Does Direct Drilling actually save money

Fred · Dec 9, 2018

Its that time of year when I sit down and review costings.
Whilst I do that I ask several questions,
Can I do it better , cheaper , more efficiently , differently etc.

So my question is this ,

Those of you who have moved to a genuine direct drilling system have you actually
1 Saved money
2 Increased profit

The reason I ask is this, we direct drill OSR , then we have 2 passes before drilling wheat, Sumo , joker, drill)
and 1 before drilling beans (sumo trio)
So effectively 1 1/2 passes before drilling across the total acreage , all rolled after .

A lot of the direct drilling passes all involve either a straw rake , or cover crop seeding pass.inc covers

Assuming we spray , fertilize and harvest at the same cost, is direct drilling saving approx. £10-12 acre in establishment costs.
Which whilst is a substantial saving on a 1000 acres, is it a big enough saving to warrant investment in a new drill .

I understand direct drilling is more than just changing the drill and its a mindset thing with a change in rotation labour practices etc , but for those who have just changed a machine did it pay?

Those of you who changed complete systems , do you find management easier, and is your farming business more profitable ?

If it is, and I suppose this is what I am really trying to find out , is your new system Brexit proof in other words are you making enough profit before subsidy to make a living at todays prices .

Its a bit of a convoluted question ,

juke · Dec 9, 2018

free your mind and the rest will follow...…. don't think of direct drilling and the various systems as just a way to save money that's a guaranteed way to fail... we are better off after swapping to strip till , diesel , labour saving, spraying less, metal savings. oh and yields have been on the up.. most importantly we have better soil that's heading in the right way and we are opening our eyes to the con that is conventional farming that relies on the can or bag..

yes we spend on cover crops that will hopefully help recycle nutrients and create om as well as giving us the chance to deal with any weed issues that may arise.

a traditional plough and combi set up round here is using 45 litres h/a,more so if they have to run a machine in between. we are using 9 litres of diesel to achieve the same, the no till guys are using round about 3 l h/a , so for any remedial works like straw harrowing there is plenty of opportunity to do so and still be in clover on the fuel bill..

labour with a 3 m strip drill on say 50 acre would be 11 hours another couple if a straw harrow pass is required and 4 hours to roll it ..
5 furrow plough on 50 acre gotta be 13 hours round about there same again for the 3m drill tractor, possibility of land needing working down. too , and the same to roll it .
metal savings too ..

the priceless factor , building soil condtion and creating your very own worm army.... along with all the other beneficals

SilliamWhale · Dec 9, 2018

I don't see the point of cultivation really. No till drill can do it all really (though I do struggle with OSR after barley). Whats the trio actually doing anyway?

Your also saving tractor investment hours so reinvestment less necessary here.

Will Blackburn · Dec 9, 2018

SilliamWhale said:
I don't see the point of cultivation really. No till drill can do it all really (though I do struggle with OSR after barley). Whats the trio actually doing anyway?

Your also saving tractor investment hours so reinvestment less necessary here.

Also substituting hard hours for easy hours.

Fred · Dec 9, 2018

SilliamWhale said:
I don't see the point of cultivation really. No till drill can do it all really (though I do struggle with OSR after barley). Whats the trio actually doing anyway?

Your also saving tractor investment hours so reinvestment less necessary here.

The thing is we tend to find the crops do better with cultivation

Brisel · Dec 9, 2018

I saved £20/acre by going from deep non inversion tillage and rotational ploughing to all strip till drilling. Osr yields slightly up. Wheat yield about the same. Spring crop yields slightly down but 2 dry early summers haven't helped.

Same number of passes but they are lighter, cheaper and faster. Tyres are lasting longer too.

Does saving time count for anything?

Brisel · Dec 9, 2018

Fred said:
The thing is we tend to find the crops do better with cultivation

Yield or margin? Are your soils improving with cultivation?

tr250 · Dec 9, 2018

Fred said:
Its that time of year when I sit down and review costings.
Whilst I do that I ask several questions,
Can I do it better , cheaper , more efficiently , differently etc.

So my question is this ,

Those of you who have moved to a genuine direct drilling system have you actually
1 Saved money
2 Increased profit

The reason I ask is this, we direct drill OSR , then we have 2 passes before drilling wheat, Sumo , joker, drill)
and 1 before drilling beans (sumo trio)
So effectively 1 1/2 passes before drilling across the total acreage , all rolled after .

A lot of the direct drilling passes all involve either a straw rake , or cover crop seeding pass.inc covers

Assuming we spray , fertilize and harvest at the same cost, is direct drilling saving approx. £10-12 acre in establishment costs.
Which whilst is a substantial saving on a 1000 acres, is it a big enough saving to warrant investment in a new drill .

I understand direct drilling is more than just changing the drill and its a mindset thing with a change in rotation labour practices etc , but for those who have just changed a machine did it pay?

Those of you who changed complete systems , do you find management easier, and is your farming business more profitable ?

If it is, and I suppose this is what I am really trying to find out , is your new system Brexit proof in other words are you making enough profit before subsidy to make a living at todays prices .

Its a bit of a convoluted question ,

Mark we haven't saved much as we bought a new drill as the type of no-till drill we wanted wasn't available second hand. We have saved a lot of fuel not a lot of time as I spend more time crop walking etc but in harvest it's allowed us more time for harvesting, bale carting, looking after livestock which would of had to wait if we were cultivating. But we are a mixed farm and I feel we are not suffering yield penaltys like long term arable farms do

Fred · Dec 9, 2018

Brisel said:
Yield or margin? Are your soils improving with cultivation?

Define improvement , yield is margin , as long as its not a ridiculous cost ,an extra pass for 1/2 ton acre always pays

Badshot · Dec 9, 2018

Fred said:
Define improvement , yield is margin , as long as its not a ridiculous cost ,an extra pass for 1/2 ton acre always pays

If you are bg free I'd agree that overall margin on decent ground can be as good, or even better.
But chuck bg control, and loss of yield into the equation and suddenly it can look very different
Bg is almost uncontrollable in places with non inversion tillage, and also with full inversion.
It's my first year of full on no till, (been DD with tines for years) and so far it's looking promising for very low bg levels.
It's easy to get caught up in the multiple pass route.
It's not so easy to do nothing.
Learning all the time.

Brisel · Dec 10, 2018

Fred said:
Define improvement , yield is margin , as long as its not a ridiculous cost ,an extra pass for 1/2 ton acre always pays

I can't argue with the yield aspect. 1/2t/acre pays for a lot of inputs & passes. As long as you're not storing up trouble for the future with blackgrass, declining soil health then carry on. An anticipated yield drop is what puts a lot of people off direct drilling IMO. Have you tried an experiment on your farm to produce a 1/2 t advantage?

If you have a weed problem, strip tillage will NOT help this, in fact it can make it worse as you're not doing as many stale seedbeds yet disturbing the soil in the seeding zone. A good rotation will sort your weed burden.

Will Blackburn · Dec 10, 2018

Fred said:
Define improvement , yield is margin , as long as its not a ridiculous cost ,an extra pass for 1/2 ton acre always pays

There is a cost in that a yield penalty is the result of nutritional lock up from building OM. By cultivating you will not see an increase in water and nutrient holding capacity in your soils, through increasing OM.

Brisel · Dec 10, 2018

Will Blackburn said:
There is a cost in that a yield penalty is the result of nutritional lock up from building OM.

The nutrients that used to leach out? You need a serious increase in organic matter to get nutrient lockup. I'm talking double SOM levels you only find in peat & black fenland soils.

Adeptandy · Dec 10, 2018

Brisel said:
The nutrients that used to leach out? You need a serious increase in organic matter to get nutrient lockup. I'm talking double SOM levels you only find in peat & black fenland soils.

So would you consider DD on black fenland soils not the greatest idea ?

Rob Holmes · Dec 10, 2018

I remember what my dad said years ago when we were walking the crops,

"Look at this lovely tilth.... then we'll go and bury it!"

Brisel · Dec 10, 2018

Adeptandy said:
So would you consider DD on black fenland soils not the greatest idea ?

Sorry - that's not what I was getting at. I was refuting to the statement that increasing OM by DD locks up nutrients. I doubt establishment methods make any difference to lockup on your black soils as long as soil structure is good to give the roots the best chance of accessing what they need. Have you seen a difference?

Will Blackburn · Dec 10, 2018

Brisel said:
The nutrients that used to leach out? You need a serious increase in organic matter to get nutrient lockup. I'm talking double SOM levels you only find in peat & black fenland soils.

I'm talking about N lock up rather than trace elements when building OM. When the OM levels have been built then you have a fantastic ability to hold water and nutrients.
I have recently tested soil that is ploughed in an arable rotatation and soil that is ley farmed in a no-till rotation. Same parent material and the estimated CECs are 10.4 and 14.6 respectively and OMs are 4.6 and 6.4. There is much more resilience to drought and leaching in the the second no-till soil.

Brisel · Dec 10, 2018

Will Blackburn said:
I'm talking about N lock up rather than trace elements when building OM. When the OM levels have been built then you have a fantastic ability to hold water and nutrients.
I have recently tested soil that is ploughed in an arable rotatation and soil that is ley farmed in a no-till rotation. Same parent material and the estimated CECs are 10.4 and 14.6 respectively and OMs are 4.6 and 6.4. There is much more resilience to drought and leaching in the the second no-till soil.

Ah, thanks for explaining. N lockup shouldn't be a problem unless your C:N ratio is too high. You're not mineralising soil N if you no till. Longer term no tillers use less N than their cultivating peers, not more. Tony Reynolds used more N & seed when he first started no till but has been able to cut them back now his soils are back to life again.

Adeptandy · Dec 10, 2018

Brisel said:
Sorry - that's not what I was getting at. I was refuting to the statement that increasing OM by DD locks up nutrients. I doubt establishment methods make any difference to lockup on your black soils as long as soil structure is good to give the roots the best chance of accessing what they need. Have you seen a difference?

Not yet, only had a year, still torn in the direction to go, heart wants to go full DD, head is struggling with it after a poor first year

Against_the_grain · Dec 10, 2018

The problem you are going to have asking this question in a no-till section of the forum is most of the responses are going to be from no-till farmers who are generally all pro no tillage. Might be better to ask this question in the main cropping section and get a more balanced response. Here we direct drill some fields and cultivate other and plough others. For us its about using all of the tools available to create the best seedbed for the crop to grow and thrive in. Normally all our 1st Wwheat is direct drilled but if we feel that a cultivation pass will be beneficial then we wont shy away from that. As already mentioned you don't need much extra yield to pay for a cultivation pass.
Soils are definately getting more friable and draining better where we are dd'ing but in some situations we have seen crops struggle when dd'd.
We have a HIGH gw burden here and am yet to be convinced either way on whether cultivation or not is helping this situation. Pros and cons for both.
Without a doubt it is saving us money though. Perhaps 50% of our farm is dd'd now and fuel/labour and wearing parts are all lower but I would be reluctant to buy the sandals and go full no till because there are situations where a better margin is achievable through tillage.

IMO If you look around the world GENERALLY dd is practiced in areas (e.g Aus) where cropping is more marginal and potential is limited by environmental factors and farmers are looking to minimise risk (cost). If you look at areas with high potential (e.g EUR) there is more of a trend to maximising output and spending on the crop to achieve this.

Is potentially limiting yield to minimise fixed costs sensible (tin hat on!)

Like everything in life its all about balance

Does Direct Drilling actually save money

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Moderator

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

0 %

Up to 25%

25-50%

50-75%

75-100%

100% I’ve had enough of farming!

Share this page