The amount of nitrogen a cover crop could supply to the following corn crop is a factor of the total amount of nitrogen it contains and how much of that will be released in time for the corn to take it up.

Cover crop nitrogen

The amount of nitrogen in a cover crop stand is determined by the amount of biomass (crop residue, roots) and its nitrogen (N) concentration. More cover crop biomass usually means more N. Planting early, using winter-hardy cover crop species that continue growing in the spring, and delaying termination can all increase biomass and total cover crop N.

The highest amount of nitrogen usually comes from a good stand of pure legumes. Most legumes are 3-4 per cent N, and a good stand can easily contain over 150 lb N per acre.

But all cover crop species will accumulate nitrogen from the soil in their biomass. Scavenging nitrogen left over from fertilizer is a primary cover cropping goals in some situations. Even legumes, which we typically think of as fixing their own N, will first take up residual mineral N before doing much fixation. When that N is held in organic form in biomass, it is safer from loss to the environment, but it then needs to be released to be available for the following crop, ideally when the crop has high N demand.

Cover crop nitrogen availability and release

Accumulated N in cover crop biomass is released after decomposition and mineralisation. The rate and timing of N availability depends on the carbon to nitrogen ratio (C:N) of the biomass, soil texture, moisture, and temperature.

The soil microbes that decompose cover crop residue need carbon and nitrogen in a certain balance. A C:N ratio around 24:1 has the balance of carbon and nitrogen that microbes need to decompose residue efficiently. With higher C:N residues, microbes take the extra N they need from the soil, which can lead to competition with corn N uptake. The microbial N is eventually released, but too little too late for corn. If the C:N ratio is much lower, N is released quickly, sometimes before the crop can use it.

Cover crop species vary in their C:N. Legumes and brassicas have lower C:N ratios than cereals and grasses. This provides the opportunity to manage cover crop C:N by mixing species. An experiment in Maryland, US that mixed cereal rye and hairy vetch in six different proportions, a 50:50 split between rye and vetch biomass was able to achieve a C:N ratio between 25 and 30. (The pure cereal rye had a C:N of 86, while the C:N of pure hairy vetch was 16). Predicting biomass proportions from relative seeding rates is tricky and depends on timing, weather, and soil N availability. The C:N ratio of established cover crop mixes can be measured by lab analysis of biomass samples collected around cover crop termination time. Harvest from a measured square area to be able to convert results to a per-acre basis (see photo at top).

The composition of cover crop biomass carbon also matters. Carbon in biomass is a mix of carbohydrates (sugars), cellulose, and lignin. As cover crops mature, C:N tends to increase, as does the proportion of cellulose and lignin, which are harder for microbes to break down. This is especially true for cereals as they mature. This starts at tillering and accelerates after stem elongation. Finally, tillage can speed up residue decomposition and nitrogen release. Residue sizing, increased soil contact, and soil aeration from tillage cause a quick rise in residue decomposition rate and can produce a flush of nitrogen release, whereas residue left on the surface breaks down and releases nitrogen gradually over the season.

Predictive tools for nitrogen release

Accurately predicting the amount and timing of nitrogen release from cover crops is challenging. Several tools have been released in the last few years that build on decades of research to help manage that challenge.

The University of Illinois and Purdue University produced a tool to guide cover crop termination timing by showing how cover crop C:N changes in the spring and how that timing influences decomposition rates under different weather scenarios.

Penn State created a tool for adjusting corn N rates based on cover crop biomass N content and C:N ratio that also considers soil texture and organic matter. This is a good tool to see how much cover crop biomass is needed for a large N credit.

A tool developed from the USDA’s, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) research, available from the Northeast Cover Crop Council includes lab-analyzed N, carbohydrates, cellulose, and lignin to estimate the amount and timing of nitrogen released from cover crop residues.

Note of caution: These tools have not been tested or calibrated in Ontario and should not be used for direct N credit recommendations, but rather may show trends of cover crop N release to help with on-farm trials and decision making on your farm.

Take-home messages

• Experiment on your own fields to see how your cover crops affect optimum nitrogen rates.
• For a sense of what to expect from a cover crop mix, send a sample for lab testing of the C:N ratio at cover crop termination.
• Most cover crops grown in Ontario don’t provide a significant N credit next season, but consistent cover cropping can build soil organic nitrogen pools and increase soil N supplying potential over time.

– This field crop report was originally published at fieldcropnews.com.

The post Managing cover crop nitrogen, residue breakdown appeared first on Farmtario.

Aubrey Lang spoke about his family’s soybean-soybean-soybean-wheat rotation, with a rye cover crop almost yearly, during a grower open house hosted by Petrolia-based Field Farms Marketing on June 22.

Lang’s late grandfather bought one of the first no-till drills in Ontario in the 1980s, and the family continues to follow in his innovative footsteps while cropping about 2,500 workable acres.

Why it matters: As Lang explained in a 2021 No-Till Farmer magazine article, a multitude of research shows that minimum tillage and cover crops benefit soil health and biodiversity.

The Langs have tried various options ranging from oilseed radish to oats since adding cover crops to their cropping toolbox. They now have approximately 95 per cent of their land with cover over the winter, either in the form of winter wheat or the rye crop they direct-seed into standing soybeans using a broadcast spreader just as the leaves begin to turn colour.

Typically, in the rotation, one field is left without cover over the winter because the Langs want one location that warms up and dries out early to start spring work without waiting for the soil under the rye to dry out.

Lang said sometimes they couldn’t even see the Amazone drill when planting beans in the spring because the rye cover could be 10-15 feet high. They spray the rye to kill it off before the beans emerge.

Lang told the FFM audience that this spring, as soybean seeding approached, he dug between two to three inches into the winter-bare field before finding moisture, whereas moisture was almost at the surface in the cover crop fields.

“This can be a detriment because it delays drying and warming in the spring,” he admitted. But it was a definite advantage this year, as evidenced by the high incidence of poor soybean germination across southwestern Ontario due to dry planting conditions.

There is typically a delay in germination compared to beans planted in bare soil, and “there are definitely risks involved because of the amount of residue with the rye,” Lang told the open house audience.

“The biggest challenge is getting the beans up.”

In a dry year, the rye can take up much of the moisture before they get into the field to plant the beans. Once the beans emerge, the rye residue “works as an ally with the beans” because it suppresses weeds and holds moisture by preventing evaporation.

To minimize crop loss and compaction, Lang uses a tramline system based on GPS where all the equipment — the spreader, the drill and the sprayer — has the same wheel spacings and follows the same paths in the fields.

Occasionally, less-than-favourable weather throws a curve in their seeding activities. If wet spring weather is getting late for soybean planting and the rye could soon head out, they spray it before and plant soybean through the residue.

In the fall, if dry weather causes poor germination in the rye planted prior to the soybean harvest, the rye is replanted with a drill after rain.

With the one year of wheat in the typical rotation, Lang explained, their “most expensive lesson” was leaving the wheat straw on the field to conserve nutrients.

“Slugs love cool, wet environments. If you don’t take off that wheat straw, it’s going to be a total slugfest because of all the residue,” Lang explained, adding the field was completely infested with slugs eating the pre-emerged soybean plants.

Even after replanting, there was still an almost complete crop loss. Now the Langs always harvest the wheat straw.

Several years into this rotation, Lang finds they “haven’t been putting a whole lot of nutrients into the soil over the years.”

Instead, they follow their agronomist’s recommendations and often opt for more seed-applied and foliar inoculants and innovative biological products than are typically used. Lang sees this as a more fossil fuel-efficient approach to boosting nutrient uptake than conventional fertilizers.

Lang believes the significant enhancement of soil biology and increased water-holding capacity from long-term no-till strategies allow crops to take better advantage of naturally occurring nutrient sources.

In addition, the Langs partnered with Ducks Unlimited and other conservation groups — through funding programs to preserve water quality in the Lake St. Clair watershed — to retire some of the gully bottoms and “protect ecosystems, create habitat and prevent erosion.”

The post Boosting soil health with cover-crop combination of soybean and rye appeared first on Farmtario.

Why it matters: Modifying and constructing equipment on the farm can alleviate the high costs of machinery.

Through 2022, Colin Elgie and Andrew Barrie, soil fertility and environmental specialists with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, visited farms across the southern and western areas of the province to see how creativity and elbow grease can result in unique, effective and comparatively affordable equipment designs.

Henry and Jeremy Denotter

Location: Kingsville

Crops: Corn, soybeans, wheat, buckwheat

Henry Denotter and his son, Jeremy, have been modifying equipment to suit their 20-inch row cropping system. This includes a hand-constructed, multicoloured corn combine header, self-propelled sprayer and fertilizer applicator.

Better fertility placement was a driving factor for the latter, particularly since no-till corn had proven challenging. What they needed, says Henry, was an implement that could get fertilizer below the soil surface, but do so in a manner suitable to their soil health goals.

The result was a ripper, modified for 20-inch rows, mounted to the back of a Salford air cart. Fertilizer enters the ripped trench via tubes located just above the soil surface.

“The reason we don’t inject or have the actual [fertilizer] pipe right down in the ground is…there’s about three quarters of a second behind the blade coming by, on an RTS, where that trench will stay open enough you can put the material in it. That’s what we’re relying on,” says Jeremy, noting a quick application speed is ideal.

They also opted to install steel fertilizer tubes to improve machine durability.

The Denotters use the implement to apply fertilizer in the autumn, then plant corn in the same rows in spring. With heavy clay soil and unpredictable weather, a backup plan for spring application is standard practice.

“You can put a lot of stuff on top, but roots don’t grow above the ground. They grow below the ground. It’s not a massively expensive strip tilling machine. It’s parts and pieces put together to make it do what we think we want,” says Henry.

“We tried this 15 years ago. I think we missed a row more than we hit it but once we tuned things up, and Jeremy’s expertise with all the GPS and John Deere mounted equipment, we were able to get it within half an inch. The accuracy definitely is the clincher to make it all work.”

Mark Richards

Location: Dresden

Crops: Corn, soybeans, wheat, sugar beets, tomatoes

Mark Richards wanted a dual-purpose fertility-application and strip-till machine that fits his cropping and soil health system, which is characterized by cover cropping and light strip till.

He created what he refers to as a “strip freshener” from a used Lilliston cultivator and central bar. After redoing the wheels and bearings, the 40-foot implement is used to lightly till strips while applying fertilizer just ahead of the tillage units.

“I always like the Lillistons, the way they fluff the ground up, and you can change the angle on them to be more aggressive,” says Richards. “I bought used Lilliston cultivators [and] Allis Chalmers mounts for the bars. I found what I could, then I bought brand new wheels and bearings.

“If you’re not putting fertilizer on, you can fly through the field at eight miles per hour. It does a beautiful job of breaking lumps up and freshen that strip.”

Richards estimates the dual-purpose strip freshener cost about $25,000 to build. Another fertilizer application goal involves replacing the implement’s Y-drop application capability, used in-season, with spoke-wheel applicators.

“Spike wheels are about $1,200 apiece, and to do this [implement] you need 32 of them. So that won’t be a cheap investment.”

Warren Schneckenburger

Location: Morrisburg

Crops: Corn, soybeans, wheat, edible beans

The goal of diversifying crop rotations turned Warren Schneckenburger’s attention to strip-till. A used 16-row, coulter-based strip tiller was purchased for a good price, although its structural integrity was lacking.

“We had to make quite a few modifications. Not so much modifications, but updating the structural integrity of some of the components that the previous owner had attempted to fabricate,” says Schneckenburger. This involved adding a few hundred pounds per row in steel components and shoring up the coulter units.

“We are blessed with some pretty heavy clay, but we are also blessed with a lot of rock… A lot of what we had to do was beef this machine up because of the speed it’s traveling, the weight we added on the bar to keep these blades in our heavier soils. When we impact stones, things can be pretty catastrophic so things need to be pretty strong.”

Funding from Growing Forward 2 was also leveraged to upgrade the row cleaners. These were augmented with extended unit arms and grass knives to eliminate wrapping problems.

Laurent (Woody) Van Arkel

Location: Dresden

Crops: Corn, soybeans, wheat, sugar beets, sunflowers, sesame

Long-time no-till and strip-till farmer Woody Van Arkel has been trying to balance minimum soil disturbance, perennial cover crop strips and effective fertility application, with particular emphasis on manure management.

He built what he calls a “poor man’s manure injection system” from his tank applicator. The modified machine uses old nose coulters, acquired for a reasonable price, to cut slots and loosen the soil, allowing applied manure to soak in more easily.

Van Arkel can then drill his cover crop in the same strips. Aside from a much lower cost, he says the strip applicator causes less soil disturbance compared to many commercial manure injectors.

“This is a little bit of junkyard engineering by inventory, as I call it,” says Van Arkel.

“Just being a small operation, there are some elaborate manure injectors on the market. But I can’t really justify the cost for the size of my operation…I’m a bit spending impaired at times.

“So, this is a low-cost alternative. Moving forward, I’d like to put a bit more down pressure on the hydraulic system to try and get the coulters in the ground a little deeper, especially in dry conditions.”

Van Arkel also developed a “unicorn drill” with the same budgetary restrictions in mind. The traditional box-hopper design was intended to make it easier to grow row crops between rows of perennial cover crops.

“The original design was to go with an APV air seeder mounted on [the drill]… Again costs of an APV being about $18,000, I bought the box for $800. About $1,000 for a used hydraulic drive and speed sensor, and then a $2,600 Raven rate controller.

“It’s all driven off the rate controller. I can calibrate to seeds and without sliding my openers, it’s incredibly accurate if you take the time to calibrate it.”

Jonathan Zettler

Location: Teeswater

Crops: Corn, soybeans, wheat, alfalfa

Jonathan Zettler uses a number of tillage methods based on crop and conditions. Efforts to improve no-till and green-planting corn seed prompted the modification of a John Deere 7340 planter mounted behind an Unverferth rosin fertilizer cart.

“One of the biggest issues with no-till in certain soil types is trying to get the seed trench to close,” says Zettler, adding older style rubber closing wheels are not always up to the task.

“The way you get the seed trench to close in conventional tillage versus no till is quite a bit different. That’s why we went down the road of doing the planter modifications that we did.”

Those modifications included adding heavier opening wheels for reduced blade flex and better part longevity. More robust seed tube guards and reinforced seed firmers were also added, plus Thompson closing wheels in place of standard rubber closers.

“What these wheels do is they just cut down the side of the seed trench, and then you have no compaction over the top of the seed trench when it’s closing it. Works really well in soils that have no loose soil, so to speak, and you can adjust based on that. When you’re running these, because they are so aggressive, you do have to run a half rate spring if the soil is fairly mellow,” says Zettler.

“The [wheel] notches act as a depth piece so it doesn’t flick seed out. That’s one problem some of these spike closing wheels can have, at times. If they have too much tension and don’t have a depth limiter on, you can end up flicking seed out of the seed trench, especially in worked soils.”

Zettler says that, at $20 or $25, robust seed firmers are a particularly valuable addition.

“It’s a lot cheaper than having a poor stand.”

Growers spoke about their modifications during an on-demand session available at the Ontario Agricultural Conference.

The post How farmers modified planting equipment to match production goals appeared first on Farmtario.

The agency’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) will spend US$38 million to help farmers in 11 states plant crops at a time fields are often left fallow, which can bolster soil health, limit soil erosion and capture and store carbon.

The investment, made through a partnership with the United Soybean Board, National Corn Growers Association, National Pork Board and others, is the latest farm-level effort by the Biden administration meant to address climate change.

Cover crop plantings have been rapidly expanding in recent years as some large agricultural companies launched carbon farming programs that pay farmers to adopt more environmentally friendly practices.

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack announced the Environmental Quality Incentives Program’s Cover Crop Initiative, at the American Farm Bureau Federation’s annual convention in Atlanta.

The most recent USDA Census of Agriculture showed 15.4 million acres of cover crops were planted in 2017, a fraction of overall acreage devoted to agriculture.

Rob Myers, director for the Center for Regenerative Agriculture at the University of Missouri, estimates plantings were as high as 22 million acres in 2021.

Farmers and ranchers in Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and South Dakota will be eligible for incentives under the program, which USDA aims to expand in coming years.

— Reporting for Reuters by Karl Plume in Chicago; additional reporting by Leah Douglas in Washington.

The post U.S. aims to double cover crop planting to address climate change appeared first on Farmtario.

When combining data across experiments and research stations, University of Guelph soil scientist Laura Van Eerd said researchers consistently saw higher corn and soybean yields correlate to higher soil organic matter.

Van Eerd spoke during a webinar hosted by the Manitoba Organic Alliance (MOA) on Nov. 9.

Why it matters: Ontario research shows that cover crops add organic matter to the soil, which helps improve yields.

They also saw less deviation in yield year to year on plots with higher soil organic matter despite drought or excessive moisture.

One long-term trial has compared five cover crop treatments, plus a control without a cover crop, for 14 years. Treatments were oats, cereal rye, radishes, and a combination of rye and radish. Researchers rotated through a combination of vegetables and cash crops comparable to processing vegetable production rotations in the area.

In eight years, they planted six rounds of cover crops. “(A) relatively short time when talking about soil health,” Van Eerd said.

Van Eerd’s co-researchers measured a 22 per cent increase in soil carbon stores in that period. Crop yields in that time averaged four to 11 per cent increases. Profit margins increased five to nine per cent, though Van Eerd said tomatoes dominated the increases as they responded well to cover crop treatments and offered higher profits for a small increase.

A collaboration with the Ontario Soil Health Institute showed that its cover crops increased soil organic matter between three and four per cent after 12 years, depending on the treatment used.

“We do have the soil moisture, we do have the long growing season to accumulate above-ground and below-ground biomass,” Van Eerd said.

“But what I think we’re seeing now is the value of those cover crops to the rotation, the value of that organic matter to the rotation,” she added.

An experiment in 2020 involved planting grain corn on ground that had been cover cropped 10 times over 13 years versus ground that had not seen cover crops. They planted corn with 30 lb./ac. of nitrogen.

They saw “night and day” results, said Van Eerd. “The no-cover was shorter. And it actually turned into yield gains — and pretty substantial yield gains.”

Depending on the cover crop treatment, the plots that were cover cropped saw increases from six to 59 bu./ac.

Oat cover crop treatments produced the lowest increase while radishes produced the highest. Van Eerd said they didn’t have a definite reason why.

In 2021, they repeated the experiment and saw similar results — Van Eerd didn’t yet have yield data.

The next task is to determine why the cover crops are working, she said.

“I think these cover crops are stabilizing soil organic matter,” she said, adding she doesn’t know by what mechanism it does this.

Soil can stabilize organic matter by protecting it within an aggregate, but their soil is sandy and doesn’t aggregate easily. Organic matter can stabilize through chemical absorption to soil mineral. This may be in play, she said.

Matter can also stabilize through the addition of plant and microbial residues, which enhance microbial communities. These release organic matter and stabilize it.

“I think this is what’s happening in our experiment,” Van Eerd said.

The post Long-term Ontario studies show value of cover crops appeared first on Farmtario.

That’s one reason for greater interest in keeping that land covered throughout the year but increasing the volume of cover crops also means addressing the economics and sociological factors that drive farmer decision-making. 

Why it matters: Cover crops help maintain and build soil health but the economics around them can be challenging.

Based on recent farmer surveys, the paths toward more cover crop use are based in economics, presence of supportive communities that involve other farmers and crop advisors, and evidence about value. 

It comes down to managing risk, especially financial risk, which is critical for farmers who are fastidious about keeping control of the factors they can manage rather than the ones they can’t such as weather and global markets.

Farmers work to simplify their systems to help manage risks, surveys indicate.

“One factor that popped up again and again were cost factors, reduction in profits, the financial component,” said Richard Vyn, an associate professor of agricultural economics at the University of Guelph’s Ridgetown Campus. He completed a survey of farmers on factors that determined who did and did not adopt a list of six conservation practices. 

They included the use of cover crops, crop rotations, reduced tillage or strip tillage, soil testing, the use of windbreaks or buffer strips and the use of organic amendments like manure or compost.

Taking on new farm practices on a large farm requires significant technical knowledge, says J. Arbuckle, a rural sociologist at the University of Iowa. 

“It’s not a simple thing to look at a 2,000-acre grain operation and say, ‘let’s incorporate cover crops.’ There are different types of soil, equipment and climatic conditions,” he said. The systems are complex and require knowledge and management.

“That’s where the technical know-how is important on the risk management side of things.”

Arbuckle and other colleagues in the United States published a meta-analysis — a look at numerous studies — about how farmers adopt or don’t adopt soil conservation practices. He and his colleagues also conducted in-person interviews with farmers.

He says the most innovative work in soil and water conservation practice adoption is focused on systems thinking. Farmers who see their farm practices as interconnected and tied to larger systems are more likely to adopt practices that affect the larger community.

“We don’t know how to cultivate or teach that, but it’s something that we need to pay attention to,” Arbuckle said.

For some practices, the economics are proven. Rotating wheat with corn and soybeans provides a five to six per cent increase in corn yield and 10 to 14 per cent increase in soybean yield, according to University of Guelph research in 40-year rotation trials.

“The problem is making the decision for the current year,” says Vyn. “I can understand why they would be hesitant to include wheat in that year if they are taking a financial hit for that year.”

Yet many farmers, especially in the American Midwest, rotate only between corn and soybeans. In Ontario, leaving wheat out of the crop rotation simplifies the system because it requires less equipment, less work in the middle of summer and less risk.

In Western Canada, the system is similarly simple, with many producers rotating between a cereal crop such as wheat and the oilseed canola. 

For farmers it’s a question of finding the right balance for their farm that makes them ecologically and economically sustainable.

How does doing the right thing fit into business competitiveness?

“Some of our reasons are altruistic,” says Exeter, Ont. farmer Mike Strang. “I like to do a bit of fishing. After a big rainfall event I see the creeks and the Morrison Dam fishing holes full of mud, I get a bit discouraged and think we can do better.”

The ability to get onto the land in spring and fall due to healthier soil, and the support provided by cover crops, is another positive for Strang.

“Compaction is also always on the forefront of our mind too. Especially when doing the corn, if you have a nice stand of annual ryegrass in there, when you go to pick the corn and it’s a little bit wet, we’ve had instances we’ve been chased out of the field with a half inch or three quarters of an inch of rain, but we’re back in the next day with no mud on those tires, right? That’s something, once you experience, you want to do it again.”

Both Vyn and Arbuckle found that local intelligence and expertise is critical to farmer adoption of new practices.

Bringing agronomists on side with conservation practices is an important step, says Arbuckle, as they are local experts trusted by farmers.

Local trials and demonstrations are highly valued, he adds.

They are “time consuming, difficult and messier than a typical soil scientist would like, but the payoff is potentially large.”

Vyn and Arbuckle found that farmers would welcome predictable, longer-term financial incentives to help reduce the risk of conservation practices, but they are not the most important factor.

“Just throwing money at this won’t have a big impact,” says Vyn. “It will have some, but there is more to it. Even if we take care of the cost side of it, there’s the time element, the additional machinery, the complexity of figuring out (how) to implement a different kind of practice for which they may not have a whole lot of knowledge.”

The post Cover crop adoption decisions are complex appeared first on Farmtario.

Why it matters: Diversity in crop rotation is a critical part of environmental sustainability, as well as a farm’s economic longevity. Finding a reliable cover crop that can also be sold could better serve both purposes.

Now growing his fifth crop, Denotter has found success in marketing the specialty grain, as well as improving field growing conditions.

Buckwheat, as described by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, is a fast-growing summer annual with broad, heart-shaped leaves and white flowers.

It takes about five weeks from planting to flower for the first time, and about nine weeks before it can be harvested. The crop will continue flowering and setting seed until it is killed by frost or some other means.

The crop is most commonly used as a cover crop for weed suppression and green manure. It can also be used as a component of livestock feeds, though it’s not a preferred food source for many farm animals.

The amino acid composition within buckwheat grains includes lysine, which provides a comparatively complete protein compared to other cereals. This makes it a good candidate for specialty grain markets.

Market opportunity

OMAFRA lists Japan and other Pacific Rim countries as presenting the most lucrative market opportunities for quality, large-seeded buckwheat, but Denotter has found success with an Ontario processor milling grains for the gluten-free market.

High-quality buckwheat (containing sufficient levels of germ) are required for milling, but Denotter says sourcing high-quality seed can be challenging as well as expensive.

“You can’t just go get seed. For this year we had already ordered seed in December,” he says. “This is the most expensive year because they bought new seed.”

At 45 to 50 pounds per acre, Denotter uses one 2000-lb. bulk seed bag to plant 200 acres. That amount of new seed this year cost $1,500. Buckwheat sent for milling also needs to be very dry, which Denotter says often incurs additional drying costs. Transporting the crop to his buyer in Lindsay adds transportation expenses as well.

These and other factors might not make buckwheat a major money maker, but Denotter says it hasn’t been a net loss either. The fact that it makes some money and fits within his crop rotation schedule are critical reasons why he continues experimenting with the crop.

“Ideally we want to grow four different crops in three crop years. If I can, I try to keep that 200 acres in the rotation,” says Denotter.

Environmental benefits

One of Denotter’s overarching production goals is to reduce herbicide use. He says the thick canopy and fast growth of buckwheat comes in handy in this regard, though not necessarily every year.

The crop also produces a corkscrew-like taproot which, while not large, can reach the subsoil. This draws phosphorus to the surface making it more available for subsequent crops.

His buckwheat fields are a hive of activity, too. Pollinators love buckwheat, and Denotter has partnered with an apiary to populate his fields with honeybee hives.

“We have 177 hives. Almost a hive to the acre. It’s good for us because it pollinates the crop, and they get to harvest buckwheat honey,” says Denotter.

“It’s a very pollinator-friendly crop.”

Production strategies

Denotter seeds buckwheat into wheat stubble between the first parts of July and August. Repeated trials show shorter wheat stubble is more conducive to earlier growth. More uniform chaff dispersal via an improved distributor on their combine also prevents chaff tunnels from emerging in the crop.

“We noticed if we didn’t give it competition, it grows a lot faster. In two to three weeks there’s reasonable growth,” says Denotter. “We use an air seeder because I want it to grow.”

Harvesting buckwheat requires that it be dead and dry. Harvesting too green will quickly clog a combine.

OMAFRA resources indicate this can be achieved via swathing or desiccation, though the former is preferable since the latter can weaken stem strength and contribute to lodging. However, Denotter says desiccation is a time-flexible option that works well in his farm’s production strategy.

The threat posed by volunteer buckwheat the following growing season also means Denotter prefers to follow the crop with corn rather than soybeans.

“You’ll get volunteers all year. It will just keep flowering and dropping seed…. It’s less of an issue in a corn crop” he says.

“We did one field in soybeans last year and had volunteer issues. We sprayed with Roundup and it wasn’t really a big deal, but that kind of defeats the purpose because you’re adding a spray.”

Denotter says buckwheat has grown on him as a viable fourth crop, although he continues to evaluate it.

The post Looking for a fourth crop to your rotation? appeared first on Farmtario.

The soil grades are based on farmer changes made over the past five to 10 years, soil conditions, and whether organic matter levels have improved.

“It wasn’t in terms of hard data, but just from my experience and research, extensions and outreach to farmers and the industry, an idea of what’s happening in different regions in Canada and trying to synthesize that information,” said Mario Tenuta, a professor in the department of soil science at the University of Manitoba.

Why it matters: The soil report card is expected to help different parts of Canada reflect on their soil health status and understand areas in need of improvement.

The report card shows low scores for Eastern Canada, focusing on Ontario and Quebec production, in areas of organic carbon and 4R nutrient management.

According to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the levels of organic matter are not increasing for agricultural systems for the East, as they are in the West.

“Some of it is related with changing cropping systems, in terms of switching away from some cereals and switching away from perennial forages. It’s resulted in a decline in organic matter,” said Tenuta.

The report was released during National Soil Conservation Week, from April 19-25.

This year marks the inaugural year for the national soil health report card, released by the Soil Conservation Council of Canada (SCCC), in collaboration with Tenuta and David Lobb, also a soil science professor at the University of Manitoba.

“I split the west and east into different grades because the situations are quite different between the two in terms of climate, agricultural commodity, agricultural systems, production and soil species,” said Tenuta.

He said 4R nutrient management in the East was scored low because of the large amounts of corn grown in Eastern Canada.

“I gave it a C because I felt that we could be doing a better job in terms of subsurface placement of nitrogen to reduce the losses through ammonium volatilization. Farmers are not managing fields or using field-specific or site-specific agriculture approaches.”

However, eastern provinces showed great interest with cover crops and intercropping, which gave them a higher score for cover crops compared to Western Canada.

The SCCC hopes the awareness generated by the report card will spark improvements in soil health across Canada by keeping the issue in the mind of farmers, policy makers, governments and researchers.

“The whole idea is a trajectory of improving awareness and understanding by farmers and industry members,” said Tenuta.

“Improving the research, the intensity of the research, the amount of the research and the diversity of the research of soil health across Canada and then implementation and practice.”

The SCCC hopes to expand the report card collaborators across Canada and continually build on the 4R nutrient management, soil carbon loss, cover crops and biodiversity of soil to create an annual picture of soil health trends in Canada.

Report card may help with the Senate re-evaluation of soils

The last time the state of Canada’s soil was analyzed was in the 1980s — with Soils at Risk.

“There is strong evidence that the state of affairs in soil conservation is in greater need now than it was back in the ’80s. The problem is the government has turned away from it,” says University of Manitoba professor David Lobb.

The report card is an opportunity to respond to certain questions and assess whether the state of affairs is moving forward or not.

“I would argue that every province and every region should look at what they’re doing and whether or not they need to be doing more,” says Lobb.

He says he hopes the soil health report card will be a part of the Senate’s initiative to re-evaluate Canada’s soil health compared to that of the 1980s Soils at Risk program.

“This should hopefully provide information for that type of discussion. I don’t think anyone is looking at this to be a tool by which we could force governments or agencies to do ‘x, y or z’. But by getting that information out, it should create a fair bit of discussion and that should influence how people make decisions,” says Lobb.

The post Eastern Canada gets poor grades on soil appeared first on Farmtario.

The Soil and Water Outcomes Fund, a partnership with the Iowa Soybean Association and third-party verification company Quantified Ventures, will then sell the environmental credits created to polluters, such as cities and companies, including Cargill itself, said Ryan Sirolli, director of row crop sustainability at Cargill.

Why it matters: The fund seeks to monetize the environmental benefits of farming practices, such as no-till farming and use of cover crops to prevent erosion.

It also follows rising criticism of intensive farming practices and the companies that rely on them. Environmentalists criticized Cargill last year for delaying a self-stated goal of ridding its supply chain of crops produced on deforested land.

Farmers in Iowa have enrolled almost 10,000 acres in a pilot program this spring, but the group is aiming to expand the program next season and broaden it beyond Iowa, Sirolli said.

Farmer Lance Lillibridge of Vinton, Iowa, enrolled about 300 acres in the program this season and expects to get at least $35 an acre, which will offset some of his planting costs.

“For a farmer, our margins are really small. In fact, right now there’s no margin at all…. This is the first time that we are rewarded for our sustainability efforts,” Lillibridge said.

Funded by grants from Cargill and the Walton Family Foundation, the Soil and Water Outcomes Fund will pay farmers $30 to $45 per acre this season, depending on what environmental results are confirmed, said Adam Kiel, director of conservation for the Iowa Soybean Association.

“We’ve got ambitions to go more broadly beyond Iowa in future years,” Kiel said. “Farmers view this as another revenue source on their farm that’s not a government payment.”

The post Cargill-led fund to pay U.S. farmers for carbon capture appeared first on Farmtario.

Why it matters: Better economic data would help farmers making decisions about whether to use cover crops.

The UTCA is pursuing the goal through a pilot project in a sub-watershed of Medway Creek. Michael Funk, agricultural soil and water quality technician with the UTCA, says the program is looking at the impact of winter cover — both green and brown — because soil loss during the season poses the greatest risk to water quality.

“That’s where ground is most vulnerable. Sediment is the easiest way to address it,” says Funk. “It’s not the only problem, but we feel it’s a good place to start since usually the higher concentrations of phosphorus comes with sediment.”

“Upper Medway Creek is small enough to count and measure acreage by hand. If we improve things there, and we get results, can we expand it to the whole area?”

Incentives for local farmers

Funk says farmers participating in the project range from long-time to new cover crop users. The types of cover employed are also diverse, although participants are paid based on how much cover they have in terms of acreage and quantity.

“Whatever species you want to use or whatever works for your system. The requirement is we measure the residue in the spring,” he says. “Our target is 60 per cent residue. If you have 60 per cent cover on a given field you’ll receive the incentive for that past cover crop.”

Funk says the initiative, now entering its third year currently involves about 4,500 acres within the sub-watershed — 2,500 of which are being tested for the effectiveness of winter cover, while the other 2,000 acres act as a coverless control group.

“They’re two sides of the same watersheds. We’re monitoring them separately.”

Funk adds several years of historical water quality data were also collected before the program’s 2018 launch in order to better identify changes.

Cover crops can be challenging from a management perspective and vary in impact from year to year, so the UTCA has partnered with certified crop advisers and Veritas Farm Management to add additional agronomic data to their analysis.

Through tests strips in each field, Funk says Veritas is measuring in-field variances in conditions. This data is made available to participants to build local knowledge on what works, what challenges there might be, and how they can adjust practices to achieve better results, such as changing the timing and density of cover crop seeding.

“We are not blind to the fact that there might be negatives,” Funk says. “It’s gathering solid information that people can be confident in.”

The post Promoting winter cover crops with local data appeared first on Farmtario.