Their crystal ball is no better than mine - I prefer to worry about stuff when it’s reality
I can cope with £100/t without going bust anyway so won’t loose sleep
Large scale No Till
- Thread starter ajd132
- Start date
Their crystal ball is no better than mine - I prefer to worry about stuff when it’s reality
I can cope with £100/t without going bust anyway so won’t loose sleep
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Just because something is uncertain doesn't mean that everyone is as good at forecasting as others. Read Superforecasting on this topic. I don't think it's a given that your crystal ball is the same.
It's useful for any model to do some sensitivity analysis. If one farming system holds up much better under low prices and doesn't perform commensurately worse under high prices, then it should be preferred in the face of an uncertain future (assuming equal likelihood of high or low prices) over a system that performs very badly under low prices but only marginally better (than the alternative system) under high prices.
yellow belly
Member
- Location
- south west lincolnshire
notills biggest issue for those looking from the outside
agents owners and non notill farmers is that it does not look as good
but with the wetness of fields to day the notill has cost a lot less get to the same stage this was the case in 2012 and 2013 what ever system the yields were low just notill systems cost less to get that low
one man farm with a limited area a plough ph combi system is hard to beat especially on a more medium soil type
notill also needs drainage issues to be sorted as it does not hide poorley drain fields
agents owners and non notill farmers is that it does not look as good
but with the wetness of fields to day the notill has cost a lot less get to the same stage this was the case in 2012 and 2013 what ever system the yields were low just notill systems cost less to get that low
one man farm with a limited area a plough ph combi system is hard to beat especially on a more medium soil type
notill also needs drainage issues to be sorted as it does not hide poorley drain fields
It’s still relatively new here though and people are gaining a better understanding of the benefits of the system. As this knowledge/acceptance of “untidy” farming gains followers then the system may gain more support.
From my perspective you’ve got to be open to change though. It’s not the biggest or strongest who survive but those willing to accept change. Those farms on a larger scale should have no trouble in conversion or adding no-till to an existing method. Half the challenge is acceptance of something different.
- Location
- NSW, Newstralya
True - but along with acceptance of change, you need to continue to accept change
Zero till here is old hat, I'd say the default farming system. 30 yrs or so. Some people very quick to adapt, some a lot slower. However, the danger I've seen is farmers then thinking that that is the " ultimate " system & being blinkered to other changes further down the track
A fundamentalist " zero tiller " is just as trapped in their own paradigms as a fundamentalist " plougher "
NO system is perfect or the ultimate, we should always be open to small tweaks or massive change as we move on . . .
- Location
- S.E
I tend to agree with a lot of what you are saying @Feldspar in terms of a lower input lower output system. When you compare crop production in the UK to crop production in say Russia and consider that we are all producing the same product for the same market its quite frightening. However we do not have the same advantages as they do being - cheap labour and 10's of thousands of acres. Our labour costs are FAR higher and we have MUCH less land to spread our fixed costs over.
Therefore we need to achieve higher yields in a high input high output (variable costs) system to help make up for the shortfall in fixed cost efficiencies. That does not necessarily mean that DD is not the answer. In fact I believe it is and I dont understand why it should be any less of a high input system than 'conventional' farming in regards to variable costs.
The advantage is in the fixed costs, which can absolutely be scaled up. We are covering more land than we have before with less labour and less capital invested and still have additional capacity.
Therefore we need to achieve higher yields in a high input high output (variable costs) system to help make up for the shortfall in fixed cost efficiencies. That does not necessarily mean that DD is not the answer. In fact I believe it is and I dont understand why it should be any less of a high input system than 'conventional' farming in regards to variable costs.
The advantage is in the fixed costs, which can absolutely be scaled up. We are covering more land than we have before with less labour and less capital invested and still have additional capacity.
post like that really make me want to get my ass into gear and come see some progressive farms in australia
- Location
- Owaka, New Zealand
Crazy not to, even this Kiwi is jealous of the progressive and adaptive nature of my neighbours, their research and development of soils and techniques is amazing IMO
I know many on here think Australia and North America are irrelevant but really, it isn't the case at all, there are plenty of conventional type systems as well and they really push their yields along to compete for profitability with the no-till lower input guys in Aussie.
On a crap year
it simply means losing much less money
yellow belly
Member
- Location
- south west lincolnshire
my father started using min till in the 1970s and some notill
since then we have used all types of system ploughing scratch subsoil disc all with burning straw some we added muck back
currently we notill with controlled traffic no burning but bale straw after leaving a foot of stubble
I am certain that the failure of notill in previous decades was not feeding and nurturing the worms burning may have reduced slugs but it did also starve the worms gramoxone may also have had some effects
there is a lot of debate about future subsidy funding for notill
I ask this question why it will just distort the market for land rents and inflate land prices
it will also attract those to notill who do not have the skill set to make it work
which are patience, farming systems experience, soil type, cropping flexibility
since then we have used all types of system ploughing scratch subsoil disc all with burning straw some we added muck back
currently we notill with controlled traffic no burning but bale straw after leaving a foot of stubble
I am certain that the failure of notill in previous decades was not feeding and nurturing the worms burning may have reduced slugs but it did also starve the worms gramoxone may also have had some effects
there is a lot of debate about future subsidy funding for notill
I ask this question why it will just distort the market for land rents and inflate land prices
it will also attract those to notill who do not have the skill set to make it work
which are patience, farming systems experience, soil type, cropping flexibility
- Location
- NSW, Newstralya
Crazy not to, even this Kiwi is jealous of the progressive and adaptive nature of my neighbours, their research and development of soils and techniques is amazing IMO
I know many on here think Australia and North America are irrelevant but really, it isn't the case at all, there are plenty of conventional type systems as well and they really push their yields along to compete for profitability with the no-till lower input guys in Aussie.
On a crap year
I think mr dyson will be trying to make something to revolutionize agriculture but i don’t think it will be going down the robot way,it’s much more likely to be grain drying side so we can cut wetter and get more output from what we have now,his blade hand dryers on a bigger scale probably run of solar or wind!,if you could start cutting wheat at 20+% how much more could you cut in a season
A lot more and we already do that because of Camgrain capped drying charges