Farmland values in the Midwest increase when no-till farming becomes more prevalent:
No-till farming, considered to be a more environmentally friendly farming practice that reduces soil disturbance when compared with conventional practices, appears to have an important benefit besides reducing soil erosion and nutrient runoff.
A new study from North Carolina State University, capturing county-level data from 12 states in the U.S. Midwest, shows that no-till farming increases agricultural land values, with a 1% increase in no-till farming translating to a $7.86 per acre increase in land values across the Midwest. In Iowa, the data show a $14.75 per acre increase in land value with a 1% increase in no-till farming.
[...] "This study suggests that farmland benefits translate into land value benefits, which is typically not considered in debates on no-till pros and cons, and ultimately whether or not conventional-till farmers should convert to no-till practices," Rejesus said.
No-till farming practices leave crop residue on farmlands after harvesting. Farmers plant seeds the following season through the remaining residue. No-till farming typically reduces labor and fuel costs for farmers when compared with traditional practices, although the academic literature also shows disparities in terms of no-till effects on crop yields and soil productivity. About 37% of U.S. farm acreage uses no-till farming, with strong adoption rates in the Northeast, the mid-Atlantic states and the Midwest.
A side benefit is that if farmers don't need their tillers, they can use them to play Doom.
Journal Reference:
Le Chen, Roderick M. Rejesus, Serkan Aglasan, et al., The impact of no-till on agricultural land values in the United States Midwest [open], Amer J Agr Econ, 2022. DOI: 10.1111/ajae.12338
(Score: 4, Interesting) by drussell on Saturday August 20 2022, @03:35PM (11 children)
What the linked article doesn't address, nor does the actual paper seem to show at a cursory glance, is what the actual yield of these un-tilled fields is year-over year when you switch to not tilling the soil. I expect this would vary depending on the crop and location, but one would think that the actual yield would be significantly lower for most crops.
The study talks about the supposed land values and the potential input costs for farmers, but I guess you'd need to delve into their actual data sets to try to see the costs vs. efficiency vs. yield and total profits in typical cases.
(emphasis mine)
Increased herbicide use? Oh, yay!...
Was this study funded by
MonsantoBayer, or something?(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday August 20 2022, @04:36PM (7 children)
Land values mean little to nothing to me. But you hit on the important thing: crop yields.
I am slowly moving from tilling the garden, toward no-till. Let's call it less-till. Crops just don't produce a whole lot, doing things as I've always done them. The biggest problem is, the ground stays warm all year round, the "top soil" only ever was 1/2" to 1", just maybe 1 1/2" in some places. The biomass is limited, and it doesn't grow. So, I've been researching.
If I haul a truckload of sawdust, mulched up leaves, grass clippings, and whatever else I can find, and till it into the ground, that biomass holds moisture, instead of just drying out under the sun. Those places that I have done already, the tiller will eat into the ground, to it's maximum depth. Those places not treated, the tiller struggles to churn up an inch or two of mostly sterile looking dirt. Seeds planted in those spots already treated germinate, sprout, and grow much faster than anything in untreated areas. And, those spots in the garden are easy to work, even without tools. I can take a stick, poke a hole in the ground, drop a seed into the hole, step on it, and that seed is probably going to grow. Places not treated, I may see as little as 50% germination, which means a lot more money spent for nothing.
Obviously, I'm not no-till, but, if I can plant crops in the spring without use of the tiller, I'll become no-till pretty quickly!! I can poke my hand into the soil around the tomatoes 3 to 5 inches, without even using a garden trowel! That was my first test area, when I first started investigating no-till. It's going to take time, but I hope to have all of the garden in the same condition in a year or three.
We've had other discussions where living soil was mentioned. It's not just dirt, there is an entire ecosystem in the ground under your feet. I'm coming to understand that fungi in the soil are more important than all the insects, bacteria, nematodes etc. I'm accumulating dead logs, and placing them around the garden, and I'm going to introduce several different mushroom and other fungi. If I'm to believe what I read, fungi spread roots all through the ground, not inches, or even feet, but many yards, all around, and deep into the soil. Claims are, if you have a healthy fungi ecosystem, crop yields will at least quadruple over anything you can expect from unhealthy soil.
No-till, limited-till, or whatever, from what I can see, you'll get a lot more food out of the ground, than tilling everything every year!
All of that said, there are a myriad of videos on Youtube on the subject. Youtube ain't science, of course, but it gives you a lot of food for thought.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Saturday August 20 2022, @04:50PM
That sounds like soil remediation and till until it's ideal for the intended crops, then only till as needed. That seems like it should be a win.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Barenflimski on Saturday August 20 2022, @05:01PM
I till when I add lots of new organic matter, to mix it. Outside of that, I am leaving it all alone.
One thing I noted a few years ago when I was studying the root structures of my plants was that when the plants from last year die, and the roots rot. Those little holes they made are now full of nutrients, and leave a path for the new roots.
Does it help for me? I can't tell a big difference as every year is different. But its less work!
I have to say though, in the end in a 1000 square foot garden, everything varies year to year, giving me great respect for the people of the world who depend on a rich and productive garden every year. If I had to depend on my garden for food, I would be waaaay more stressed over every cricket, Japanese beetle, and other thousand bugs chewing on my plants.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Gaaark on Saturday August 20 2022, @08:27PM (4 children)
I don't have acres of land: i just have a few raised garden boxes and follow the Square Foot garden method, part of which is no-till.
Make the ground nice and loose and don't step into it so the soil stays loose: therefore, when weeding, a gentle pull gets the whole weed up, roots and all.
I mostly only have time for my asparagus garden, which i also have some tomato plants in and will try garlic in this late fall. I planted some clover in the garden (asparagus loves their nitrogen) and the clover acts kind of like mulch, keeping weeds from growing and keeping the soil from drying out quickly.
When i retire, i'm going to go full SF gardening and try to increase our yield by buckets.
Might also add some rabbit meat into the mix 'cos there are far tooooooo many wascally wabbits around here!
Also, have to remember to dig up some horseradish....mmmmm, horseradish..... :)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 20 2022, @11:37PM (3 children)
What's the difference between "Make the ground nice and loose" and tilling?
(Score: 4, Informative) by Gaaark on Sunday August 21 2022, @12:50AM
As in, don't step into the garden and compress it with your feet. Also, don't pat it down with your hands. Just put the dirt in loosely and leave it.
The official SF gardening has an actual garden mix to keep it loose:
Compost
Peat moss
Coarse vermiculite
https://squarefootgardening.org/2020/05/the-magic-of-mels-mix/ [squarefootgardening.org]
https://squarefootgardening.org/ [squarefootgardening.org]
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Monday August 22 2022, @01:25PM (1 child)
As far as I understand it, and I'm not an expert, tilling tears up the existing soil to prepare for new planting. "Make the ground nice and loose" leaves the existing soil alone and puts new material on top. As others have said up and down this discussion, tearing up the existing soil damages it over the long term, so over time more and more fertilizer is required to compensate. By letting plant waste rot on top after each harvest and maybe throwing compost and fertilizer on top, you keep the soil healthy so that over time your fertilizer needs diminish or even stop.
At least, that's the theory. I've got kids at home, I don't know how any household with all parents working full time jobs and children at home can manage a garden unless maybe they forego sleep.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 26 2022, @06:54AM
Ok, I guess. The soil round here is heavy and clayish. If you leave it alone it is a long way from loose. Putting compost and fertilizer on top without digging it in would just result in a layer of slime on a clay bed.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by richtopia on Saturday August 20 2022, @06:41PM (1 child)
I run my garden as close to a farm as I can with the limited space I have, and consequentially I spend a lot of freetime researching farming techniques. There are varying techniques when it comes to no till, but when done correctly it has been demonstrated to increase yields. The behavior is actually the opposite of your suspicion: more years without tillage improves soil quality and yield, while tillage is the short-term technique that will improve yields immediately but ultimately defeat the soil year over year.
The quick working-principle is the tillage breaks up organic matter in the soil. This immediately makes it more bio-available for the crop, however the tillage also kills the supporting soil ecosystem so this biomass does not replenish. If you compare a 20 year no-till vs tilled field, the no-till will be able to adsorb and hold water much better thanks to this increased carbon content.
Lastly, regarding herbicide, you can perform no-till with limited to no herbicide usage. The secret there is moving away from monocultures; if you seed 6 or 10 different crops in the same field you can select some seeds in your cocktail to out-compete the classic weeds. It does require some homework from the farmer: you are choosing plants with complimentary growth rates so you can combine harvest the tallest plant before the shorter plants are interfering (for example). It is made easier if you are a rancher; cattle are willing to eat a mix of crops (and perhaps prefer it).
If you are interested, Gabe Brown has been running his property no-till since the 90s in Montana and has written the book on the topic. He also gives talks that are easily found on youtube; his real-world experience is much more digestible than a scholarly paper.
https://soilhealthacademy.org/team/gabe-brown/ [soilhealthacademy.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2022, @02:33PM
From the bits of the paper I read, your comments capture the subtleties and caveats of it very well. It is a very use specific scenario (climate and choice of crops making big differences).
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2022, @12:36AM
The Cusser 2020 paper [msu.edu] you highlight (and where that phrase is basically lifted word for word) talks about those increased herbicide costs as part of the switchover from till to no-till. I only skimmed the paper, but they don't seem to figure additional herbicide costs into the calculations once things have switched over to no-till Their paper supports the idea that, on the whole, no-till is beneficial in many ways (including economically), but it can take the better part of a decade for things to stabilize.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Spamalope on Saturday August 20 2022, @04:56PM
Unless the farmers are planning to sell, they can enjoy increased property tax along with potentially lower yields? Yay! (tilling only when the soil needs it does seem like a win though)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by srobert on Sunday August 21 2022, @02:12PM (2 children)
I glanced through the article. I didn't see spot a reference to the effect on water consumption. We in the U.S. southwest are trying to figure out how we will run farms without water in the not so distant future.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2022, @02:48PM (1 child)
I have a two word answer to water consumption: ground cover. Keeping some kind of ground cover in place prevents a lot of evaporation. Ideally, in arid regions, you'll be using some kind of native species, adapted to drought conditions. Keeping anything alive to shade the soil is better than nothing, even weeds, thistles, and nettles. Better to broadcast some sort of a legume to fertilize the soil naturally. Or hemp, or amaranth - anything that is going to add biomass to the soil when it dies, and/or is cut back in preparation for planting. I use hairy vetch, but I'm not sure that it's any good for dry lands in the southwest.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2022, @06:28PM
For the Southwest, there's those tepary beans [soylentnews.org] again. IIRC, the article said they were a good cover crop (or maybe they were saying that they were looking into that) and they fix nitrogen in the soil.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2022, @08:31PM
https://www.trueleafmarket.com/ [trueleafmarket.com]