New concepts will change the way farmers work, think

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 24/04/2021 (1988 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Back in the early 1990s when no-till farming conferences were attracting upwards of a thousand farmers from across the Northern Great Plains, I frequently asked farmers how giving up tillage changed how they farmed.

One farmer’s answer always stuck with me. “It hasn’t just changed how I farm; I’ve had to change how I think about farming,” he said, or in words to that effect.

His point was that it wasn’t about plowing or not plowing. Eschewing tillage had changed his mix of crops. It created different weed cycles to figure out. It changed how his soil responded too, not only to wet and dry cycles, but to temperature fluctuations and fertilizer inputs.

Under permanent crop residue cover, his fields captured more snow — which meant more moisture for the following year’s crop. The soil beneath didn’t get as cold during the winter months, which changed the community of micro-organisms — some good, some bad — that were living above and beneath the surface. The black earth in his fields was no longer exposed to the early-spring sun and so took longer to warm up.

Each change and each decision created a ripple effect, often in ways he hadn’t anticipated.

That no-till revolution saw farmers, at least initially, simply replacing tillage with herbicides, adhering to the marketing advice of the era to “Seed. Spray. Harvest.” But replacing one simple solution with another proved naïve.

Herbicide-resistant weeds, already a problem, took off under the relentless selection pressure associated with no-till and the introduction of crops that could tolerate non-selective herbicides such as glyphosate. It created a scenario that eventually forced some back into using tillage in various forms.

The farmers who really made it work were the ones who pragmatically and persistently figured out what their land was trying to tell them, and reacted accordingly.

It was micro-innovation at its best. The most popular sessions at those remarkably large gatherings were led by farmers rather than experts. More important than the solutions they were developing for their farms, was the thought process that went into them.

Those organizations faded into obscurity as farmers’ collective intel grew around minimum-tillage systems; equipment manufacturers came out with better seeding technology and the range of herbicide options for weed control expanded.

However, as I watch the convergence of issues around the role of agriculture in climate change, I can’t help but think that we’re on the cusp of another leap in innovative thinking.

Farmers are notably on the front lines of climate change. They must adapt or perish.

Insurance programs and farm support programs can help buffer the impact but those only buy them time. Farmers must build more resilience into their farming systems to reduce their financial and environment exposure.

They are also increasingly recognized, as recently as this week’s federal budget, as “major players” in Canada’s fight against climate change — but only if they change how they farm.

The mix of programs and direct payments in the budget is being welcomed by farm organizations, with some going so far as to say that it marks a historic win for farmers.

These investments, which include carbon tax compensation, helping farmers buy more efficient grain-drying systems, and programs that help them reduce emissions are welcome incentives to help them adjust to the changing paradigm around carbon. However, it won’t be an easy transition.

The $200-million Agricultural Climate Solutions Program sounds deceptively simple. It aims to improve nitrogen fertilizer management and encourage more use of soil-building “cover crops” grown along with cereals and oilseeds, as well as encouraging more ranchers to practise rotational grazing, which is a much more intensively managed system.

Farmers as well as the environment will undoubtedly reap rewards from better nitrogen management, but generally speaking, it means shifting practices from the law of averages where farmers follow general guidelines and add a bit more for good measure, to a precision-based approach that won’t always deliver an immediate return.

Cover crops and rotational grazing will also add new layers of complexity to management.

Embracing these concepts won’t just change how they farm; it will change how they think.

Laura Rance is vice-president of Content for Glacier FarmMedia. She can be reached at lrance@farmmedia.com