The UK isnt suited to No-Till....discuss!!

[Against_the_grain]

Not trying to be provocative but only asking this because I am interested in the principles, but surely no-till isnt really suited to UK conditions.

Most big no-till countries are hot and dry and on very light soils, and and moisture conservation is critical to the crops success. Thats why they (initially started) no-till. Clearly this isnt the case in the UK. Yes it has its merits in that it saves money and improves soil structure/health but with the climate and soil types we have do we not need to till the soil?

Like I say I would like to be corrected on this if anyone can offer a decent opinion.

 

[Dan Powell]

The UK isn't really suited to plough based agriculture. Most farms that use ploughs have an unlimited supply of organic matter to burn up and don't need to worry about preserving it. Also,their fuel and wearing metal is extremely cheap as are labour costs so they don't need to consider an alternative. Moreover plough based agriculture never fails. There is never insufficient moisture for germination in a dry autumn and ploughing when wet is fine as plough pans are easily removable by dragging a 3 metre subsoiler through wet soil with a 250 hp tractor.

Discuss.

 

[SilliamWhale]

its all in the head (and heart)

Tropical Paraguay isn't dry, in fact it was about erosion not just moisture retention.

The rest of the world is a big place- not all soils are light

 

[SilliamWhale]

I reckon the problem isn't the UK but its that the big arable boys on heavy land are totally wedded to the idea that

a. everything must go through a combine in august
b. everything must be sown a month later
c. they are arable farmers not farmers so everything has to fit in with the need to be identified as an arable farmer first.

So farms like this end up trousering a huge amount of agricultural subsidy and spend a fortune on chemicals to control resistant weeds, when what they really need is a bit more variety or a perennial sequence (maybe 2-3 years in 9?) I must be right because there are still a lot of farms planting and spending cash on loss making oilseed rape this year and last just to keep the addiction going.

 

[shakerator]

Not trying to be provocative but only asking this because I am interested in the principles, but surely no-till isnt really suited to UK conditions.

Most big no-till countries are hot and dry and on very light soils, and and moisture conservation is critical to the crops success. Thats why they (initially started) no-till. Clearly this isnt the case in the UK. Yes it has its merits in that it saves money and improves soil structure/health but with the climate and soil types we have do we not need to till the soil?

Like I say I would like to be corrected on this if anyone can offer a decent opinion.

Remember commercial agribusiness is basically a European export to developing countries where it may not be as suited.

All about water really. Is it wasteful to drain away all high nitrate surplus winter rainfall? Could this water be better utilised ?

The trouble with dd and clay is we are not starting with a blank canvas but in many cases trying to reverse years of "getting a crop in on the mans land at all costs" without looking outside the box

 

[Against_the_grain]

Surely all these large arable farms perhaps even all of us are/were only farming close rotations because these make most financial sense. After all profitability is absolutely fundamental so these Farms are surely doing the best they can to be as profitable as possible! I would love to grow spring oats and cover crops etc but financially I am better off growing 'another wheat'....at least short /medium term

Osr could be £300/t by harvest.

I am aware that no-till is very fashionable at the moment but if it works so well why didn't it work first time round back in the day. Power harrowing was all the rage 10yrs ago!

Don't want to be caught up in the hype

 

[SilliamWhale]

Surely all these large arable farms perhaps even all of us are/were only farming close rotations because these make most financial sense. After all profitability is absolutely fundamental so these Farms are surely doing the best they can to be as profitable as possible! I would love to grow spring oats and cover crops etc but financially I am better off growing 'another wheat'....at least short /medium term

I am aware that no-till is very fashionable at the moment but if it works so well why didn't it work first time round back in the day. Power harrowing was all the rage 10yrs ago!

Don't want to be caught up in the hype

I take your point. Firstly to me its not hype, having studied and practised continuous no till for 11 years and met farmers who've done it for much longer I think whilst it is creeping up the uptake curve I still feel its alway is and always be about focusing on two things - quality and rationality Its not about revolutions or fashion that is of no interest one way or the other. Hype comes around when it feels new and unknown, ignore hype, talk to and visit farmers.

Profitability yes I agree, it is the main thing. But I think we can make mistakes about profitability as per my oilseed rape comment. You may be profitable growing another wheat and if so you should grow it, but what is stopping you growing another and another? You could still be 60% wheat with a good no till system (may need a bit of spring wheat in it though).

p.s. is it really all the rage?

 

[DrWazzock]

Some years I can get away with no till, (dry years), some years I can't.

There is no magic bullet in farming. Generally you have to chop and change according to the conditions at the time. The older I get, the more I realise it's futile to try and find the holy grail or ideal solution. There isn't one. Best just to wait till something needs drilling, see what the grounds like and keep an open mind as to what will be the best tool.

Soils might self structure with zero traffic while they revert to native woodland, but they sure as hell don't with livestock or any sort of machinery on them during a wet time.

 

[Feldspar]

Just when I thought the other discussion was quietening down...

 

[SilliamWhale]

Some years I can get away with no till, (dry years), some years I can't.

There is no magic bullet in farming. Generally you have to chop and change according to the conditions at the time. The older I get, the more I realise it's futile to try and find the holy grail or ideal solution. There isn't one. Best just to wait till something needs drilling, see what the grounds like and keep an open mind as to what will be the best tool.

Soils might self structure with zero traffic while they revert to native woodland, but they sure as hell don't with livestock or any sort of machinery on them during a wet time.

I'm big on no machines beyond a quad in the fields now but to be honest I don't find sheep on turnips and covers a problem at all. But I do shift the grazing pattern a bit. Will deffo no till into these fields after - soil is lovely under the 5mm layer.

Lots of people forget that just cos you got a no till drill you don't have to no till every acre to start - keep the subsoiler and a light cultivator til your happy I'd say.

 

[SilliamWhale]

Just when I thought the other discussion was quietening down...

New year, fresh mankini, 6 days off alcohol (new years resolution for a dry january failed tonight) - I'm raring to go again!

 

[dontknowanything]

Not trying to be provocative but only asking this because I am interested in the principles, but surely no-till isnt really suited to UK conditions.

Most big no-till countries are hot and dry and on very light soils, and and moisture conservation is critical to the crops success. Thats why they (initially started) no-till. Clearly this isnt the case in the UK. Yes it has its merits in that it saves money and improves soil structure/health but with the climate and soil types we have do we not need to till the soil?

Like I say I would like to be corrected on this if anyone can offer a decent opinion.

There's a scale, hot & dry at one end, cool & moist at the other. The closer to the cool end the more your land will suit cultivation systems, and will be able to handle it for longer. I think we are about as far that way as it's possible to be.

 

[Feldspar]

New year, fresh mankini, 6 days off alcohol (new years resolution for a dry january failed tonight) - I'm raring to go again!

OK then. Why the need to single out large arable farmers? I know of farmers on 100 ac who have plenty of black-grass, drive on their soil when it's too wet and don't have a 'proper' rotation. And what about those farmers on light land like Clive a few years ago who like to grind their soil to dust every so often when they grow potatoes? There is naught so pious as the recently converted!

If you sit down with the figures, the most profitable farms per acre have been 3000ac farms who grow only a few crops, who ensure good timeliness (which means getting the combining done fast), run big machines in syndicates and have minimal amounts of livestock - and that's before rent and subsidy so nothing to do with being a slipper farmer who is kept afloat by their vast subsidy cheque. These farmers simply snigger whilst they're off skiing / shooting jocularly conjecturing how they afford it year after year after year given that they don't make any money.

There we go. That should get you going!

 

[SilliamWhale]

OK then. Why the need to single out large arable farmers? I know of farmers on 100 ac who have plenty of black-grass, drive on their soil when it's too wet and don't have a 'proper' rotation. And what about those farmers on light land like Clive a few years ago who like to grind their soil to dust every so often when they grow potatoes? There is naught so pious as the recently converted!

If you sit down with the figures, the most profitable farms per acre have been 3000ac farms who grow only a few crops, who ensure good timeliness (which means getting the combining done fast), run big machines in syndicates and have minimal amounts of livestock - and that's before rent and subsidy so nothing to do with being a slipper farmer who is kept afloat by their vast subsidy cheque. These farmers simply snigger whilst they're off skiing / shooting jocularly conjecturing how they afford it year after year after year given that they don't make any money.

There we go. That should get you going!

Really? Dairy has been top of the tree for the past year hasn't it?

 

[Feldspar]

Really? Dairy has been top of the tree for the past year hasn't it?

One data point does not maketh a trend.

 

[SilliamWhale]

One data point does not maketh a trend.

Agreed. Spuds would have been top the year before I expect.

Is the cost per tonne of wheat or barley really that much lower on these black grass infested tillage crazy heavy land farms though? I'm not so sure all things considered though I find it easy to see how a big farm will make more cash than a small one.

 

[Feldspar]

Agreed. Spuds would have been top the year before I expect.

Is the cost per tonne of wheat or barley really that much lower on these black grass infested tillage crazy heavy land farms though? I'm not so sure all things considered.

Tillage crazy and black-grass infested is a wild exaggeration and generalisation. Our agronomist says there is only about a few % of land that he manages that is a real problem, and that is all concentrated on a few farms which means poor management. As I said tillage crazy occurs when you plant potatoes, and not many farms around here can be accused of that crime.

 

[SilliamWhale]

Tillage crazy and black-grass infested is a wild exaggeration and generalisation. Our agronomist says there is only about a few % of land that he manages that is a real problem, and that is all concentrated on a few farms which means poor management. As I said tillage crazy occurs when you plant potatoes, and not many farms around here can be accused of that crime.

I know it is. But seriously if wheat pays so well which it does why not grow it over and over again and not grow rape?

 

[Feldspar]

I'm not so sure all things considered though I find it easy to see how a big farm will make more cash than a small one.

Would you like me to send you the numbers then (and I assume you mean per acre, because obviously in general the bigger farms make more in absolute terms)?

 

[SilliamWhale]

Would you like me to send you the numbers then (and I assume you mean per acre, because obviously in general the bigger farms make more in absolute terms)?

Yes because i don't think necessarily the largest farms have the cheapest cost per tonne. I also think is a side issue though.

Immovable costs = seed and nitrogen.

Everything else is subject to variability and not necessarily strongly linked to yield ie you can spend a lot or a little on other actions but your core yield could still have stayed the same incl fungicides in some seasons.

Stripping out the need for cultivation and some of the pricer chemicals and maintaining yield is the challenge.