No-Till Farming on the Rise with Better Profits and less Fertilizer Run-off

[GreatGazoo]

No-till farming uses a mix of plants to create a thick mat of bio-mass which holds more water and crowds and shades out weeds. After a harvest, a cover crop is planted -- so called because it covers the soil with nutrient dense vegetation such as vetches and legumes which hold nitrogen. Then when the next cash crop is to be planted, rather than plowing the soil and opening it up to erosion, the cover crop is killed and rolled down flat. The new crop is planted through this mat of dead plant matter. The dead cover crop fertilizes the new crop, keeps out weeds and hold water and soil in place much longer than plowed soil.

Such farming methods, which mimic the biology of virgin land, can revive degenerated earth, minimize erosion, encourage plant growth and increase farmers’ profits, their proponents say. And by using them, Mr. Brown told more than 250 farmers and ranchers who gathered at the hotel for the first Southern Soil Health Conference, he has produced crops that thrive on his 5,000-acre farm outside of Bismarck, N.D., even during droughts or flooding.

He no longer needs to use nitrogen fertilizer or fungicide, he said, and he produces yields that are above the county average with less labor and lower costs. “Nature can heal if we give her the chance,” Mr. Brown said.
...
For some crops, no-tillage acreage has nearly doubled in the last 15 years. For soybeans, for example, it rose to 30 million acres in 2012 from 16.5 million acres in 1996. The planting of cover crops — legumes and other species that are rotated with cash crops to blanket the soil year-round and act as green manure — has also risen in acreage about 30 percent a year, according to surveys, though the total remains small.
...
“My goal is to improve my soil so I can grow a better crop so I can make more money,” said Terry McAlister, who farms 6,000 acres of drought-stricken cropland in North Texas. “If I can help the environment in the process, fine, but that’s not my goal.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/science/farmers-put-down-the-plow-for-more-productive-soil.html?ref=science&_r=0

[herding cats]

1. Oh, there's a member here who will love this! mopinko I think is their name?

This is something they've posted about here, and fought for locally for some time!

K&R for them to see it.

[KamaAina]

43. I am FB friends with her.

[herding cats]

82. If you were the person who alerted them to the post, thank you.

I respect what mopinko is doing and this post made me think of them. It's not exactly the same, but it gives a nod to what she's been fighting for, which is important. She needs all the ammo she can get in her fight.

[KamaAina]

86. De nada.

Love the name!

[mopinko]

61. yes i am.

someone else sent me the link. ha! i have spies.

this is so important. so very important. we are not hearing enough about what climate change is doing to soils around the world.
farm practices are also an underestimated cause of climate change. i suppose when the next dust bowl happens it will cool the planet. but you cant grow food in the clouds.

urban farmers often face the challenge of bad soils, or little soil. we NEED to be able to grow our own. but it doesnt always go down well with neighbors and city statutes.

http://www.permaculture.co.uk/articles/many-benefits-hugelkultur
this is what we are doing. we are being sued for it.

lots of info at my sig link.

[herding cats]

83. I respect what you're doing and I totally support your efforts.

I thought of you when I saw this post, and I'm glad you had friends here to lead you to it. Every little bit helps you with your fight.

Thank you for the link, also. I've learned a lot of things I now practice in my own gardens, small though they may be, from reading your posts. You've inspired me and I thank you.

[mopinko]

84. ripples in the pond.

ya know, i actually started that page in self defense. i was told by the alderman to do some pr. but it has turned into a great exercise. and it will help my case. everything i have done is on there, recorded in real time.

i thank you for reading, and for gardening. all for the best for the planet.

[NaturalHigh]

2. Cool. Bookmarked for later.

[pnwmom]

3. This appears to be a promotional piece for GMO's and Roundup.

From the article:

No-till farming uses a mix of plants to create a thick mat of bio-mass which holds more water and crowds and shades out weeds. After a harvest, a cover crop is planted -- so called because it covers the soil with nutrient dense vegetation such as vetches and legumes which hold nitrogen. Then when the next cash crop is to be planted, rather than plowing the soil and opening it up to erosion, the cover crop is killed and rolled down flat. The new crop is planted through this mat of dead plant matter. The dead cover crop fertilizes the new crop, keeps out weeds and hold water and soil in place much longer than plowed soil.

How is the "cover crop" killed exactly?

The only information I could find was here:

Mr. McAlister, for example, still uses nitrogen fertilizer. He plants seeds that are genetically modified for drought or herbicide resistance. And he depends on herbicides like Roundup to kill off his cover crops before sowing the crops he grows for cash.

Another point of view:

http://earthopensource.org/gmomythsandtruths/sample-page/5-gm-crops-impacts-farm-environment/5-5-myth-gm-enabled-adoption-environmentally-friendly-till-farming/

GMO proponents claim that GM herbicide-tolerant crops, notably GM Roundup Ready (RR) crops, are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to adopt the no-till system of cultivation. No-till farming avoids ploughing in order to conserve soil and water. It is claimed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by sequestering more carbon in the soil.

In no-till cultivation of GM herbicide-tolerant crops, farmers try to control weeds through herbicide applications rather than mechanically, by ploughing.

However, USDA data show that the introduction of GM crops did not significantly increase no-till adoption.

A study comparing the environmental impact of GM RR and non-GM soy found that once the ecological damage caused by herbicides is taken into account, the negative environmental impact of GM soy is greater than that of non-GM soy in both no-till and tillage systems. Also, the adoption of no-till raised the negative environmental impact level, whether the soy was GM RR or non-GM.

No-till fields do not sequester more carbon than ploughed fields when carbon sequestration at soil depths greater than 30 cm is taken into account.

Claims of environmental benefits from no-till herbicide-tolerant farming systems are unjustified.

[whereisjustice]

6. Thanks for this info!

[GreatGazoo]

16. Organic No-Till uses a heavy crimp roller to kill the cover crop and weeds mechanically

“To be a successful farmer one must first know the nature of the soil.” It was fitting that Jeff Moyer, Farm Manager for the Rodale Institute, kicked off his workshop on organic no-till practices with this bit of ancient wisdom from Xenophon's Oeconomicus, written cerca 400 B.C. Moyer was speaking to a packed audience at the 2011 “Farming for the Future” conference of the Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture. If there is one thing organic and no-till advocates have in common, it is a passion for soil health.
...
On the other hand, while conventional no-till allows farmers to minimize erosion and save on fuel, heavy use of some chemical weed-killers can pollute soil and water, and long-term sustainability is threatened by the development of herbicide resistant weeds. What if there were a farming system that combined the best elements of organic and no-till farming, while minimizing the harms? That is the bold question that researchers at the Rodale Institute and Penn State have been asking, along with innovative farmers across the region. The key to bridging organic and no-till practices turns out to be cover crops.
...
The major innovation that has enabled this approach is an implement called a “roller-crimper”. As the name suggests, the roller-crimper is a large, heavy cylinder, with metal flanges coming off at an angle, that attaches to a tractor. As it rolls, it pushes down the cover crop and “crimps” the stems to kill the crop. The killed cover crop is left in place, and the main crop is planted through the thick mulch that remains. Timing cover crop establishment and termination is critical to get enough biomass to suppress weeds, effectively kill the cover crop in spring, and still get the main crop planted on time.

http://extension.psu.edu/plants/sustainable/news/2011/sept-2011/4-org-no-till

[pnwmom]

19. Thanks for providing the information that should have been in the other article. n/t

[ND-Dem]

29. the article itself says something else.

Mr. McAlister, for example, still uses nitrogen fertilizer. He plants seeds that are genetically modified for drought or herbicide resistance. And he depends on herbicides like Roundup to kill off his cover crops before sowing the crops he grows for cash.

[GreatGazoo]

39. Mc Allister is not an organic farmer

The NYT article is not an exhaustive look into no-till and that is why I am citing other sources for the organic version of no-till.

For conventional farmers like Mc Allister, the benefit of no-till is less fertilizer, less plowing and better drought resistance and less money spent on inputs. Herbicide-wise in conventional farming, plowing versus no-till, it is not that different. So all things considered the combination of conventional farming with no-till represents an improvement over plowing. Not perfect, just a step in the right direction.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

55. Thanks for covering that, that was the first question that popped into my mind.

I was wondering if, on the back yard garden scale, you could basically just mow with a non-bagging mower.

[Enthusiast]

7. Thank you. This is the first thing I considered.

I know they want us to pretend that the repeated application of herbicides is entirely harmless. It just is not harmless.

[GreatGazoo]

14. GM and No-Till are 2 different components that don't necessarily go together

Last edited Tue Mar 10, 2015, 10:56 AM - Edit history (1)

I appreciate your skepticism -- Yes, some farmers use herbicide once a season to kill off the cover crop but No-Till as a practice is also used by organic farms and home gardeners. In smaller organic gardens people smother the grasses with cardboard or other mulch. And in commercial systems, if the farmer is using herbicide to kill the cover then the herbicide is sprayed on the cover crop, not on the food crop. Perhaps not ideal but that is reality and a big improvement over till-and-kill.

The main benefits of No-Till are:
- "Green manure" cover crops replace commercial fertilizers, saving money and avoiding highly concentrated chemicals
- Retains ground moisture better than plowing; drought tolerant, water saving.
- less labor and gasoline than plowing the field 3 to 6 times per season
- Avoid fertilizer run off into local streams and groundwater
- Better soil health
- and as cited by the farmers -- Lower costs

Lower cost because they aren't buying chemical fertilizers, and not buying as much diesel fuel and herbicides -- this is not in line with the corporate goals of Monsanto and the rest.

ETA: Organic no-till as promoted by Rodale Institute
http://rodaleinstitute.org/our-work/organic-no-till/

[pnwmom]

21. Thank you. Unfortunately, the article only mentioned using an herbicide

to kill the ground cover.

A curious omission.

[ND-Dem]

27. thanks. i wondered how they 'killed' the cover crop all at once and 'rolled it flat'.

[kestrel91316]

44. If you read the NYT article, there are plenty of farmers doing

ultra-low or no-input no-till WITHOUT using herbicides. Takes longer to get to where you can do that. Rome wasn't built in a day and soil can't come back to life overnight.

The decreased use of fertilizers is essential to be able to reverse the growing ovean dead zones.

[yellowcanine]

59. I could not fine any GMO reference in the article. Where did you see that?

[pnwmom]

62. It is buried in the 32nd paragraph.

Early on there was a reference to killing the ground cover plants, but I had to read almost to the end to find out how most farmers accomplish that.

But few growers go as far as Mr. Brown in North Dakota, who produces grass-fed beef and has given up most agricultural chemicals. Mr. McAlister, for example, still uses nitrogen fertilizer. He plants seeds that are genetically modified for drought or herbicide resistance. And he depends on herbicides like Roundup to kill off his cover crops before sowing the crops he grows for cash.

[yellowcanine]

64. Buried in 32nd paragraph is "promoting?" I thought it was "glossing over."

Can't have it both ways. They better fire that marketing person.
Your logic escapes me.

[pnwmom]

65. It is promoting the idea of no-till while glossing over the fact that

most farmers accomplish this by using GMO's and Roundup.

The farmers they're marketing to will understand how the cover is killed, but the average reader will have just absorbed the message that no-till is a great thing.

[yellowcanine]

73. No till was widely used (1970s-80s) long before GMO crops (1996)

The article isn't particularly well written. It makes it sound like no-till is relatively recent. But in fact farmers were doing no-till in the 60s and it took off in the 70s and 80s. Roundup wasn't even the first major chemical used for no-till. Paraquat was the herbicide of choice early on for killing cover crops - Roundup became available around 1975 but initially was too expensive for conservation tillage. However its effectiveness as a systemic herbicide (unlike paraquat, which kills only on contact - ok for annual plants but sucks at killing perennials) combined with major price decreases around 1985, made Roundup and other glyphosate products the natural choice for killing both annual and perennial plants and a good fit for no-till agriculture. But this was still a decade before Roundup Ready soybeans, the first commercially available GMO field crop. And in fact RR soybeans are grown widely under both conventional and conservation tillage as is RR corn. It is a mistake to try to connect GMOs and no-till. The only connection is Roundup, which is only one of many forms of glyphosate available to farmers. It does not add to our understanding to try to make connections where they don't actually exist. It is the definition of a red herring. No-till will stand or fall on its own merits, regardless or what happens with GMOs.

[mopinko]

66. making the perfect the enemy of the good.

soil loss is an underestimated scourge on the environment. separate and apart from the use of herbicides. period.
fertilizer runoff is just a symptom of soil erosion. good topsoil is being lost, polluting watersheds, just as much as the fertilizers. wasted water is also a part of the environmental cost.

but even if it werent, no till will cut down on the need for such. cover crops are one way to do it, but there are lots of others. using mulches, especially if you can use landscape waste instead of sending it to the landfill is one. use of annuals for cover crops is another. plant an annual grass like rye in the fall, and it is already dead in the spring.

your attempt here to discredit this important shift in agricultural practices is just wrong headed.

[NickB79]

81. Current tilling regiments are eroding soil faster than the sustainable rate

http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/ewg-releases-erosion-report/

On Wednesday, April 13, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) released a new report on soil erosion in Iowa. The report, entitled Loosing Ground, states that soil in Iowa and other Corn Belt states is “being swept away at rates many times higher than official estimates.” The findings are based in part on data from aerial surveys and Iowa State University (ISU).

According to the report, the National Resources Inventory (NRI) data that are typically used by USDA suggest that erosion rates in Iowa averaged 5.2 tons per acre per year, and 3.9 across the entire Corn Belt in 2007. These rates are considered acceptable according to the “sustainable” rate of erosion of five tons per acre per year — the amount of soil loss per year the land can tolerate before it loses its ability to sustain a healthy crop.

However, EWG and ISU data show far worse erosion and runoff figures for the state, reinforcing long-existing doubts about the current acceptable definition of “sustainable” levels of erosion. According to the report, “the data indicate that farmland in 440 Iowa townships encompassing more than 10 million acres eroded faster in 2007 than the ‘sustainable’ rate. In 220 townships totaling 6 million acres, the rate of soil loss was twice the ‘sustainable’ level.”

Erosion in farmlands is exacerbated by runoff, which washes away soils, fertilizers, pesticides and manure, eventually discharging them into the Mississippi River. The runoff has led to the development of a Dead Zone — a zone of depleted oxygen that forms each year and suffocates marine life — in the Gulf of Mexico.

http://world.time.com/2012/12/14/what-if-the-worlds-soil-runs-out/

A rough calculation of current rates of soil degradation suggests we have about 60 years of topsoil left. Some 40% of soil used for agriculture around the world is classed as either degraded or seriously degraded – the latter means that 70% of the topsoil, the layer allowing plants to grow, is gone. Because of various farming methods that strip the soil of carbon and make it less robust as well as weaker in nutrients, soil is being lost at between 10 and 40 times the rate at which it can be naturally replenished. Even the well-maintained farming land in Europe, which may look idyllic, is being lost at unsustainable rates.

I didn't see soil erosion addressed at all in the links you provided. And if we can't even maintain the soil itself in the fields, what kinds of chemicals we apply to it or seeds we plant in it becomes moot.

[tecelote]

4. We have one food source that is pesticide free and needs no hormones. Grown on bio-waste.

http://www.bugsfordinner.com

Insects are high in protein, vitamins and minerals. They use significantly less resources to produce. They can be produced in high volume anywhere in the world with low-tech equipment.

[NaturalHigh]

5. Yeah, but dang...

I just really don't want to eat bugs.

[tecelote]

12. You don't have to see them to eat them.

Bug flour is high in protein, mineral and iron. As a food additive, it's easier to handle.

Pound for pound it takes .5% of the water to produce, less than 15% of the land and has almost no methane output.

[mopinko]

70. bugs make wonderful animal feed.

i am not ready to eat them myself, but boy howdy do my chickens love bugs. when the rotary composter starts to attract flies and grow maggots, i take the top off and let the girls feast.

[bobclark86]

77. Umm... yeah, I have.

Grew up in a rural area, surrounded by farms. One year, we bought a pig, "Elmer" (named after one of the clerks at Central Tractor). We raised him, loved him, called him George (or Elmer, whatever), and then ate a lot of fine, tasty dead piggie all winter.

[Android3.14]

8. Looks misleading

How does one "kill the crops" before rolling them down flat?

I suppose it could be done by covering the crops with black plastic tarp, but it looks like this little story promotes herbicides.

[GreatGazoo]

15. Depends on the cover crop and the overall farming method

Use of allelopathic plants is showing some promise:

Are there means on the horizon for eliminating the need for synthetic organic herbicides? Certainly. The move away from monocropping is already reducing weed problems, and many of the facets of good husbandry (such as meticulous screening of seed for cleanliness) help. Then too, there are developments in natural weed control. Scientists at the University of North Carolina are using plants against plants. By incorporating allelopathic species (which release chemicals to fight off neighbors) as cover crops in conjunction with no-till plantings, they're having great success at controlling weeds. So, aspects of no-till may offer advantages over conventional tillage when coupled with natural controls.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/no-till-farming-zmaz84zloeck.aspx?PageId=5

[GliderGuider]

9. My question is:

When are we going to start producing less food, so we can finally get our population growth under control?

[mopinko]

67. starvation as a means to population control?

good idea hitler.

[GliderGuider]

72. Somebody had to say it.

We won't do it deliberately, but if world population is ever rapidly reduced, famine will be a likely mechanism. With what's happening in the Arctic right now, and what that's doing to the jet stream, and what a long-term jet stream disruption will do to agriculture in the Northern Hemisphere, we may not have to wait long to find out.

I'm not Hitler. I'm the ghost of Thomas Malthus, groomsman to the Four Horsemen.

[mopinko]

74. there is a big difference between natural disasters and advocating

creating one in order to kill people.
du being what it is these days, i suppose you are right that someone had to say it.
but someone also has to call them on it. what you advocate is despicable.

[GliderGuider]

75. I don't advocate it.

I made the statement because if we really wanted to reduce global population significantly messing with the food supply would be the only way to do it. We won't do that, and I couldn't live in the moral abyss that would create - so I'm happy to wait for the Four Horsemen to do the job. My original statement was a touch sarcastic, but it was serious at the same time, if you get what I mean.

The human race is in a world of hurt. The population of the planet is entering very hard times; there are too many of us doing to much damage too our little blue marble; and there isn't a blessed thing we will or even can do to actually fix it. The best we can do is to live as lightly as possible while we're still here. Spraying Roundup on fields and calling it "no-till farming" doesn't qualify.

[enough]

10. No-till has many advantages, but it is based on massive use of herbicides. (nt)

[Agony]

11. A Little Burndown Madness - a little 2,4-D for the glyphosate resistant horseweed.

A Little Burndown Madness
If you are a no-tiller then you are probably considering your burndown
options for this year. Your burndown herbicides can be applied with your
early pre-plant or separate. However, it is important to have a clean slate for
the up coming planting season. A wooly field interferes with planting and
planting timing. Some of the products that you might want to consider for a
burndown program this coming season are listed in the table below.
Glyphosate or paraquat (Gramoxone inteon) can be applied almost any time
before planting in the spring, however allow 7 to 10 days for glyphosate to do
its job. Due to the widespread occurrence of glyphosate resistant horseweed
(marestail) it is recommended to mix at least 1 pt/A 2,4-D ester with your
burndown. When using 2,4-D at 1 pt/A or less (< 0.5 lb ai/A) you have to
wait 7 days before the planting of soybean. If you use more than 1 pt/A (>0.5
pt ai/A), most labels specify a 30 day preplant interval. Extreme, Canopy
DF, or Canopy EX can only be used before soybean. Simazine can only be
used before corn. Atrazine, Sencor, Scepter, and FirstRate will have some
burndown ability when COC is added to the mix. Always read and follow
pesticide labels.

https://ag.purdue.edu/btny/weedscience/Documents/BurndownMadness.pdf

Yeah! “If I can help the environment in the process, fine, but that’s not my goal.”

Atrazine? pour a little more into the Ogallala.

not that the happy homeowner isn't using a little 2,4-D on their lawn we can't just call out industrial agriculture...

[GreatGazoo]

17. The organic way is...

#t=35

[HuckleB]

18. It's very helpful. The anti-GMO crowd doesn't like to talk about it, though.

Ideology trumps good farming practice for them.

Persistent Anti-GMO Myths
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/persistent-anti-gmo-myths/

[pnwmom]

22. It turns out organic farmers can No-Till without GMO's or Roundup.

So the article gives a misleading impression.

http://rodaleinstitute.org/our-work/organic-no-till/

[HuckleB]

23. And they produce much less food for the outputs they use.

And you continue to use anti-GMO links that are not tied to good science. Rodale has no respect in the science community as a whole. Earthopensource is nothing more than a bad joke. Until you stop doing that, and stop cherry picking things instead of offering honest discussion about the matter, please don't respond to my posts.

Thank you.

[pnwmom]

24. Take your comments off-line if you only want fans to respond.

I'll respond to any public posts I choose.

Keep on pushing your "experts" who are employees of Monsanto Corporation. It's amusing.

[ND-Dem]

31. That one linked a wide variety of far-right sources, including ones funded by the Kochs, on

his last go-round.

[pnwmom]

34. Not surprising. Thanks, ND-Dem. nt

[mopinko]

78. what are you talking about?

please put up a link.

[yellowcanine]

35. Hypothetically yes, but in practice, it is very difficult.

Successful no-till generally requires the use of herbicides.

[pnwmom]

40. That's what I figured. And that's the only solution mentioned in the OP's article.

So it can be read as a promotion of GMO's and herbicides like Roundup.

[yellowcanine]

41. Or it can be read as an accurate portrayal of no-till agriculture.

I guess it depends on what you want to see. Facts are......facts. Most successful no-till farmers use glyphosate. They don't do it to promote Roundup. They do it because it works.

[pnwmom]

46. It's not accurate if it glosses over how the cover is killed

and implies that the whole process uses less chemicals.

[yellowcanine]

49. How is this "glossing over" how the cover crop is killed?

"And he depends on herbicides like Roundup to kill off his cover crops before sowing the crops he grows for cash."

Seems like a straight forward declarative statement to me.

[pnwmom]

52. That was buried near the end of the article,

where many readers would miss it. Why didn't they mention it with the first reference to killing the cover? It's an important point.

[yellowcanine]

53. I guess you see what you want to see and miss what you want to miss.

The real problem, I suspect, is that the article said something positive about Roundup.

[mmonk]

54. My post 37 notes a useful way to go for organic farming (or original farming as they say).

[HuckleB]

20. A Farmer's Perspective On No Till..

http://thefarmerslife.com/environment/what-is-no-till/

and another good piece on the topic:

http://gmoanswers.com/ask/scientist-bob-kremer-has-documented-some-detrimental-effects-f-glyhosate-soil-when-used-roundup

and another...

The Promise of GMOs: Conservation Tillage
http://www.biofortified.org/2014/02/conservation-tillage/

[pnwmom]

26. Maybe you should call your post: "A Monsanto employee's perspective on Roundup."

Since one of your links is by this person:

Expert Answer
By: Kristin Huizinga, PhD, Plant & Soil Microbiology Lead, Monsanto Company

[closeupready]

48. Thank you. Just as I've always suspected of that one.

[jwirr]

25. I live in NE MN and wonder if this can work here - it says after the harvest another cover crop is

planted. I don't think our growing season allows for cover crops.

[BronxBoy]

33. Sure it does....

a national project on cover crops was recently complete by SARE and the results are being looked at in other regions. Many cover crops are region specific so a lot of the work done in that project is specific to the midwest and is not entirely transferable to other regions. But there is a cover crop for every region.

[jwirr]

45. The problem I see is the time factor. Most gardens are planted in June and the season is often over

by October at which time we do the harvesting. By November we have freezing temps and snow. It seems to me that to make this work up here we would need to rotate crops so that some of the land can lay fallow for one season and planted the next.

Last year we had a very gold spring, planted late and then had an early winter. Many of our first crop did not mature and provide a crop. We are already limited to what crops we can grow by the short season.

Don't get me wrong here - we practice soil improvement using natural means (Chickens, turkeys, sheep, etc.) and do not use fertilizer other than that. And I would love to be able to not have to till the soil.

[BronxBoy]

51. You're exactly right....

And one of the problems with introducing these practices piecemeal to farmers who haven't used them is that you are taking one piece out of a system that is designed to work as a whole. No-till should be used in conjunction with crop rotations and specific cover cropping but convincing a farmer to take usable land out of production in a climate like yours is a very tall order.

A lot of these practices are coming out of the organic and sustainable agriculture movements. One of the problems those of us in the movement have is showing that these practices can effectively scale up to larger farms and that they can be utilized without killing a farmers bottom line. I strongly believe that the burden is on us to do this research and identify and solve the issues. And it will take time. But 10 or 15 years ago, this subject would have fallen on deaf ears in the conventional ag world.

[jwirr]

57. Yes, thank you for the video of the work being done at UM. I agree - we grow family gardens and

I need to see what the others think of this idea. My grandchildren love radishes so that one will be no problem. To bad the government stopped the lay away program where they paid farmers to set land aside for a season. It could have been used to convince farmers to try this idea.

[BronxBoy]

60. Conservation Tillage programs are still very much in effect....

In fact, there was an increase in funding for it in the last farm bill. Your can check with your local National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) if you'd like more info or you can PM me and I'll send you some info.

While these programs are good in theory, I have heard complaints about them specifically that the money paid to the farmer doesn't begin to compensate them for the paperwork they have to do. I work with a lot of small family farms and urban farms who just don't have or can't afford to idle land for thew time stipulated in the programs. Larger farms where there is excess capacity seems to be where a lot of this money is going.

[Hestia]

63. They do allow to go fallow for a year or two. Went to a Sustainability Conference & No-Till was one

of the highlight symposiums. Extremely interesting farmer and and gave out information on he doesn't have to use weed killers and has less of a pest problem. After harvest and sewing ground covers, he plants in a new row the next season. He's getting more crops out of less space doing it this way. The soil gets over 1 ft. deep.

[GreatGazoo]

47. Excellent question. U of MN is working on the best cover crops for your weather challenges

They give a progress report here:

[SoLeftIAmRight]

80. Very Good

Thanks

[Auggie]

28. How do you kill the cover crop? Chevron used to promote Paraquat,

back in the 1980s. I know because I helped advertise this shit.

[ND-Dem]

32. same rodeo:

Mr. McAlister, for example, still uses nitrogen fertilizer. He plants seeds that are genetically modified for drought or herbicide resistance. And he depends on herbicides like Roundup to kill off his cover crops before sowing the crops he grows for cash.

[pnwmom]

36. That was my question too. And the only answer in the article: Roundup.

But it turns out that there are mechanical, organic means, too -- just not mentioned in this promo piece for Roundup and GMO's.

[jwirr]

58. The cover crops used to be tilled under as fertilizer but if you are not going to till then maybe a

burn off?

[cilla4progress]

30. Well, I'm confused by all the back and forth on this thread -

short of doing my own background research ... all I can say is

where I live here in the inland Pacific NW where we really didn't have a winter - nor its benefits - I am already finding myself adapting to the reality of extreme heat and dryness, actually starting already.

When I did my Spring cleaning in my flower beds this weekend, rather than raking off last Summer's detritus, leaves and such, and turning over the soil deeply as I used to do, I just barely turned it (using hand tools - a shovel) and left a cover of leaves and other biomass on top to protect the soil from dehydration. I think this is only one tiny adaptation of many we will all be called to implement moving forward.

[MissB]

50. I'm in the PNW too

and have built two hugelkultur beds so far this spring and am working on a third this weekend. The two that I started and planted in February are doing amazingly well, though I've just gotten around to a top layer of 3-4 inches of mulch (straw).

This is the first year that I've forced DH to keep so much of our spring yard waste on site. Part of that is slated to be used for the next big hugel bed but much of it will be available for an end of season mulch covering of the new hugel beds.

So far the beds have really held moisture in and it's quite nice to be able to utilize the wood debris that falls in our property.

[mmonk]

37. Planting rows of non crop vegetation between

every few rows of crops can pretty much provide the same benefits of soil and water retention without herbicides.

[yellowcanine]

56. That works in a garden - not as practical on a field scale.

You are basically talking about strip tillage. Yes it works but there can still be a fair amount of soil exposed you lose some of the benefits of no-till. But it is one way to till less in organic production.

[mmonk]

85. On larger fields, you can square them off and on hillsides, you can vegetate the bottom or valley.

Yes, many who just produce small amounts for your famers market use this, not so much for large producers.

[kestrel91316]

38. This is how you fight the War on Dead Zones.

[mopinko]

68. eggzactly.

i get so upset when i hear about the results of agricultural runoff. no one seems to acknowledge that it is more than fertilizer that is running off. it is topsoil, which is an extremely limited resource. (well, not really. we could be building new soils instead of landfilling landscape and food waste. but we arent.)

this is a truly important issue and i am very happy to hear that farmers are taking it seriously.

[BronxBoy]

42. This is good news...

Getting conventional farmers to adopt more sustainable practices is a good thing. Yes there are farmers who are probably using conventional methods to kill the crops but just the fact that they are looking at this farming method is a start.

There is still a lot of research to be done in this area to broaden it's reach among conventional farmers. A good cover crop in the midwest can become a pernicious weed in the Southeast. Studies as to which crops work best in specific regions is just starting to be done and it will be several years before we can start to get answers. But the work is getting done and there has been some positive communication between farmers in the conventional and sustainable worlds.

This is a good thing.

[mopinko]

69. my experience

i am using hugelkultur on my little farm, which is a no-till technique.
my first hill is now 3 years old. the first season i planted beans, the second season i planted heirloom tomatoes.

i was able to raise 200 lbs of beautiful tomatoes (plus many squirrel bitten and otherwise imperfect tomatoes for my chickens.) with zero watering. granted it was a good year for rainfall. but the rest of the plot required daily watering, because the natural soil here is extremely thin and sandy.
not only did i grow tomatoes as big as babies heads, i avoided a lot of common faults. no wilt or fungus. no watering faults like blossom end rot.
just gorgeous, delicious tomatoes.

this year i will be growing peppers on the hill. sweet peppers do not do very well in the ground here. they require a lot of water. so, i am optimistic that i will have a great crop.

even tho i have access to plenty of cheap water, and whatever runs off here is filtered through about a mile of sandy soil before returning to lake michigan, i still have a goal of using little to no irrigation. we are about permaculture here, establishing a soil base and a perennial food base that will still provide me with food after i am too old to be an active farmer.
dragging hoses and sprinklers around is a task that i do not think i will be up for when i am 80. i intend this place to fly on automatic pilot within 5-10 years.

yes, that is the long haul. but most farmers, however much they live year to year, still see the big picture.
glad that people like this farmer and warren buffet see that without soil there is no food.

[GreatGazoo]

71. Sounds great!

I just got the book "Farming the Woods" to help us utilize the 100+ acre of woods we have on the farm. Really cool stuff -- I love the emphasis on perennials and on planting the right plant for the conditions of a given position. I bought mostly for the chapters on mushrooms. I was hoping to grow morels but they seem to defy cultivation. Shiitakes are nice (and grow easily) but they get boring after a while.

http://farmingthewoods.com/praise-for-the-book/

I did a variety of 3 Sister plantings 2 years ago and they did fantastic. Did the whole thing -- 3 days before the full moon, fish, etc. then didn't touch it for 2 months. Thought I had picked them clean but they just kept going. I am very interested in pre-modern farming techniques and low input farming.

I'm also interested in ergonomic and mobility-impaired farming as I am not getting any younger.

[mopinko]

76. focused on fungi here as well.

we got a lovely first bloom of winecaps last year. planted them on the second pile, which is about a year behind. we did potatoes in straw, with the winecaps co-planted. waiting to see how many volunteers we have in that spot.

we have some wild ones, too. i am still learning about mushrooms and a lot of my attempts so far have failed, but....
just put in my order for some sawdust spore for a couple of oysters, and yes, some morels. ya never know.

i should have added above that another great way to "destroy" a cover crop is by running chickens on the space. we have a chicken tractor on that second pile that will leave us with a very nice pile of compost when we move it. but letting them out on a large field will result in a clean space w few bugs and some awesome eggs and meat birds. as long as you dont leave them out there until they have eaten every last sprout, that is.

[GreatGazoo]

79. I haven't tried it yet but one thing I read was

to look for a place where any mushrooms grow naturally and then put your spores there. Makes sense. I see kits for sale to grow morels but my local permaculture guy tells me it probably won't work well. I love a challenge so I will likely give it a try anyway. Good luck with yours!