grassweed management, particularly blackgrass, where emergence declines by 15% each week from early September to mid-October. Delaying drilling is also important to mitigate against diseases and Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus (BYDV).
Best case scenario this leaves my growers with no choice but to start drilling once ground conditions are suitable- likely not until the start of October now. The recent rainfall will have encouraged blackgrass to chit, providing the perfect opportunity for a stale seedbed before drilling. Additionally, residual herbicides will perform better in October due to less UV degradation and increased soil moisture, maximizing the effectiveness of these costly inputs.
Growers should begin with fields that have the lowest grassweed pressure and carefully monitor weather windows ensuring all operations can be carried out. A smooth process—pre-drilling glyphosate, drilling, rolling, and pre-emergence herbicide application—will be key. Here’s hoping that we’ve already seen October’s share of rain and we get a dry start to the month, allowing us to wrap up the drilling campaign efficiently.
Looking ahead, I can’t shake the growing concern over the increasingly extreme and frequent weather events we’re witnessing. It seems every year brings new records—whether it’s the relentless rain of this season or the heatwaves, droughts, floods, and wildfires playing out on a global scale. While it’s clear that climate change is a major driving force behind these shifts, reversing the damage done feels daunting, if not impossible. The bigger question is: are our soils, and by extension our farm businesses, resilient enough for these ‘unusual’ or ‘extreme’ years to become the new norm?
We are going to have to adapt our farming systems to make a living as these extreme events become more frequent. How we do that is still unclear, but I believe it starts with having healthy soils—soils that possess the right physical, biological, and chemical characteristics to withstand the pressures of climate change.
Resilient soils are those that can recover their functional and structural integrity after a disturbance, whether that’s ploughing, high-intensity rainfall, or prolonged drought like we experienced in the summer of 2022. Building this resilience, however, takes time—decades, even.
Following this weekend’s extreme rainfall, our soils at home are in good order. Most of the nearly eight inches of rain has infiltrated through the soil, thanks to the years we’ve spent transitioning to a minimum tillage system. We now use a low-disturbance subsoiler for deeper compaction and direct drill using our Dale Drill. In contrast, the soil erosion occurring in neighboring ploughed fields is staggering.
This resilience isn’t the result of recent practices alone; it’s the outcome of decades of thoughtful decisions. My grandad’s decision to drain the entire farm back in the 1970s, when it was grant-funded, laid the foundation. Equally important has been the ongoing maintenance of those drains—every year, we hire a digger for a few days to repair drains. Thanks to that consistency, those old clay drains are still doing their job, and we continue to invest in new drainage whenever possible.
Annually, we apply organic manures such as sewage sludge across the farm and chop the majority of our straw. My Dad’s knowledge of our farm continues to amaze me; he can pinpoint where soil types change, identify acidic patches, and recognize areas that often run short on phosphorus (P) and potassium (K). Recently, we took this understanding a step further by having our entire farm terramapped for pH, P, K, and organic matter. This advanced scanning technique generates high-resolution mapping layers, providing detailed insights into the soil properties across our fields.
The results were enlightening: our soil showed remarkably little variability compared to other clients’ farms, with no areas falling low in pH, P, or K. Our organic matter levels averaged an impressive 5-6% throughout the farm, enhancing our soil’s ability to retain moisture during dry periods and absorb water during heavy rainfall. Additional testing has also showed our soils have unfavourable calcium-magnesium ratios, so we have applied gypsum across the farm this autumn to help improve soil structure which will promote further air and water movement.
Historically, farmers have often managed crops with a somewhat casual approach, applying inputs as needed without much thought to long-term implications. A wet or unproductive area is now simply put into ‘SFI’ without much thought into the root cause of the issue or exploring longer-term solutions. However, with tightening margins and increasingly unpredictable weather, this practice is no longer sustainable. We must prioritise soil resilience, which begins with getting the basics right. Low pH and nutrient deficiencies compromise soil health, hindering root growth and diminishing the populations of beneficial organisms like earthworms and microbes. These conditions create weaker soils that struggle to recover, making crops more vulnerable to the extremes of climate change.
With attention to detail, we can develop soils that are resilient enough to handle the challenges of extreme weather, ensuring not only good yields now but also long-term sustainability for our farms. I’m optimistic about the solid foundation we’ve built on our family farm to achieve this. Plus, I’m eager to support my clients across various farming businesses as they navigate these changes and adapt to the unpredictability of the weather. Together, we can cultivate a future where our agricultural practices thrive, regardless of the climate’s whims.
-
Securing sustainability
A move to biological seed treatments has helped a Borders grower move away from chemical alternatives in a bid to help secure long-term business sustainability and improve soil health.
Written by Sarah Ferrie from Interagro
Though sustainability has become a buzzword in farming over recent years, for many growers making strategical decisions across their operations to promote long-term viability is an integral part of their ethos. This may mean looking at establishment techniques, chemical inputs and what alternative tools are in the armoury.
Biologicals and biostimulants are among those alternative tools that have gained a huge amount of traction over recent years, with large amounts of research and development going into products to prove they’re more than just ‘muck and magic’.
So are biostimulants the next logical step on the industry journey to sustainability? David Fuller-Shapcott thinks so. Farming 369ha in the Scottish Borders near Roxburghshire, David has spent the past few years looking at how to refine and improve his business. This has included being part of the YEN network, which saw him win the bronze award for best percentage of potential yield in oilseed rape in 2019 and another oilseed rape bronze award for yield in 2022.
“We’re farming mostly heavy clay, high magnesium soils which are very sticky when wet but like concrete when dry,” says David. “I’ve been focusing on soil health for a while, but now we’re trying to nuance that – refine that focus – to improve the proportion of soil fungi, which is one of the main reasons I’m not very keen on putting fungicidal seed dressings on the crop. Though I’ve been told they have no effect, I have difficulty believing that a fungicide in the soil doesn’t influence fungi populations.”
It’s this reason that one of David’s main goals for the farm is to reduce his dependence on chemicals. “To enable this, we need to make sure that the seed we plant is healthy – everything starts with the seed. One of the things that chemicals have bought in the past is rooting benefits, but I’m looking at what else is out there to provide the same advantages.”
Alternative options
This is where biostimulants have proved to be a good alternative option, with David particularly finding success from using Newton – an organic plant-based biostimulant treatment from Interagro which is claimed to aid both crop establishment and to build healthier, stronger plants which are more resilient in the face of stress factors such as drought. “One of the main ingredients within Newton is signalling peptides,” explains Interagro’s technical manager, Stuart Sutherland. “These peptides are essentially signalling messengers for plants to modify their hormonal balance to reduce stress and enhance quality and quantity production parts in plants.”
But what does this mean practically for farmers? Stuart says the high loading of peptides within Newton means incorporation can help with regulation of both plant growth and development which in turn can lead to faster seed germination and emergence.
This has been proven in a number of independent trials over recent years, he adds. “These trials have shown that by including Newton, growers can not only speed up crop emergence by several days but can also help build tolerance against stress by triggering key defence mechanisms and even reduce the reliance on synthetic fertilisers by increasing rooting ability.”
Tried and tested
David tested Newton for the first time two years ago, putting it up against Kick Off – a phosphate-based seed treatment designed to help boost rooting – incorporated with a fungicide. “I trialled it in a field of spring barley, sowing 56m wide strips and comparing paired tramlines of Newton with paired tramlines of Kick Off.
“I then asked the agronomist to see if he could find any difference,” recalls David. “I told him where the breaks were in the tramlines, but not what the products were, and he could not find a single difference between the fungicide and Kick Off tramlines and where Newton was used alone.
“What we took from that is that Newton was bringing a fair bit to the party in terms of how it benefited crop performance, and also reducing my seed costs as a consequence. We took this through to combine yield at harvest over a weighbridge and found no statistical difference in yield either, so now I just use Newton alone. I don’t bother with Kick Off or SPDs in the spring – Newton does it all.”
This season, all of David’s spring barley was sown with Newton only and he’s looking to do some Newton-only autumn sowing later this year. “My spring barley has all been direct drilled for the first time this year with the Newton and it got away fine – I’ve not suffered with any moisture stress which a lot of spring barley in the area has. Generally speaking, it looks well.
“With my YEN hat on, it’s very clear that we need to be enhancing rooting to maximise output – rooting is imperative to both water and nutrient capture – and as a treatment, Newton ticks that box well. Using it means my nitrogen use efficiency has improved because rooting and water capture has got better, therefore I’ve not been suffering in these dry springs we’ve been having recently.”
David notes that he sees the spring being a particularly beneficial timing for the application of Newton. “These dry springs seem to be getting more common, so I think Newton will have a really big role to play prior to this window to help bolster plant resilience.”
Future plans
Looking to the future, sustainability is the goal. “Short-term, this means focusing on getting direct drilling to work for us which is difficult in Scotland, on water-retentive soils and weather patterns like we’ve been having,” explains David. “Long-term, I want to be in a position where we are – or fairly close to being – net zero and we’re recognised for that. I think that’s a key part of this, being recognised that what we can do as farmers makes us part of the solution and not the problem.
“Biologicals will be a key component in achieving this – they’re absolutely part of the IPM approach to how we grow crops. We’re losing chemicals, either regulatory or efficacy wise, at an alarming rate and we’ve got to get on the front foot and understand what we can do to improve the way we’re growing crops.
“Newton is a piece of the jigsaw, with a number of tabs on that piece, which fit into a lot of other aspects of crop production – which is where we need to be if we’re aiming to achieve true resilience.”
NEWTON FAQS
- Composition: vegetable-derived peptides
- Recommended crops: cereals, peas, beans
- Recommended rate: 1 litre/tonne of seed
- Compatibility: Compatible with chemical and nutritional seed dressings
- Application: Can be applied to seed via a conventional seed treater or mobile
- Approved for use in organic systems by OF&G and registered with the Soil Association
-
Tillage with simultaneous fertiliser placement in classical direct seeding regions
Tillage is becoming increasingly interesting in some no-till regions. Michael Horsch talks about various systems all over the world that with regard to tillage focus on a simultaneous deep placement of fertiliser.
“While we observe an increased interest in direct seeding in intensive regions such as Europe, we also notice that tillage becomes more interesting again in traditional no-till regions,” Michael Horsch says. There are various reasons. Among them disturbing layers, dense layers and compaction in the soil. This is particularly the case on soils with a high sand content like we find in Australia or South America. These are sites that have been working very successfully with direct seeding for two decades or more. “Here we also see that farmers managed to increase yields by means of targeted tillage with longer intervals. The objective is to increase the root space and bring nutrients deep into the soil to optimally feed the plants for a longer time. And then to cultivate the fields again with direct seeding in the following year.”
HORSCH Evo CS (South America/Brazil) The following article presents various systems that are used worldwide. A particular focus is on the simultaneous deep placement of fertiliser. The biggest difference between the methods presented is the intensity of the cultivation of the surface. It can be roughly classified as follows: the higher the precipitations and the hotter the peak temperatures can get, the less mixing is required on the surface. But read more about this yourself.
Michael Horsch
Evo CS South America/Brazil
“In South America/Brazil, we notice an increasing demand for machines for deep soil loosening,” Michael Horsch says. The objective is to loosen the soil deeply to break layers that have formed over several decades of direct seeding. These layers act like compactions and prevent further root penetration. In most cases, the reason is the washing in of fine soil particles from the surface and, on lighter sites, the dense compaction of sand. In regions with high rainfall and high biological activity, the objective is loosening without surface mixing. “These are the regions where we mainly sell the Evo CS and now also the Evo TL. The use of fertiliser is always possible and is also requested by the customers. In most cases, this is phosphorus, but we also notice more and more discussions about placing lime deeper in the soil.”
Fertiliser is placed across almost the full working depth. This allows for applying fresh nutrients, especially phosphorus and potash, to the soil in a targeted way. Fertiliser can be applied at two levels, with the option of changing and individually adapting the respective dose. In Brazil, the Evo CS is not used as a standard tool, but rather for the targeted improvement of fields where usually direct seeding is used. Equipped with a packer system, it leaves behind a closed surface.Tiger MT with FertiProf Ukraine
In one single pass, the Tiger MT can mix in a lot of organic material and, in the Ukraine, is therefore mainly used after grain maize and sunflowers. The objective is to achieve a reasonable mixing ratio so that the straw can decompose during the vegetation period. In one pass, the Tiger MT manages to mix intensively, to loosen and level the soil as well as to consolidate it to achieve a horizon that is ready for seeding. The advantage of mixing is that the straw is in a more intensive contact with the soil and, thus, decomposes more reliably.
HORSCH Tiger MT with FertiProf (Ukraine)
In combination with the FertiProf attachment, fertiliser can be placed directly in the depot. The obvious advantage is that the fertiliser is applied in deeper layers where water is potentially available for a longer time, thus allowing for a longer uptake of nutrients as the soil dries off from above. This means that the water is available for a longer time for nutrient uptake. This effect plays a decisive role for phosphate in particular, but also for potassium in combination with heavy soils. Moreover, the plant specifically looks for phosphorus concentrations. This ensures that root penetration takes place. The third advantage of concentrating fertiliser is to create a small-scale saturation of the soil so that the nutrients are longer available to the plant. The black earth soils of the Ukraine are ideal for the concentrated placement of fertiliser, as nutrient supply is scarce, as they time and again are dry during the season and have a very high exchange capacity.
Tiger MT Australia
The approach pursued with the use of the Tiger MT in Australia aims to mix organic material into the partly sandy soils and deeply loosen the ground. Fine material on the surface is washed in by rainfall, forming compacted layers over the years. Initial experience shows that breaking these compacted layers has positive effects, while simultaneously leveling and re-compacting the soil with the Tiger MT helps prevent new compacted layers from forming. The primary goal is to maximize water absorption after rainfall and increase its availability for crops. In combination with a MiniDrill, the Tiger is also used to plant cover crops.
HORSCH Tiger MT (Australia)
Panther USA
Starting around 2007, the HORSCH Panther (then the HORSCH Anderson 60-15) started being used for autumn fertiliser operation in North Dakota and South Dakota. This system has grown in popularity since then and today is a common autumn fertiliser application system used by contractors and farmers alike in these regions. Compared to traditional strip till on 30” row spacing, the Panther system utilises its existing 15” shank spacing for fertiliser application. Narrow openers are installed for use with fertilizer sources of dry, liquid, or NH3 and even a combination of products at the same time. The overall concept of the Panther gives several agronomic advantages when being used for fall fertilizer applications.
The Panther has proven itself in the broadacre min-till/no-till type farming systems of the northern corn belt of North America. The opener system can place fertilizer 8 to 15 cm deep with minimum soil disturbance. A cutting coulter system is used in front of each shank to prevent plugging in heavy residue conditions. Surface level residue stays relatively intact. Usually, the Panther travels a slight angle to the direction of planting. This gives uniform coverage over the field, eliminates the need for RTK steering at planting, is independent of planter row spacing, plus provides an amount of soil loosening/mixing to break shallow soil compaction.
HORSCH Panther (USA)
Field conditioning is another agronomic topic with the Panther system. When applying fertilizer, the strips are closed and firmed, not leaving a ridge or berm. The disc levelling system and pneumatic tire packing system leave the field smooth for planting in the spring. This closing and firming action also aids in securing NH3, sealing the strip to prevent gas-off losses. The added benefit is with the soil movement and disc levers, small ruts from harvest get levelled. Some farmers will do a shallow pass of spring seedbed preparation, others will leave a stale seedbed.
With the Panther system there is large capacity for carrying dry fertilizer and also towing NH3 trailers. A very simple system, in the northern corn growing regions the results have been positive. Yield results in corn have been comparable to typical 30” strip till systems. Further north into western Canada the Panther is being used on a true 15” spacing of fall fertilizer strips then spring planting of canola and wheat. In addition, the Panther can be converted between seeding applications and fertilizer applications, adding to the versatility for farmers maximizing return on investment of the unit.Phosphorus and potassium dynamics in the soil
The availability of phosphorus in the soil can roughly be divided into three parts. Stable phosphate is bound to calcium, iron, aluminium or in organic matter and is not available to the plant. Unstable phosphate is characterised by a more or less strong sorption to exchangers such as clay minerals, oxides or organic compounds. Dissolved phosphate is present in the soil solution as free and immediately plant-available HPO42-. The balance of these three fractions in the soil very quickly flows towards the stable phosphorus and also quickly and severely restricts the availability of fertilised phosphorus to the plant. This process is also referred to as phosphorus ageing and is very difficult to reverse. The concentration of dissolved phosphate is very low with an average of 1-2 mg/l and requires soil moisture, soil temperature, good basic phosphate supply and optimum soil reactions (pH value, microbial activity, root exudates) for sufficient replenishment. A high humus content increases the share of unstable phosphate and thus promotes the availability as well as a good root penetration by the crop.
Phosphorus is involved in all energy metabolic processes in the plant and is particularly important for root formation and the storage of starch in the grain.
Phosphate that is stored in a depot is sorbed as usual at the contact surfaces of the depot with the soil environment until the bonds are saturated. The majority of this soluble phosphate inside the depot thus remains fully available to the plant over a longer period of time.
The uptake of nutrients via the mass flow requires water. As only very small doses of phosphorus are present in the soil solution, the mass flow alone is not sufficient. The additional diffusion requires significantly more water. Thus, the uptake of phosphate suffers in dry conditions. Placing the depot in a deeper layer that is more likely to bear water increases the uptake reliability. As unstable and stable phosphate are not prone to wash out and as soluble phosphate is present in low concentrations, the risk of a displacement to even deeper layers is low. In rare cases, if it is extracted continuously from the subsoil without deeper, replenishing mixing, this immobility of phosphate can even be disadvantageous in dry periods.
High magnesium contents favour the uptake of phosphorus. Iron and zinc mobility within the plant is restricted if the phosphorus content is high. A high nitrate supply also restricts the uptake of phosphorus.
In contrast to phosphorus, potassium is much more mobile in the soil. The three fractions are also found in potassium. However, the potassium content in the soil of up to over 100,000 kg per hectare in the top 30 cm of the topsoil are enormous. The strength of the bond to clay particles, organic matter and to minerals and salts varies and ensures a constant supply and, due to the high solubility of potassium, an easy washing out on light soils. The availability is limited by the K saturation at the exchanger (correct ratio of calcium, magnesium and potassium), the soil structure and the depth as well as by antagonisms among others with ammonium. The higher the content of potassium-fixing clay particles, the stronger the bond and the lower the risk of washing out. After many years of extraction, clayey soils with mainly expandable clay minerals (smectite or the transformation to illite) tend to fix potassium immediately after fertilisation.
The fertilised potassium is stored in the intermediate layers of the clay minerals and is no longer available until these layers are replenished. As the ion diameters of K+ and NH4+ are similar, ammonium is sometimes also incorporated in these empty layers. “Fresh potassium” can displace ammonium and ensure that nitrogen is replenished.
Potassium influences the regulation of water uptake via the roots which also influences the supply of nutrients and their distribution within the plant parts. In dry conditions, it is responsible for the proper closing of the stomata and thus prevents further drying out. Barley and sugar beet react much more sensitively to the lack of potassium than for example wheat.
Due to its high mobility and the good solubility, the short-term top fertilisation of potassium also makes sense. Well-supplied soils with a high clay content react somewhat slowlier to top fertilisation than sandy soils. In the case of poorly supplied clayey soils, recognisable by the low soluble potassium content even after fertilisation, top fertilisation is not practicable. In this case, the plant has to be supplied via a concentrated fertiliser band. The resulting “micelle” saturates the adjacent clay minerals and remains available to the plant in the core.Focus (StripTill)
The Focus works according to the StripTill principle where the soil is only cultivated in the seed rows. Due to the front tine zone, the soil is loosened in strips and removes crop residues from the seed and root zone. The loosening depth can vary depending on the soil. The Focus offers various options for fertiliser application. In addition to a 100% application directly into the loosened root zone resp. on the topsoil, there is also the option of a proportional 50:50 application. This allows for responding to different conditions when seeding. In very good seeding conditions, the placement at the cultivation depth allows for supplying the lower topsoil area with fresh nutrients in a targeted way. If the conditions are rather wet and cold, the 50:50 placement can be used to specifically encourage the crop’s youth development and “lure” the roots downwards. This attraction effect makes the plant significantly more drought-resistant as it can form roots more quickly and efficiently in deep layers.
HORSCH Focus TD
On the one hand, fertiliser placement is important for soils that have not been turned for several years to compensate for any nutrient deficiencies in soil layers of 15 to 30 cm. On the other hand, the concentrated placement of fertiliser has a positive effect on nutrient efficiency and root growth. It is important to use the effect of the basic nutrients in a targeted way.
-
Land sparing and land sharing – considerations for farming with nature
Written by Dr David Cutress: IBERS, Aberystwyth University.
- Land sparing and land sharing are two different perspectives on land management towards improving global biodiversity
- The Welsh Government’s Sustainable Farming Scheme proposal appears to favour a land sharing focus despite most policy, industry and sustainability groups having favoured land sparing in the past
- There are pros and cons to both strategies but more recent research seems to suggest that considering case-by-case combinations of the two may be best for biodiversity
Why working with nature and encouraging its recovery is important?
Agriculture represents the single biggest use of land area worldwide, as such it inherently has a large role to play in human interactions with natural systems. With an ever-growing population of mouths to feed, following our historic patterns of expansion would only lead to even more land being converted for food, which is noted as a driving force behind biodiversity losses.
We have previously discussed the importance of naturally diverse biodiversity for improving the resilience and functionality of our ecosystems as well as highlighting some key areas where biodiversity and agriculture interactions can be beneficial (dung beetles, biological pest control, farmland birds). The decline of biodiversity worldwide is significant with over 65% reductions being noted in the numbers of monitored species populations between 1970 and 2016. Biodiversity levels play important roles in the planet’s ability to adapt to climate changes (droughts, floods, natural disasters) and such declines arguably make this more important an issue than climate change itself (despite the lack of media coverage).
To break it down to a basic message, working with nature rather than against it can save us a lot of energy, time and costs (both financial and environmental), therefore, it should be a focus for more efficient and sustainable land management practices. If we try to implement systems that go against nature without careful consideration we will impact ecosystems both up and downstream in ways that we often will not see for 10s or 100s of years.
For example, initial agricultural innovations of monocultural crops harvested with efficient machinery have led to a huge reduction in the species of food crops we now grow, with 75% of all our food being provided by 12 plant species. This reduction in species diversity whilst productively efficient short term is now being seen to have impacts on disease resilience (one pathogen being able to wipe out entire crops), environmental resilience (current species not adapted to hotter drier summers die or yield poorly), soil health (through lowering diversity of associated microbiomes and diverse root structures benefits on soil properties) and habitat loss impacting biodiversity levels.
We are now moving towards increasingly recognising the benefits of nature/biodiversity, through the economic impacts on public goods provided and climate benefits to name just two things. So, how can we look to manage and reduce further potentially negative interactions with nature?
Two of the major overarching strategies that have been discussed across the world and within the literature are land sharing and land sparing, sometimes looked at more simply as intensification and extensification. Despite the 10-year-long controversies between these two strategies, there is still much debate ongoing in the industry and the scientific community, though land sparing is the dominant choice from governments, policy, industry and sustainability-focused groups. Interestingly, however, it is land sharing that is discussed in the Welsh Government ‘Sustainable Farming Scheme’ proposal.
What are land sharing and land sparing (benefits and problems)?
For over half a century there has been debate ongoing around the ideas of land sharing and land sparing. Whilst the terminology is quite self-explanatory we must ensure that the aspects of these two options are understood before we discuss them further. Land sparing involves the consideration that we can merge all of our production needs into fewer highly intensive/efficient smaller areas, ‘sparing’ the remainder of the land (particularly important conservation/protection regions like rain forests and nature reserves) to be utilised for natural biodiversity-friendly ecosystems.
Land sharing on the other hand involves shifting the focus to less intensive more sustainable farming and land management systems across current land space to increase natural mimicry and lead to biodiversity increases across all lands at the same time. Land sparing could have a lot of benefits as it potentially involves less complicated considerations surrounding the recovery and functionality of highly complex natural ecosystems within the land that is ‘spared’ as once established these will require minimal management.
It is often focused on by governments as it can make a country appear far more sustainable depending on the metrics being measured. What land sparing is specifically beneficial for, is conserving species-rich habitats which are often those focused on for protection in sparing strategies, which often contain species with very small global ranges.
However, if land sparing is not considered globally and holistically it can simply lead to the shift of ecosystem/nature impacts elsewhere in the world and, therefore, realistically have no real beneficial impact. For example, if livestock facilities are intensified down to smaller areas and are high-producing systems they will likely require huge feed imports which may simply end up offshoring the issue of monoculture climate-negative crops, such as palm oil and soya.
Similarly, if ecosystems are made the focus then there may be further insufficient land for food production, increasing a nation’s reliance on, and the costs and emissions associated with, food importation. Consolidation of products into smaller intensive spaces may also have negative impacts on farmers’ abilities to spread their investments/risks which should not be overlooked. A concept often linked with land sparing which farmers find controversial is ‘rewilding’. Many believe re-wilding to be a waste of productive land which could otherwise be turning a profit, but it is important to note that subsidies are increasingly available that can make strategies which encourage natural biodiversity increases more beneficial.
Equally many ecosystems are now so degraded or far removed from historic natural states that they cannot easily self-repair without land management assistance, therefore, there could be roles for farmers and land managers to play in the future to be properly reimbursed by sustainability-focused subsidies to assist the ecological restoration of spared lands. Whilst this may benefit innovative, forward-thinking individuals, it of course does act as a barrier to integration for farmers who wish to simply farm as they always have and not re-skill to being ecosystem caretakers.
Land sharing was proposed as a methodology where many individuals do smaller amounts to benefit biodiversity as a whole, and largely many of the techniques associated are already being taken up within the concept of sustainable farming systems which encourage biodiversity.
The extensification that occurs can allow farmers and land managers to spread their production, therefore, spreading their potential yield risks to ensure at least some gains if there are crop or pasture failures. For this concept to work, it requires a change in focus from yields achieved to biodiversity gains, as such it doesn’t answer the consumer needs adequately without a shift from the consumers towards, for example, reduced meat eating and reduced food waste in general.
Whilst both these consumer changes would equally benefit land sparing they are more prominent for land sharing. Furthermore, many early models suggest that land sharing alone would ultimately reduce biodiversity more on the lands that would need to be encroached on (to feed the growing population) than it would improve biodiversity on the lands already being used, leading to a skewed impact.
Techniques/strategies for land sparing
Within these two concepts, many technologies and techniques have the potential to be employed to help achieve the goals set out. For land sparing for example everything relies on efficient intensification so that more can be produced on less land. In these instances, the following techniques can play roles;
Technologies that could bolster land sparing include;
Whilst these technologies can all benefit more products from less space they may not do so with energy-saving/environmental and animal wellbeing benefits as their key focus.
Techniques/strategies for land sharing
Land sharing techniques, on the other hand, are far more related to our previous discussions on sustainable farming and regenerative farming as both focus on improving biodiversity within their concepts.
Some technologies overlap between the two strategies depending on their focus and how they are used.
Why not both?
Ultimately across literature, the understanding that has formed is that a mixture of techniques is likely the answer for global biodiversity, and whilst land sharing and sparing consideration can have benefits in framing how we think about what we do and how biodiversity responds to farming, it may not work as an overarching framework to follow on its own. For example, a modelling exercise of elements integral to these main strategies (intensification, extensification and abandonment) demonstrated that in some geographical regions practices associated with land sharing perform best and in others those associated with land sparing perform best.
As such it will be interesting to see how the Welsh agricultural bill develops as it undergoes further consultation and what routes land managers will be incentivised to take.
Summary
Land sharing and land sparing are interesting concepts within the debate surrounding agriculture and land management practices and their impact on biodiversity worldwide. Whilst both have advocates and adversaries, it increasingly appears as though using one of the two cannot be the answer in all situations. Instead, it seems more likely that blended considerations or region-by-regions/case-by-case analysis may be required towards most optimally improving biodiversity holistically.
-
2022 US Census of Agriculture Reports Increase in No-Till Acres, Decrease in Conservation Tillage
Among the wins for conservation reported in the most recent U.S. Census of Agriculture was a 17% increase in cover-cropped acres.
By Katie Pratt from No-till Farmer USA
The U.S. saw a slight increase in no-tillage adoption during the past 5 years, despite declines in the number of overall farms and acres used for agriculture. This is according to data released by the 2022 U.S. Census of Agriculture and analyzed by No-Till Farmer. On a state level, 4 of the 7 Corn Belt states analyzed for this article reported increases in no-till acres.
Released every 5 years, the U.S. Census of Agriculture collects millions of data points about the U.S. agriculture industry from farmers and reports data on national, state and county levels.
More No-Till, Fewer Farms
Census data for 2022, the most recent survey, shows American farmers added more than 756,000 acres to no-tillage production since the 2017 census. In 2022, more than 105.2 million acres were in no-till production, compared to more than 104.45 million acres in 2017.
More farms are also no-tilling, going from 279,370 no-till farms in 2017 to 300,954 no-till farms in 2022. Farms averaged 350 acres of no-till, a 24-acre decrease from the 2017 average and significantly lower than the 1,086-acre farm size reported in the 2024 No-Till Operational Practices Benchmark Study.
Iowa: In Iowa, the number of farms using no-tillage and the number of acres in no-till were both slightly up from 2017. In 2022, more than 1,700 farms reported adopting no-till since in 2017. This is an increase of 7% and brings the total number of Iowa farms practicing no-till to 25,796. Iowa farmers reported a 3% increase in no-tillage acreage. Between 2022 and 2017, the state’s farmers added more than 250,000 acres to no-till production. In 2022, the state had more than 8.45 million acres in no-tillage, which is up from 8.19 million in 2017.
Minnesota: Minnesota has seen a 17% increase in the number of farms that adopted no-tillage from 2017 to 2022. 2022 numbers include 6,845 farms using no-till, which is up from 5,815 in 2017. No-till acreage has also had a large increase in the state, going from over 1.09 million acres in 2017 to more than 1.19 million by 2022.
Wisconsin: The Badger State saw increases in the number farms adopting no-till and the number of acres in no-till production between the 2017 and 2022 censuses. The number of farms using no-till was 14,880 in 2022, compared to 14,665 farms in 2017. 2022 no-till acreage was more than 2.4 million acres, up from more than 2.22 million acres in 2017.
Michigan: The number of no-till farms and acres have declined over 5 years. In 2022, Michigan farmers reported more than 1.38 million no-till acres on 7,896 farms, which are decreases of 11% and 3%, respectively. In 2017, the state’s farmers no-tilled over 1.56 million acres on 8,174 farms.
Indiana: The Hoosier State saw drops in the number of farms and acres using no-tillage between 2022 and 2017. In 2022, producers reported 14,892 no-till farms and about no-till 4.72 million acres. This is down from 15,867 farms and more than 4.9 million acres in no-tillage in 2017. These are declines of 6% and 3%, respectively.
Missouri: The Show Me State saw increases in the number of farms and no-till acres from 2017 to 2022. Missouri farmers reported a 6% increase in the number of farms with no-tillage acres 2022 for a total of 15,490 farms. In 2017, the state had 14,555 farms practicing no-till. Acreage is up by 5% with farmers adding 250,000 more no-till acres in the 5 years between the two censuses. This increase brings total no-till acreage in the state to 4.89 million in 2022, up from 4.64 million in 2017.
Illinois: Illinois saw a slight decrease in the number of farms and the number of acres in no-till production over 5 years. In 2017, more than 6.47 million acres and 21,979 farms used no-tillage. In 2022, farmers reported 21,631 farms and more than 6.43 million acres in no-till.
Kansas had the most no-till acres with farmers no-tilling more than 11.74 million acres in the state, followed by Nebraska (10.1 million acres), Iowa (8.45 million acres), Montana (7.97 million acres) and North Dakota (7.8 million acres).
Census data showed the number of U.S. farms and land used for agriculture continues to decline. In 2022, there were 109,000 fewer farms and 20 million fewer acres dedicated to agriculture than in 2017. With fewer acres dedicated to agriculture, but a continuously increasing world population, experts see no-till as a solution to future challenges — and a worthy national investment.
“Ballooning disaster relief payments are another trend that the next food and farm bill can address,” says Ricardo Salvador, director of the Food and Environment Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “With crops and livestock increasingly at risk due to drought, extreme heat, heavy rains and other climate change impacts, Congress must preserve and increase funding for conservation programs that will make farms more resilient to extreme weather, reducing losses and associated insurance payouts, and safeguarding the security of the U.S. food system.”
The USDA’s 2022 Census of Agriculture, which was released in February 2024, reported about a 1% increase in no-till acres in the U.S. compared to the 2017 census. Cover-cropped acres went up about 17%, while conservation tillage and conventional tillage acres both declined as of 2022. Source: 2022 Census of Agriculture, USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, February 2024 Conservation Tillage Acreage
More farms are using conservation or reduced tillage, but the number of acres decreased since 2017. In 2022, more than 11,000 farms added conservation or reduced tillage since 2017, a 5% increase. However, conservation or reduced tillage acreage has slightly declined from 2017’s 97.75 million acres to 97.06 million acres in 2022. It’s possible that some of those acres may have gone into no-till, as the no-till acreage increased by more than 756,000 acres since the 2017 census.
The number of U.S. farms and acres using intensive or conventional tillage continues to decline. The U.S. saw a drop of 6.55 million acres in conventional tillage from 2017 to 2022, an 8% decline. Conventional tillage also declined 24% between the 2017 and 2012 censuses. The average number of acres that each farm puts in conventional tillage also declined by 23 acres to 279 acres, a 7% drop from 2017’s 302-acre average.
As a result, more than 73% of all U.S. cropland used no-till or reduced tillage in 2022. This is up slightly from 2017 when around 72% of U.S. cropland was in no-till or reduced tillage.
U.S. farmers added cover crops to 2.5 million more acres in the past 5 years. In 2022, 17.98 million acres had a cover crop planted on them, up more than 16% from 15.39 million acres in 2017. At the farm level, the average amount of cover crop acreage per farm increased by 17 acres. The average amount of cover crops farmers plant is up to 117 in 2022 from 100 acres in 2017. These figures do not include lands that are in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Texas leads all states with 1.55 million acres seeded to cover crops, followed by Iowa (1.28 million acres), Indiana (988,282 acres), Nebraska (925,686 acres) and Missouri (921,222 acres).
-
Stratified Soil Sampling: A New Lokk at Soil Testing
What happens to the fertiliser which is sown on or near the surface of No-till fields? After a decent shower we see it has gone, presumably disappearing to the root area. But what happens then? How far does it get into the soil profile? Have you got the answer?
Marion Calmer from Illinois is a farmer, farming educator, innovator and maker of headers and other maize based machinery and in 2022 he decided to find out. Through ingenious soil sampling he discovered that most of the plant nutrients, which amounted to $1,000/ac over 14 years, were left in the top two inches. 42% of P was found in the top two inches, and just 16% in the bottom 6 – 8 ins slice.
Which meant the roots stayed close to the surface, so they stopped working in a dry spell. He could see and measure the quantity of this surplus fertiliser After 14 years No-till he got out his plough and cultivator after harvest, planted cover crops in the autumn and in the spring did a deep chisel to give the soil a thorough mixing. The result was a tremendous maize crop.
At the same time he divided the soil test into one inch thick layers extending to eight inches in depth. The test sites were done where the soil differed rather than in a grid, as he wanted to see if there was a difference in plant nutrients at various depths. He found that this was very much the case.
The financial difficulties of the 1980s forced Marion Calmer to find more efficient and profitable ways of farming. After a visit to then-world-record-holder Herman Warsaw’s farm in 1985, Marion became interested in narrow row maize due to the potential yield increase and input cost reduction.
In that same year he founded Calmer Agronomic Research Centre, an independent, self-funded enterprise with the goal of discovering ways to reduce input costs and increase profitability for himself and other farmers. This involved designing and building the world’s first header used to harvest maize planted at 15 inches in 1994. In 2013 he made the first 12-inch corn head. More recently he created the BT Chopper® Upgrade Kit which is a retrofit system that enables the heads on all the top brands of harvester to manage cornstalk residue more efficiently, saving farmers time and money.
Because of his research, Marion has:
- gone from conventional tillage to no-till
- adopted the use of biotechnology
- gone from growing maize and soybeans in 40-inch rows to growing both crops in 15-inch rows
- reduced his herbicide treatments down to one pass
Marion emphasises the independence of the research done in his name, and he won’t accept any outside money for research from commercial or government bodies. He knows the data is unbiased and can be used with confidence on his farm and on others.
What happens to residual No-till fertiliser?
Farming No-till for the past 30 years has provided him a huge amount of experience, multiplied many times by seeing the results of other farmers he visits. His interest turned to the way fertiliser travelled in the soil on his farm. He came up with a way of doing soil tests at different depths or strata which would measure the weight (using American lbs) in lbs per acre of available nutrient. He took a strata from ground level to a depth of 8 inches, and measured the contents of each sample for not only P and K but pH, Ca and even Organic Matter.
The samples were taken in early November, seven months since the last application which was at drilling time, so there was no newly sown fertiliser in the soil. The measurements showed the residual which was available for the cover crop and, potentially, for the crop following. The figures clearly illustrated how the nutrients linger in the top two inches and only a small quantity get to the 7 – 8 inch strata.
The phosphate goes from 37 lbs/ac at 7-8 inches to 142 lbs at 0-1 inch depth. Between 1 and 2 ins it has dropped to 97. The same applies to potash, the surface layer carrying 569 lbs and the 7-8 bottom section 177 lbs, an increase of 223%.
Many No-till farmers assume and are told that nutrients pass through the soil structure carried by winter rains and snow, but this test shows omething very different. The photos of Marion in the three different test areas are visual evidence of the differences in growth rate. The crop n field 1 was planted without fertiliser and had reached forearm height. It had leaves yellowing in the bottom. The crop in the second test area was healthier, taller and fewer leaves affected. The third field was cultivated to mix the soil in the 8 inch zone, and so was mouldboard ploughed, broken down with a cultivator, fertilised in the autumn and chisel ploughed before planting. This crop was stronger, taller by about a ft, and advanced over the other two.
The soil sample from the ploughed land showed how the nutrients were distributed evenly with the 0-1 inch profile reading 51 lbs P/ac, followed by 54 lbs in 1-2in; 107 in 2-3; 120 in 3-4; 74 in 4-5; 84 in 5-6; 57 in 6-7 and 42 in 7-8ins depth. The plough had inverted the surface burying the nutrient into the moisture zone, putting the nutrient where it does the most good. The soil samples of each three fields were taken so to find the level of nutrients in each of the eight layers. To do this he cut them into one inch slices which were sent off for analysis. Samples were taken from the best, the median and the poorest parts of each plot in a field that has a uniform soil structure.
The maize grown without fertiliser was showing stress from the 10 week drought. The outside of the bottom leaves was yellow, indicating a deficiency in potassium. Marion points out in the video that if the yellowing occurred up the spine of the leaf the problem would be N.
The results are maybe what we might expect, but not necessarily want to see. After 14 years of fertilising on the surface, 42% of the P was found in the top two inches. In the 6-8 inch slice the figure was 16%. The available P was hanging around on the surface while the plant could use the nutrients in the root zone. The figures were the same for potash where the top inch had five times as much as the soil between 7 and 8 inches.
Stratified soil tests reveal nutrients at the top
Soil tests show that applying phosphorous to the soil surface for 14 years results in 142 lbs/ac in the top inch and 97 in the 1 – 2 in strata. The top two accounted for 47% of the total P. The lower 6 – 7 ins strata (47 lbs) and 7 – 8 ins 32 lbs accounted for just 16% of the total. The figures for potash showed similar results, with 569 lbs/ac in the top inch and 177 in layer 7 to 8 ins. Figures for the stratified samples of elements which were not added show no major variation through the profile. Soil pH averaged 5.7 and was 5.8 in the 0 – 1 in strata and 5.5 in the deepest. Ca was 4,515 in 0 – 1 in and 4,751 at 7 – 8 in; Mg 908 and 822Lbs. Base saturation was again evenly distributed for Ca and Mg, but in K was 3.5% in the top strata and 1.0 in the bottom.
Soil tests for P after ploughing and soil mixing show a lbs/ac score of 51 and 54 in then first and second inch strata, rising to 107 lbs (2 – 3 in) and 120 lbs in 3 – 4 ins. The quantity then falls to 57 lbs in 6 – 7 ins and 42 lbs at 7 – 8 ins. Soil tests for K show a similar pattern, starting with 221 lbs in layer 1, rising to 376 lbs at 3 – 4 ins and remaining at 300+ until the deepest 7 – 8 ins strata at 177 lbs. The %age saturation remains even
throughout the strata, with an average 55% for Ca; 17% for Mg; 1.6% for K. It seems that it stays on top. Ploughing, cultivating and subsoiling the highly fertile surface which had been under No-till for so many years may seem like sacrilege.It’s not the experience which everyone has, but soils are hugely different. Over ten years of No-till is a long time for soils to lose porosity. Resisting changing the No-till system would produce the same results as in previous years Incorporating the residue fertiliser with tillage has had outstanding results for this first year, while increasing costs.
Conclusion
and assessed. Not knowing where the fertility is placed means possible waste. American experience shows that stratification encourages surface rooting so making low rainfall periods stressful for the growing crop. Fertiliser and nutrient in the top two inches are not being used
efficiently. Mechanical mixing makes the nutrients available at depths of 8 ins or more. Cover cropping utilises free N and other nutrients to build soil quality.Stratification needs measuring more widely in the UK. There may be major differences in the soil type between here and the USA with the soils working in an entirely different way, but maybe the differences are not so great. Maybe long term No-tillers have highly fertile soil surfaces and poorer soils at depth.
Maize remains a relatively niche crop in Britain, and perhaps the stratification of soils when used to grow cereals is less significant as the root zone is shallower. Improving lower level fertility may be achieved with surface work using aerators and spiked rollers which crack hard soils.
No-till crop establishment has won the approval from the government’s Sustainable Farming Incentive, and there seem few known disadvantages.No-till, alongside the use of cover crops over the winter, improves soil condition, involves far less work and leads to better yields. Like any technique it needs understanding, and this involves getting advice which is specific to the land in question. The nutrient stratification needs to be considered, especially before clearing out the ploughs, power harrows and other conventional equipment. They may be needed!
-
From Innovation to Evolution: A 16-year Journey in Direct Drilling
Written by Clive Bailye
It seems like such a long time ago now, but back in 2008 when we made the decision to stop cultivating and direct drill everything, there really wasn’t a lot of drills on the market to choose from. This made our choice relatively straightforward, but also brought compromises that often saw us heading to the farm workshop to modify and adapt what we felt was needed.
Our own previous “min-till” establishment system revolved around a single Simba solo cultivation train with a DD press. This was followed by a Vaderstad Rapid cultivator drill a few weeks later after applying glyphosate to a good weed and volunteer chit. It worked well for nearly a decade and was consistent, but it was expensive, time-consuming, high-horsepower dependent, and required lots of fuel, capital, and wearing metal, all adding to an unsustainable high fixed-cost structure.
We didn’t just rush into buying our first true direct drill without our own R&D phase. We started by using that existing Rapid drill to direct, without cultivation, at the easy points in the rotation, such as wheat after beans or OSR, where the drill’s ability to handle high levels of previous crop residue was not an issue. Although not designed to be a “direct drill,” in the right situation, it was perfectly capable of doing the job and certainly provided the proof-of-concept confidence we needed to sell those big tractors and cultivators and start direct drilling every crop.
We had also learned where the mechanical challenges would be for replacement machinery on our soil types and our rotation. In high trash situations, a drill’s ability to keep residue flowing and not block was essential, especially now as we planned to grow cover crops at every possible opportunity and drill directly into them. We found a disc-based coulter best in these situations, but we had also seen how a disc can sometimes “hairpin” straw, creating establishment and agronomic issues.
When conditions are dry, without soil loosening cultivations, penetration can be a challenge for drills not designed to work directly, resulting in a compromise to seeding depth and coverage. Conversely, when conditions are wet, smearing of the seed slot or failure to close it successfully and cover the seed can be the challenge. Mechanical and agronomic solutions to these issues have occupied my mind and those of many agricultural engineers over the years, resulting in an evolution of direct drills that today make things easier than ever, or in my case lots of farm workshop time spend chopping and tweaking existing machinery.
Back in 2008, a visit to Simon Chilles, a long-term direct drilling guru in Kent, resulted in us buying his old John Deere 750a as our first proper direct drill. These drills were a rare thing in the UK, and his 4m was the only one available at that time. I recall trying to buy parts for it from our local JD dealership, whose parts counter had no knowledge of what a “750a” even was!
Being used to the capacity of a 6m rapid, we felt more capacity was required than 4m alone, so we also bought a used Dale tine drill, feeling we had the best of both worlds in the ability to drill cover crops with the 750a discs and the Dale tine to use where hair pinning was an issue.
Both drills performed well and excelled in accurate seeding depth however, after that our first season with them both, it was clear we had seriously underestimated just how much time not cultivating would gift us. We didn’t need both drills, so we sold the Dale, imported Australian-designed row cleaners and fitted them to the 750a to deal with the hair pinning issue.
As workload increased over the next few years, the 4m was eventually changed for a new 6m which we immediately cut in half to extend the chassis and added a liquid fertilizer tank, granular applicators for Avadex and slug pellets, a split hopper for companion crops, and row cleaners, all of which features are either standard fit can be optioned from the factory on many of the drills available now. We learned in wetter seasons that a disc could smear on our soils and blocked where a tine didn’t, so we bought an old Horsch CO6 and modified it with a Bourgault VOS tines to act as insurance for such years, an investment that paid back handsomely in the very wet autumn of 2020.
Over time, we have customized our own solutions to get the machinery that we needed to consistently direct drill our soils. Meanwhile, the interest among UK farmers in direct drilling has grown significantly, and along with it, so has the choice of drills.
By the time our 750a was due for replacement, there was so much more choice of suitable machinery that didn’t need farm workshop adaptations to add options we wanted. I have become a fan of wider row widths in cereals, and with our drill tractor size dictated at a 240hp minimum to be able to pull our trailed sprayer and 18t grain trailers, it had always been too big for the 6m John Deere. The added efficiency of being able to operate a 12m Horsch Avatar with the same tractor was just too tempting. Its coulters familiar with a similar layout to the 750a and with large split hoppers, fertiliser placement all factory options, so no need for farm modifications.
My soils and my rotation will of course differ from those of others, as is always the case in farming there is no simple “copy and paste” solution that will work for all; every farm is different, and time and effort will need to be invested in researching solutions.
Experience here reflects the evolution of how the direct drill market has now created a huge choice of fantastic machinery available from so many quality manufacturers meaning a solution is now available to suit most soils and rotations.
Compared to my lack of choice 16 years ago, the question today is, how do you decide which of these many machines is right for you? Hopefully, this supplement and the QR code links to Phillip Wrights video interviews with some of the manufactures at the Cereals event this year provides a good starting point for initial comparison to help you make good, informed decisions.
