Economics of Conservation

Systems Research in the Southeastern

United StatesLEAH M. DUZY

USDA-ARS, NATIONAL SOIL DYNAMICS LABORATORY

JUNE 28, 2015

70 T H ANNUAL SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONFERENCE

GREENSBORO, NC

Conservation Systems Research

“Our research objectives are specifically designed to develop conservation systems that will improve soil quality, conserve natural resources, and

increase production efficiency, considering input costs and profitability.”

Objectives

What is a conservation system? Importance of economics in evaluating conservation

systems Economic benefits and costs of conservation systems Summarize current economics of conservation systems

research from the Southeast

What is a conservation system?

ConservationTillage

CoverCrop

ConservationSystem

Conservation tillage is… Any tillage sequence, the object of which is to minimize or reduce loss of soil and water; operationally, a tillage or tillage and planting combination which leaves a 30% or greater cover of crop residue on the surface1.

Different types of conservation tillage:

Mulch tillage

Non-inversion tillage

Strip tillage

No-tillage

1Glossary of Soil Science Terms, Soil Science Society of America, https://www.soils.org/publications/soils-glossary

Who cares about economics?“Conservation tillage and related practices have been suggested to conserve moisture and reduce erosion. But farmers will only adopt those conservation methods that allow them to produce a crop profitably.”

~Albert C. Trouse, Jr.

“Planting a cover crop is a minimal expense as compared to the dollar returns we get each year from this cover crop.”

~J.C. Harden, J.W. Harden, and L.C. Harden1st Annual Southeastern No-till Systems Conference

November 29, 1978Georgia Experiment Station

“A conservative estimate is that 60-80% of crop acreage will be planted no-tillage within the next 25 years.”

~S.H. Phillips

Land use practices – includes all agricultural land used for the production of agricultural commodities

Conventional tillage – tillage operations that use standard practices for a specific location and crop to bury crop residues

Conservation tillage – conserves the soil by reducing erosion and decreasing water pollution

No-till practices used – using no-till or minimum till is a practice used for weed control and helps reduce weed seed germination by not disturbing the soil

Cover crop – a crop planted primarily to manage soil fertility, soil quality, water, weeds, pests, diseases, or wildlife

2012 Census of Agriculture: Definitions

Appendix B. General Explanation and Census of Agriculture Report Form (http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012)

ALABAMA GEORGIA MISSISSIPPI NORTH CAROLINA TENNESSEE

14%

32%

43%

26%

7%

11%

22%

18%

13%

7%

26%

17%

12%

40% 40%

Tillage Practices as a % of Total Croplandconventional

conservation

no-till

ALABAMA GEORGIA MISSISSIPPI NORTH CAROLINA TENNESSEE

7.2%

8.8%

1.3%

8.3%

3.4%

Cover Crop Acres as a % of Total Cropland

Source: 2014-2015 Annual Report Cover Crop Survey, July 2015, http://www.ctic.org/media/pdf/20142015CoverCropReport_Draft6.pdf

What are the three most important factors that prevent you from using cover crops on your

farm? Time/labor required for planting and

managing cover Cost of planting and management cover

crops Too wet in spring – fears of delaying

planting time Cover crop seed costs Establishment success No measurable economic return Cover crop becomes a weed the following

year

Cover crop sometimes uses too much moisture

Seeding the right species for my operation Increases overall crop production risk Yield reduction in the following cash crop Cover crop seed availability Increased insect and disease potential Nitrogen immobilization

Benefits and Costs

Controlling soil erosion and reducing runoffo Increase in crop residues and soil

organic mattero Absorb rainfall impact

Improve soil quality Reduce yield variabilityo Reduce risk

Conservation System Benefits

Increases efficiency of a rain or irrigation event by improving water infiltration.

Potential for lower water requirements.

Preserve water resources and lower production costs.

Increases Plant Available Water

Rainfall Variability, E.V. Smith Research Center, Shorter, AL

Source: 2014-2015 Annual Report Cover Crop Survey, July 2015, http://www.ctic.org/media/pdf/20142015CoverCropReport_Draft6.pdf

Cover Crop Benefits (as identified by cover crop users)

Increases soil health Increases soil organic matter Reduces soil erosion Controls weeds Reduces soil compaction Provides a nitrogen source

Provides nitrogen scavenging Increases yields in the following

cash crop Fibrous rooting systems Economic return (e.g. from yield

or haying, grazing, biofuels) Deep tap roots

Improve soil fertilityo Improve fertilizer use efficiency

Reduce labor Reduce fuel use Reduce land preparation Reduce irrigation requirement Improve water quality

Other Cover Crop Benefits

New/modify tillage and/or planting equipment

Cover crop establishment and termination Learning curve for managing high residue Limited experience with conservation

tillage and/or cover crops Change in chemical use

(increase/decrease) Increased seeding rate (?)

Converting to a Conservation System

Cover Crops Costs Establishmento Seed/Plantingo Fertilizer

Terminationo Chemicalo Mechanical

Example of Cover Crop Costs

Note: Machinery costs are for labor, fuel, and repair and maintenance.

Our goal is to produce a high residue cover

crop.

An Overview of Past, Present, and Future Research

Conservation Systems for Weed Control

2007 2008 2009$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

$400

$450

$500Conservation Tillage with Early Cover Crop Planting Date

Conservation Tillage with Normal Cover Crop Planting Date

Conservation Tillage with Late Cover Crop Planting Date

Conservation Tillage with Winter Fallow

Conventional Tillage

Aver

age

Net

Ret

urns

(US$

ac-

1)

Price, A. J., et al. (2012). "Herbicide and Cover Crop Residue Integration for Amaranthus Control in Conservation Agriculture Cotton and Implications for Resistance Management." Weed Technology 26(3): 490-498.

Rolling Direction and Row Cleaners: Cotton Yield

Treatment Combinations 2004 2005

Rolling Row CleanerEVS TVS EVS TVS

US$ ac-1

No rolling

No row cleaner 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Dawn 0.44 -9.77 9.17 -27.11

Dawn/no coulter 9.87 15.53 0.44 -12.01

Yetter 16.17 23.57 -4.81 -43.12

Parallel

No row cleaner 39.35 -0.36 26.06 -12.32

Dawn 41.53 11.75 3.43 -40.89

Dawn/no coulter 31.40 -4.89 10.77 -66.28

Yetter 36.99 18.32 8.32 -83.54

Kornecki, T. S., et al. (2009). "Impact of rye rolling direction and different no-till row cleaners on cotton emergence and yield." Transactions of the ASABE 52(2): 383-391.

Tomatoes and Conservation Systems

Duzy, L.M., T.S. Kornecki, K.S. Balkcom, and F.J. Arriaga. 2014. Net returns and risk for cover crop use in Alabama tomato production. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. 29(4): 334-344.

2005 2006 2007 2008$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000Plastic Mulch Rye Clover

Net

Ret

urns

(US$

ac-

1)

Impact of Conservation Systems on Net Returns to

Cotton Production in Alabama Prattville, AL from 2004-2009

Dryland Cotton/Corn Rotation

Four conservation tillage treatmentso Fall paratill, spring paratill, strip-till, and

no-till

3 cover crop treatmentso Fallow (Corn Residue), Rye, and Wheat

Cover crop biomass and soil organic carbon discussed in:◦ Balkcom, K.S., F.J. Arriaga, and E. van

Santen. 2013. Conservation Systems to Enhance Soil Carbon Sequestration in the Southeast U.S. Coastal Plain. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 77:1774-1783.

Rainfall from March 1 to October 31 (inches)

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

32.19 36.03 16.97 13.79 34.81 45.36

Duzy, L.M. and K.S. Balkcom. 2015. Impact of Conservation Systems on Net Returns to Cotton Production in Alabama. In: Boyd, S., Huffman, M. (editors). Proceedings of National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conf., 5-7 Jan. 2015, San Antonio, TX. pp. 445-451.

Net Returns to Wheat Production Four locations (TVS, EVS, WGS, and GCS)

2008 – 2011 (depending on location)

Two tillage treatmentso Non-inversiono Conventional

12 fertilizer treatments

Calculated a discount based on test weighto Range: 46.52 - 63.47 (the low of 46.52 is equivalent to a discount of $1.43 / bu)

Balkcom, K.S. and C.H. Burmester. 2011. Optimize nitrogen for Alabama wheat yields with and without fall tillage. Better Crops 95:8-11.

Tillage System NRAVTC (US$ ac-1)

Conventional 257.02

Non-inversion 289.99LSD0.5 17.80

Tillage System Test Weight

Conventional 56.76

Non-inversion 57.36

Balkcom, K.S. and C.H. Burmester. 2011. Optimize nitrogen for Alabama wheat yields with and without fall tillage. Better Crops 95:8-11.

Cotton Quality and Conservation Systems

2004 – 2006 at E.V. Smith

2 row spacing, 3 cotton varieties, 2 tillage systems

Ordered multinomial mixed logit model to analyze quality attributes

Color gradeo In both narrow and standard row spacing for cotton, the

use of CST produced the highest probability for 11 and 21 color grade cotton fibers.

Uniformityo Standard row spacing with CST had the highest probability

of receiving a fiber quality premium for uniformity.Tillage$230

$240

$250

$260

$270

$280

$290

$300

$310CVT CST

NRA

VTC

(US$

ac-

1)

Balkcom, K.S., A.J. Price, E. van Santen, D.P. Delaney, D.L. Boykin, F.J. Arriaga, J.S. Bergtold, T.S. Kornecki, and R.L. Raper. 2010. Row spacing, tillage system, and herbicide technology affects cotton plant growth and yield. Field Crops Research 117 (2–3):219-225. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.03.003.

Current/Future Research…

Meta-analysis on cover crops and cotton across the Cotton Belt

Emphasis on quality data Cover crop mixtures

Long-term benefits of conservation systems

Questions?

More information is available at:

www.ars.usda.gov/sea/nsdl

Subscribe to mailing list and NSDL Highlights:

NSDL-Highlights@ars.usda.gov