Farm experiences, agronomy and benefits of CTF. Tim Chamen CTF Europe
|
|
- Richard Dorsey
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Farm experiences, agronomy and benefits of CTF Tim Chamen CTF Europe
2 Reality of CTF Most farms convert all their land Almost all farms do it differently Most farming systems become simpler Smaller or fewer tractors are used Capital investment is generally reduced Costs per ha are significantly less Difficult to assess effects on yields because whole farms are converted
3 Impact of CTF on agronomy CTF precludes ploughing on a regular basis sctf assumes regular ploughing
4 Agronomic challenges of not ploughing? Most CTF farmers have gone to no-till BUT some are cultivating some are rotationally ploughing (seasonal sctf) (peas, sugar beet, potatoes) straw management crucial in non-plough systems
5 Some CTF farmers are cultivating
6 Some are using their drill as a cultivator
7 A good drill is essential for reliability with low or no till systems
8 Agronomic challenges of not ploughing? Weed control more reliance on chemicals? No evidence that extra herbicides needed compared with conventional practice, including ploughing precision management on and between rows selective/non-selective inter-row tillage
9 Benefits of not ploughing weed seeds nearer the surface healthier non-trafficked soils make plants more competitive
10 Alopercurus myosuroides Blackgrass a moisture loving plant! CTF reduces blackgrass competitiveness due to better soil aeration and drainage
11 Benefits of CTF Easier to create weed seedbeds More reliable spring cropping
12 Benefits of CTF Healthier plants from healthier soil more resistant to disease on-farm trials suggesting less need for fungicides
13 Grey field slug Some evidence that CTF encourages slugs limited tillage, good porosity BUT also encourages slug predators (needs time) Active management: rolling surface tillage (rake) pellets
14 The no-till debate! Mother nature is a no-tiller! weed seeds kept near the surface most germinate at the same time most are better controlled by residual herbicides
15 The no-till debate! Tillage loses moisture patchy or no germination Philosophy should be: WHY do I need to cultivate this field?
16 Why do I need to cultivate? Weeds consider previous slides Residues mechanical and management rather than crop issues Compaction You know what the answer to that is!
17 Traffic compaction a very negative impact! Random traffic Nontrafficked both fields in no-till for 3 years - neither deep loosened
18 Practical challenges with CTF Baling straw Maintaining CTF at harvest of vegetable and root crops Managing permanent traffic lanes Managing non-trafficked soil
19 Baling Constraints are all in the mind!
20 Baling It s just a matter of putting the bales in the right place!
21 Baling If bales are dropped in the right place, chasers can pick them up without going off the traffic lanes
22 sctf It all goes wrong at harvest because machines are not compatible!
23 Seasonal CTF (sctf) and running on the field at harvest has a big cost -
24 - not only in energy but also in soil damage
25 A necessary evil?!
26 Traffic lane management Tramlines Intermediates
27 Intermediates Tramlines Cereal harvesting Grain auger Cultivator/drill Trailer Chemical application
28 Tramlines Definition of tramlines: non-cropped traffic lanes to guide chemical applications Management fill as necessary, never loosen
29 CTF tramline after 4 years with no-till!
30 CTF tramlines Some may need filling after 3 years
31 Intermediates Usually need filling in first season
32 Infilling Need not be full width Discs, power harrow - shallow, fast
33 Intermediates May need little or no attention after first year in terms of infilling, BUT -
34 How do we maximise yield here in the non-trafficked bed - and here in the intermediate traffic lane?
35 Maximising yield in non-trafficked beds - a healthy soil should produce healthy crops Do we need to interfere with natural processes?
36 On-farm trials, to till or not to till? By kind permission of August Farms
37 Many are finding that no-till works well with CTF
38 How do we maximise yields in the intermediates without compromising their load carrying ability?
39 Loosening intermediates Too much and you sink next time around!
40 Loosening intermediates Shallow loosening in front of drill
41 Loosening intermediates We don t yet know what is the optimum management for intermediates
42 Monitor & Measure! On-farm trials Be prepared to do some of your own measurements with advice from agronomists Yield assessments
43 First considerations for CTF CTF mindset Cropping with less tillage - particularly deep tillage what will work, what will not? what are the weak points? straw management? weed control? drill performance? risk assessment (find others doing something similar?)
44 Trying out CTF Data Tracked Uncropped Percentage 66.30% 3.31% Current system < > 7
45 Trying out CTF Data Tracked Uncropped Percentage 37.57% 3.31% Auto-steering to common width < > 7
46 Trying out CTF easy to see effects
47 Economics & Energy
48 Net yield increase with CTF Need data on cropped traffic lane yields Crop response, % Tramline CTF bed CTF intermediate Spacing, m Tracked width, m Tracked area of CTF system, % Net yield increase for CTF system, %
49 Economics Study of 8 m OutTrac system on farm converted in ha wheat/oilseed rape rotation: Random traffic non-inversion to CTF no till 8% increase in profit 17% increase with 4% (wh) and 7.5% (osr) extra yield 14% return on capital investment 250,000 savings on machinery investment
50 Economics 9 m OutTrac system on farm converted in ha wheat/osr/linseed or spring barley Random traffic non-inversion to CTF and notill/some till 14,000 saving on machinery capital
51 Return on investment Does RTK and CTF pay? Example 550 ha farm growing wheat, rape and spring beans investing NOK254k in RTK RTK gave NOK43/ha or 9.5% annual return on investment With 5.7% yield benefit, return was NOK635/ha Figures do not reflect extra savings due to changes in whole farm business
52 Andrew Manfield, UK 200 ha Hessleskew CTF a way of thinking A lot of learning machine widths not true measure them yourself! 50% less fuel with CTF & No-till 5 tractors down to 3.5 No no-till without CTF still some cults ploughing 2 gears up on CTF Potatoes being integrated
53 Jan Jönsson, Sweden 650 ha Lydinge jordbruk AB CTF since 2006 If I have ever done anything right, this is it! Have got effects never thought possible We save fuel and labour Now no problem with pulling implements Haven t got it all right yet, but we are getting there
54 10 m CTF system All components, including harvester unloading auger now match up
55 Main reasons why farmers adopt CTF To cut all costs (labour, machinery, fuel) Greater reliability with low tillage inputs Better crops Better weed control Potential for inter-row cultivation Low inputs mean less weather dependency Better soil structure and wildlife habitats Legislation around water quality Not expensive if in right timescale
56 CTF on-going research Bavaria Slovakia Switzerland Sweden UK
57 Slovakia Controlled Traffic Farming Current research at Department of Machines and Production systems Jana Galambošová
58 Layout of the long term experiment in Slovakia Layout of the longterm experiment Wheat Spring barley Oilseed rape
59 Bavaria Aims adapt CTF and strip till to Bavarian conditions measure soil and plant effects identify demands on machinery make recommendations for Bavaria
60 Bavaria Wheat Rye Sugar beet
61 Switzerland Aims Can CTF no-till improve efficiency compared with trafficked no-till and ploughing? Effect on yields of different traffic lanes Suitability of CTF for grassland
62 Sweden Aims How does CTF compare with ploughing in Swedish conditions using: shallow and deep chisel ploughing? no-till?
63 United Kingdom Aims: To compare shallow and deep non-inversion tillage and no-till in the presence of: conventional traffic low ground pressure traffic zero traffic (CTF)