Of all the reasons to consider zero tillage, none is more important than economics. Erosion control and soil building are vital and have long term economic benefits, but the economic bottom line is an annual concern whether you no-till farm or not.

While small plot demonstrations at research stations in Canada and the United States have confirmed the experiences of no-till farmers regarding the economic advantages of reduced tillage, it is only recently that farm field scale trials have been carried out. One such trial over a 5 year period was completed in the fall of 1990 on a farm in western Manitoba. This farm has clay loam soil and an average long term precipitation of 17 inches per year. In co-operation with Manitoba Agriculture, the study was carried out on a 90 acre field divided into thirds with one third farmed conventionally (one to two cultivations in the fall plus fertilizer application - cultivation, harrow and seeding in spring). one third minimum tillage (fall banding of fertilizer, cultivation, harrow and seeding in spring) and the final third no-till (fall banding, spring seeding).

Costs were actual costs and the herbicide rates were the rates actually used. Cost of tillage was estimated at 80% of the custom rate normally charged. Labor was figured at $8.00 per hour, insurance taxes and other costs came from the Crop Planning Guide of Manitoba Agriculture. In other words, every effort was made to make a fair comparison. Gross return per acre was actual measured yields x actual price. Net returns were gross return minus total expenses. Results are summarized in the chart below.

Yields on the zero till field exceeded the conventional or minimum till fields every year except one when they were equal.

This study was taken one step further. A projection was made for costs in 1991 based on the more recent reality of lower glyphosate prices and higher fuel prices. The projected expenses per acre for 1991 are as follows:

A closer look at the costs indicates that in the zero tillage system increases in the cost of herbicides are approximately equal to a decrease in the cost of tillage when comparing it to the conventional systems. Most other costs are comparable. This confirms the recent experience of many zero till operators. This fact, coupled with the potential for further increases in fuel prices and decreases in glyphosate prices, as well as the good potential for yield increases makes the future economics for no till very attractive.

Economic research in the United States indicates similar results. A North Dakota State University study in the mid-80's involved a fallow-durum wheat rotation with the chisel plow as the main tillage implement - the traditional crop management system in western North Dakota. In this study a realized net revenue of $27 per acre also resulted in a 10 ton per acre loss of soil. The study also revealed that a number of alternate crop management systems could yield about $10 more net revenue per acre, reduce soil erosion by 50%, and reduce the variability in income. A four year rotation of chem-fallow, durum wheat, winter wheat (no-till), sunflowers (no-till) proved to be the most practical and profitable.