This summer's controversy between many conservationists was on the pros and cons of using conservation tillage, particularly no-till, in a drier-than-normal year. Some experts say no-till stayed true-to-form and yielded as many or more bushels per acre than conventional tillage. But others disagree.

Jim Kinsella, a veteran no-till farmer in central Illinois, says his no-till fields yielded equal to or higher than those of many of his farming neighbors who did not use conservation tillage. And he spends $15 or $20 less per acre.

But yields from a no-till system have received some discouraging notes where corn was no-tilled into a cover crop or a legume that was killed just prior to planting, Kinsella says. The corn did not grow because the spring crop robbed what moisture was available, not because it was no-tilled.

"If the spring crop would have been plowed under, chances are the conditions would have been worse, he says.

The Conservation Technology Information Center says that other problems being reported as no-till failures are actually management problems, such as nitrogen fertilizer remaining on top of the ground and volatilizing in dry weather, no-tilling into previously compacted soils, planting too shallow in a dry year and adjusting equipment improperly for no-till.