Farmers don't understand what drive their yields

[Guy Smith]

This is quite interesting

It's Professor Dave Goulson from Sussex University who is one of the lead academic voices who wants to ban Neonics. In the piece he seems to be of the view that neonic dressings don't have any yield benefits and farmers only use them as they don't understand what drives yields so they just use them because agrochemical manufacturers tell them to.

If there are any oilseed rape growers in Sussex and Kent with OSR crops being chewed to bits by flea beetle at the moment then it might be an idea to invite Dave out onto farm for an bit of 'show and tell'.

 

[Badshot]

Plenty of slugs but few flea beetles here at the mo.

 

[franklin]

Syngenta must be laughing all the way to the bank at the rate I am using Hallmark.

 

[Guy Smith]

The Prof probably thinks you are only using it because Syngenta tell you to and you don't realise it doesn't bring you any benefits.

 

[fudge]

Metaldehyde next? HSS and wider rotations seem a better approach than moaning about products that won't come back.

 

[SilliamWhale]

Strictly speaking it may not bring a yield benefit ie you can get the same yield without a dressing as you could with a dressing.

So it could be a play with words to claim it costs yield. (I realise that more plants could die and that means less plants to have the potential of yielding). I'm a bit not sure on it all - maybe we should learn to farm without them?

I'm sure we can adapt in the longer term, it still a morotarium isn't it so its worth seeing what happens.

p.s. Goulson doesn't want outright ban of neonics forever so he's not completely swivel eyed on the issue presumably?

 

[Guy Smith]

There is quite a few reports on here of farmers writing off 100s of acres if rape because of Flea Beetle damage. That sounds like a yield loss to me.

 

[SilliamWhale]

There is quite a few reports on here of farmers writing off 100s of acres if rape because of Flea Beetle damage. That sounds like a yield loss to me.

I think its a play on words. If a crop has established well without neonicotonids then there is no reason why it should yield lower than one that was established with neonicotonids. Presumably you think this isn't the case?

I think we should probably be prepared to leave neonics behind anyway.

 

[SF1]

I know its late but what a tosser, clueless!!

 

[Jim Bullock]

We have just finished combining 12 tons of spring rape off 196 acres due to uncontrollable flea beetle damage back in May - sprayed twice..Perhaps the Prof might like to have a chat with my Bank manager about the "hole" in my cash-flow.. We proved the need for insecticidal seed dressings on spring oilseed rape crops years ago.. (Last year we achieved yields up to 1 ton/acre -with Chinook)

 

[DrWazzock]

Professors ain't what they used to be.

 

[Guy Smith]

I think the whole point of neonics is to give you better establishment which leads to better yields - as Jim seems to have proven very well.

 

[Charlie--chalk]

The majority of my spring rape was written off due to flea beetle damage even though I sprayed twice for them. Wasn't growing a huge area but that makes no difference in my eyes as it was far too higher a percentage lost! The rest that I decided to take through to harvest is awful and in hind sight I should have sprayed that off to. Will not be growing again unless a certain seed dressing becomes available.

 

[shakerator]

The most stupid thing is pyrethroids will kill more bees anyway

 

[Wheatland]

Don't feel so bad now @Jim Bullock, we managed 1620kg off 10ha of spring osr. Also sprayed twice for flea beetle but most was lost by the end of May

 

[crazy_bull]

The most stupid thing is pyrethroids will kill more bees anyway

But the bees won't be in the crop when you are spraying for flea beetle, as a contact spray it shouldn't get them.

C B

 

[willy]

We can grow osr without neonnics.

People have to adapt, I can't believe they were still growing the stuff at the same seed rates. Common sense will tell you that the reason we used neonics was to mitigate the percentage losses to flea beetle. So without it you have to grow the stuff with the idea that you may loose upto 60% of the plants.

I know people who have grown good rape with hss out of the heap for years, and I have for the last 2. But I have doubled my seed rate accordingly. And still getting the same yields but with less black grass competition.

 

[SilliamWhale]

I think the whole point of neonics is to give you better establishment which leads to better yields - as Jim seems to have proven very well.

When straw burning was banned, did you think it would adversely affect crop yields because establishment would be "compromised"?

Another thing - will we see the supply/demand of OSR change? ie increase prices?

If farmers "can't" grow without neonics what about the people who do grow without them? Do they not understand what they're doing and are lucky whereas the skilled ones are the ones using neonics?

 

[Brisel]

Professors ain't what they used to be.

Professors are great in their chosen field of expertise - in this case bee health. Making sweeping statements on the agchem trade which Goulson knows nothing about is stupid. He would have no credibility if he didn't have that academic title. Just another anorak with a power trip.

 

[Clive]

We can grow osr without neonnics.

People have to adapt, I can't believe they were still growing the stuff at the same seed rates. Common sense will tell you that the reason we used neonics was to mitigate the percentage losses to flea beetle. So without it you have to grow the stuff with the idea that you may loose upto 60% of the plants.

I know people who have grown good rape with hss out of the heap for years, and I have for the last 2. But I have doubled my seed rate accordingly. And still getting the same yields but with less black grass competition.

Much as I agree the neonic ban is badly thought through and the alternative liberal use of parathyroids even worse I think its unfortunate here to stay now no matter how loud we shout

I think now that seems to be a fact of life that the greed of seed merchants is the problem - what should have happened post ban was a big cut in seed prices (i'm sure the margin is there to facilitate this and they are saving on dressing anyway) advice should have changed to much higher seed rates which at current seed rates are unaffordable to mitigate loss to flea beetle

Instead yet more growers have been put of growing OSR after another bad experience and financial loss, seed sales will fall as more growers will move away from OSR especially at current input and output prices , those that remain will be bigger users of home saved seed at affordable higher rates etc


anyone recall the story about the goose that laid the golden eggs ?? !!!