Efficiencies under 0-Till Systems

Cost of actual labour per field unit has been cut in half through:

- reduced field trips

- multi purpose operations (seeding & fertilizing)

- exchange in weed control from tillage to spraying, incorporating high clearance sprayer

On the other hand much more time is spend planning, preparing and scouting. High emphasis is given to timeliness. This also requires a higher standard of education and commitment from operators.

The change of farming initially requires high cash outlay because of the need of more specialized equipment. However over time the need to replace equipment is less than in conventional systems.

- O-till seeder

- double shoot system to place fertilizer

- service & logistics to stay efficient through planting

- spraying equipment

- harvesting includes trash management

After the initial shock of changing methods the machinery cost have actually down through less use of than - parallel to the labour requirements. In our estimation cost per field unit went down 33 %.

This issue is much less clear and more integrated. Many factors that are not controlled by us determine and vary the result of most applications more than the factors controlled by us.

-seed placement in relation to moisture availability

-fertilizer placement combined with seed placement

-plant population and weed competition

-crop rotation diversification

-herbicide application timing, choice of herbicides

-systems approach to weed control, modular timing

-crop health and pest control, linkage to crop rotation

-methode of harvesting, residue destribution (crop rotation)

The interpretation of all these factors is -in most cases- more art than science. Based on land unit cost of dicressionary inputs went up considerably due to increases in weed and pest management. This is to a large extend offset by decreased cost-allowances for equipment.

On the other hand the cost of production unit fell app. 10 %. This has been achieved with generally higher yields. However there are never two seasons exactly the same and other progress has been made. So I think yields in general have increased through better nutition and progress in varieties - just to name a few. Also since we started low disturbance seeding in '91 we did not experience a sustained dryspell equal to the mid 80'ies here.

There are things that definately improved. Moisture availability has improved. Short dryspells are not as damaging. Fertilizer placement is more favorable to he cultured plant population and is utilized better. Weight carriing capacity of our soils has improved. Erosion, wind and water, are not atopic of conversation any more.

There is a good chance that with the new tools provided by the precision farming technology many of our assumptions can be quantified and physical inputs will hit there target more predictable.

Josef Boersch

Farm in Indian Head, Sk.

app. 3800 ac, well divsified, pulses(peas, lentils), oilseeds (canola, sunflower), cerals (canary, wheat, winter wheat)

active in IHARF for 5 years, chaired 3