Aug 13, 1998
Is Conservation Tillage A Viable Option in the CIS?
By Jitendra Srivastava
and Evan Meyer
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………2
II. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………5
III. Conservation Tillage …………………………………………………………………7
IV. Similarities in Agro-Climatic and Ecological Conditions Between North America and
CIS Countries……………………………………………………………………………22
V. Possibilities for Adoption of Conservation Tillage in CIS…………………………...25
References……………………………………………………………………………….29
LIST of TABLES
Table 1 Soil loss in comparison to residue cover ……………………………………..7
Table 2 Advantages, disadvantages, and typical field operations for selected tillage
systems.………………………………………………………………………………….8
Table 3 Diesel fuel requirements for various tillage systems…………………………15
Table 4 Comparative labor costs………………………………………………………16
Table 5 Yields from Ukrainian Minimum conservation methods……………………..19
Table 6 Climactic similarities in CIS and North America…………………………………22
Table 7 Soil types in CIS and North America………………………………………...23
Executive Summary
Conservation tillage—an assortment of reduced tillage practices such as no-till, ridge till,
chisel plowing, and mulch till—reduces soil erosion and production costs, while
maintaining or increasing productivity. There are many similarities in climate and
agroecological conditions between North America and the Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS). North American conservation tillage technologies, practices,
and policies provide examples that could be modified to fit the agricultural needs of the
CIS.
Conservation tillage practices are vital in an area of the world striving to improve
efficiency and achieve profitability in farming systems. Agriculture in the CIS is facing
problems of efficient, economical, and sustainable production. Old machinery is often in
a state of disrepair. A mentality focused on production has often neglected issues of
sustainability. As a result many practices are leading to lower soil fertility, erosion, and
soil compaction.
Various terms for conservation tillage create confusion about what the term stands for.
According to the 1985 and 1990 U.S. Farm Bill, conservation tillage is classified as any
practice that leaves a minimum of 30% crop residue on agricultural fields. No-till, ridge
till, mulch till, and reduced tillage fall under this definition.
All of the tillage systems offer both advantages and disadvantages in different
circumstances. No one tillage system is ideal for all soil, climate, and crop conditions.
Conservation tillage practices offer a variety of options to meet different conditions that
include:
•
•
•
•
•
Farming systems
Agrochemical use
Crop sequence
Topography
Soil type and water conditions
Corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton are the most common crops in conservation tillage.
However, many other crops have been successfully farmed using these techniques.
Conservation tillage offers benefits such as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reduced labor requirements
Time Savings
Reduced machinery wear
Fuel savings
Better long term production
Improved water quality
Decreased erosion
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Higher soil moisture
Improved water infiltration
Decreased soil compaction
Improved soil tilth
More wildlife and biological activity
Reduced release of carbon gases
Reduced air pollution
Russian, Ukrainian, and Moldovan conservation tillage practices are examined. Examples
of North American farmers who have successfully implemented conservation tillage
practices, while minimizing or eliminating agrochemical use are provided. Effective
means for promoting conservation tillage through farmer to farmer exchanges is
examined in a case study of Brazil.
While conservation tillage offers many advantages it does require a change in agricultural
practices. In some respects conservation tillage requires more intensive management
skills. Barriers that exist in switching to conservation tillage are:
Cultural barriers
• Reluctance to reduce plowing
• Fear of switching to a new production system
Economical
• Initial cost of conservation tillage machinery
• Potential increased chemical fertilizer and herbicide use
Management
• Weed management
• Pest management
• Disease management
• Residue management
• Fertilization management
• Maintaining yields
• Soil temperature and moisture
While these issues are legitimate concerns to farmers, if properly managed they should
pose little or no problems. Culturally, farmers in the CIS are used to plowed fields free of
crop stubble and residue. Programs to increase their consciousness will be needed to help
increase farmer awareness of the need for conservation tillage and its place in a
productive agricultural system. Increased herbicide use and costs may be economically
prohibitive to farmers in the CIS. However, with proper management and innovative
techniques herbicide and chemical fertilizer use can be kept to a minimum. While
excellent researchers and institutions exist, they lack the funds to carry out effective
research. Government policies evaluating an environment for greater adoption of
conservation tillage is required. The cost for purchasing conservation tillage equipment
3
may be discourage individual farmers. However, the initial large investment in equipment
should pay for itself in economic savings and efficient production.
In North America government agencies, policies, universities, and farmer organizations
have played a role in promoting conservation tillage. In addition to environmental
benefits economic benefits also play a role in conservation tillage acceptance. These
savings are realized in three forms: Savings in fuel, labor, and lower depreciation and
maintenance costs for agricultural machinery. Fuel costs can be reduced by 25%, while
depreciation in machinery is less than in conventional tillage due to less use and wear and
tear on the machinery.
The World Bank can play a crucial role in promoting conservation tillage in the CIS. The
Bank can work with government officials in the CIS to generate effective national
policies encouraging conservation tillage, and provide funds available to implement these
policies. These funds can be distributed amongst research institutions and low interest
loans or grants to purchase conservation tillage equipment could be made available.
These may include provision of machinery testing and demonstration of location specific
technologies and training. Programs that raise awareness about conservation tillage
benefits should be funded as well. In addition programs that provide exchange of North
American academics and farmers with conservation tillage experience could help
promote conservation tillage.
4
Introduction
Conservation tillage, a term used to describe various minimum tillage operations are
effective technologies for reducing soil erosion, while maintaining or increasing
productivity, improving soil conditions, and realizing economic benefits. North America
conservation tillage technologies, practices, and policies provide a viable option for the
CIS due to similarities in climate and agroecological conditions. Conservation tillage
practices are vital in an area of the world striving to improve efficiency and achieve
profitability in farming systems. However, many barriers stand in the way. This
document attempts to explore conservation tillage practices in North America and their
applicability for similar conditions in the CIS.
Significant political and economic changes have occurred in the CIS in the 1990’s. These
new countries have struggled to move from state controlled to market economies. The
legacy of state directive and management style still predominates on many large and
partially privatized farms. Many of these farms operate at low efficiency and are
struggling financially. At the same time private farms have increased production. These
private farms produce a disproportionately large amount for the small amount of land
they occupy (Csaki and Nash, 1998).
Much of the agricultural machinery in the CIS is in a state of disrepair. The use of this
machinery plays a large role in unsustainable agricultural practices leading to soil
erosion, compaction, and decreased fertility. Replacing this machinery with conservation
tillage equipment would help to improve agricultural production and sustainability
(Cameron and Oram, 1995).
Agriculture production in the Soviet Union was based on central directives. The result
was a focus on production, which often came at the expense of sustainability. Often farms
would attempt to meet production goals, even if unrealistic. Soil conservation was widely
neglected. Marginal areas were farmed in order to boost production. Various problems of
sustainability arose from these practices. Amongst them were decline in soil fertility, soil
erosion, and soil compaction. Many of the practices that have led to these problems
remain in use.
Soil fertility and organic matter is declining as a result of tillage and agricultural practices
that neglect to incorporate sufficient organic material into the soil. Deep tillage
techniques play a major role in this process (Puterbaugh, 1993). As a result of heavy
tillage practices soil fertility has declined by as much as 50%. Humus in Chernozem soils
has gone from 10-13% to 5% (Cameron and Oram, 1995). While these soils still contain
adequate organic matter, the declining humus and fertility indicate a trend that needs to
be reversed. Low soil fertility is exacerbated by the little amount of organic matter
produced and returned to the soil in areas of low rainfall and productivity, such as
marginal agricultural land in Kazakhstan (Libert, 1995). These lands are fragile and came
into production from 1954-1960 in an effort to increase agricultural production. While
some of the land can be used for agricultural purposes its use needs to be moderated and
appropriate agricultural management practices need to be found. However, some of this
5
marginal land is unfit for agricultural production (Libert, 1995).
Soil erosion is a major problem affecting agricultural production in the CIS. An estimated
327 million ha of land have been severely effected by wind and water erosion
(Nazarenko, 1993). Thirteen million gullies on agricultural land total 6.6 million ha.
Approximately 150,000 ha of land annually are severely damaged by water erosion
(Libert, 1995). In Russia alone 60 million ha of agricultural land is affected by erosion.
Little funds exist to implement erosion prevention methods. An estimated 50% of arable
land in the Ukraine is sufficiently steep to warrant water erosion as a major problem
(Cameron and Oram, 1995). On average 30-50 tons of topsoil are lost per hectare per
year. Wind erosion alone accounts for a loss of two to three billion tons of fine topsoil a
year. Agricultural yields are affected to varying degrees depending upon the severity of
erosion. On soils with minor erosion, yields have declined by 15-20%, areas with
moderate erosion suffer 30-40% drop in yields, and severely eroded lands suffer a 5060% drop in yields (Nazarenko, 1993). A secondary effect of soil erosion is siltation of
rivers and reservoirs. In many cases the reservoir capacity of water systems are greatly
reduced by siltation. The Volga reservoirs have decreased by one third as a result of
siltation (Libert, 1995).
Existing practices and heavy machinery are leading causes of soil compaction.
Approximately 170 million hectares of land has been affected by soil compaction.
Inflexible operation procedures and short window period for tilling and harvesting
coincide with extreme weather often result in tilling and plowing operations during wet
periods. Ineffective machinery needs to make more trips over the soil in order to prepare
it. On the average seven passes are made over the soil to prepare it for planting.
Estimated losses as a result of soil compaction differ. Conservative estimates calculate a
production loss of 15 million tons of grain, two million tons of sugar beets, and 500,000
tons of maize (Libert, 1995). While other estimates calculate a 16-27% decrease in
production as a result of soil compaction, with a loss of 50 million tons in grain
production alone (Nazarenko, 1993).
6
Conservation Tillage
Conservation tillage has been applied across North America in an effort to drastically
reduce erosion, while maintaining or increasing yields. Various terms for conservation
tillage create confusion about what the term stands for. According to the 1985 and 1990
U.S. Farm Bill, conservation tillage is classified as any practice that leaves a minimum of
30% crop residue on agricultural fields. No-till, ridge till, mulch till are the three
practices that fall under this definition (Hill, 1996). Several variants exist within these
practices. However, most importantly “conservation tillage is not one system but many
systems adapted to make high-residue farming provide as many of the economic and
environmental benefits as it can on a particular site.” Conservation tillage can reduce soil
erosion by up to 91% (McCain and Towery, 1996).
Table 1: Soil loss in comparison to residue cover
Residue Cover %
Runoff
0
45
41
20
71
26
93
0.5
Source: Janssen and Hill, 1994
Soil loss ton/acre
12.4
3.2
1.4
0.3
No-till creates minimal soil disturbance by using machinery to chop down residue and
then to cut a slit in the soil where the seed is injected and then covered over. Herbicides
are sprayed to control weeds. In emergency cases cultivation is used (Janssen and Hill,
1994). No-till is ideal for highly erodable soils. Sloped areas and soils that are sandy
loams with average or poor water retention capacity are good places for no till.
Strip tillage is very similar to no-till except that a strip is cleared and sometimes the soil
is deep tilled. The advantage of strip till is that it improves drainage and helps to heat up
soils quicker (Janssen and Hill, 1994).
Ridge till creates slightly more soil disturbance than no-till. Sweeps, disk openers,
coulter, or row cleaners prepare ridges. Areas with irrigation have used ridge till for
better drainage. The advantages that ridge till offers is decreased herbicide costs and the
flexibility to incorporate manure into ridges, helping to offset fertilizer costs. Another
advantage of ridge till is that the ridges heat up and dry sooner allowing crops to be
planted earlier, offering them a competitive advantage over weeds. This is particularly
important in colder regions where residue during spring keeps soil at a lower temperature
resulting in delayed germination (Janssen and Hill, 1994).
Chisel plows, field cultivators, disk sweeps, or blades till the soil in mulch till systems.
Soil is not turned over but simply broken up. Different techniques determine the amount
of residue left over. Herbicides and/or cultivation are used to control weeds. The success
of mulch till is determined by the amount of residue, surface roughness, and tillage
direction (Janssen and Hill, 1994). Chisel plowing offers the advantage of breaking up
7
soil similar to the way done by moldboard ploughs, without inverting the soil. This is
particularly important in compacted soils.
Stubble mulching or no-till eco-fallow is a modified conservation tillage practice for
areas of low rainfall. Whereas conventional tillage practices in semi-arid prairies heavily
rely on fallowing to maintain soil productivity, eco-fallow systems are able to increase
agricultural productivity. Reduction in tillage helps to increase soil moisture, increasing
the land’s capacity to produce. A more intensive crop production system can be
implemented. Depending on soil moisture different crops with differing water needs can
be used. This practice is particularly suited for wheat, sunflower, and grain sorghum.
Crop rotation and adequate weed control are a core element of this practice (Hill, 1996).
All of the tillage systems offer both advantages and disadvantages in different
circumstances. No one tillage system is ideal for all soil, climate, and crop conditions.
Conservation tillage equipment is lightweight and can be pulled by a lightweight tractor.
This offers the advantage of reducing and virtually eliminating soil compaction.
Following up criteria could be taken into consideration while selecting a tillage system:
•
•
•
•
•
Soil and cropping situation
Crop sequence
Topography
Soil Type and weather condition
Chemical fertilizer and herbicide use
In certain situations tillage rotation offers the advantage of matching different
conservation tillage techniques with the most ideal crop. For example following no-till
after soybeans, and using chisel plow after corn. The drawback of such a system is that
the soil disturbance eliminates the benefits of a no-till or ridge till situation where soil
structure and tilth is greatly improved through minimized soil disturbance. (Jasa et al.
1991)
Table 2: Advantages, disadvantages, and typical field operations for selected tillage
systems
System
Typical Field
Operations
Major Advantages
Major
Disadvantages
Moldboard Plough
Fall or spring plow; one
or two spring diskings
or field cultivations;
plant; cultivate.
Little erosion control.
High soil moisture loss.
Timeliness
considerations. Highest
fuel and labor costs.
Chisel Plow
Fall chisel; one or two
spring diskings or field
cultivations; plant;
cultivate
Suited to most soil and
management conditions.
Suitable for poorly
drained soils. Excellent
incorporation. Welltilled seedbed
Less erosion than from
cleanly tilled systems.
Less winter erosion
potential than fall plow
or fall disk. Well
adapted to poorly
8
Larger number of
operations cause
excessive soil erosion
and moisture loss. In
heavy residues, stalk
shredding may be
Disk
Fall or spring disk;
spring disk and/or field
cultivate; plant; cultivate
Ridge Plant
Chop stalks (on furrow
irrigation); plant on
ridges; cultivate to
rebuild ridges.
No-Till
Spray; plant into
undisturbed surface;
post emergence spraying
or cultivation as
necessary.
drained soils. Good to
excellent incorporation.
Less erosion than from
cleanly tilled systems.
Well adapted for lighter
to medium textured,
well-drained soils. Good
to excellent
incorporation.
Excellent erosion
control if on contour.
Well adapted to poorly
drained soils. Excellent
for furrow irrigation.
Ridges warm up and dry
out quickly. Low fuel
and labor costs.
Maximum erosion
control. Soil moisture
conservation. Minimum
fuel and labor costs.
necessary to avoid
clogging of chisel.
Larger number of
operations cause
excessive soil erosion
and moisture loss. In
heavy residues, stalk
shredding may be
necessary to avoid
clogging of chisel.
No incorporation.
Creating and
maintaining ridges.
Narrow row soybeans
and small grains not
well suited.
No incorporation.
Increased dependence
on herbicides. Not well
suited for poorly drained
soils.
Source: Jasa, 1991
Of the three practices that fall under the category of conservation tillage, mulch till is the
most widely applied practice with approximately 57,525,400 acres in mulch till in the
United States. No-till follows behind with 42,889,400 acres in no-till. Ridge till is only
practiced by a limited group of farmers amounting to 3,400,220 acres. These three
practices combined amount to 35% of all agricultural land in the United States. Reduced
tillage practices that leave at least 15% of crop residue on the ground account for 25.7%
of agricultural land accounting for 74,99,100 acres. (CTIC National Crop Residue
Management Survey, 1996) In Canada zero till (the Canadians term for no-till) is not
widely practiced. In the semi-arid prairies as little as 2% of farmers implement no-till
practices. However, an estimated 70-80% of farmers practice mulch tillage (Cameron and
Oram, 1995).
Out of all the above practices no-till is experiencing the most rapid growth. From 1989 to
1996 land under no-till went from 14,148,144 (making up 5% of agricultural land) to
42,889,400 in 1996 (making up 14.78% of agricultural land) in the U.S. This can be
attributed to various factors. No-till is a relatively easy practice to put into use. Research
and extension with no-till has also been fairly intensive. A decrease in the cost of the
herbicide roundup (glyphosate) has made no-till a more affordable practice. Many
farmers prefer no-till because it reduces the amount of labor necessary to plant. In areas
of the United States where farming is becoming a part time profession no-till allows
farmers to plant their crop without missing too much time from their other jobs. (Walker,
personal communication, 1998). No till has received a great deal of funding for research
and promotion on the part of chemical and machinery companies interested in promoting
their products. Other practices such as ridge till have received less focus and funds.
9
Conservation Tillage in Relation To Various Cropping Systems
Conservation tillage technology is expanding and growing at a rapid rate. However, the
most widely planted crops under conservation tillage are corn, soybeans, and wheat. At
the present, cotton is the fastest growing crop under conservation tillage. Other crops that
have been used under conservation tillage systems include: Canola, rape, mustard,
sunflower, flax, coriander, and chickpeas (Cameron and Oram, 1995). Currently,
experiments are at an advanced stage for planting no-till vegetables.
Management Aspects of Conservation Tillage
While conservation tillage offers many advantages it does require a change in agricultural
practices. In some respects conservation tillage requires more intensive management
skills. If certain elements are not managed correctly problems can occur. Farmers have
often expressed concern over the management of various factors in conservation tillage.
Amongst these are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Weed management
Pest management
Disease management
Residue management
Fertilization management
Maintaining yields
Soil temperature and moisture
While these issues are legitimate concerns to farmers, if properly managed they should
pose little or no problems.
In order to be fully effective conservation tillage needs to be practiced alongside other
agricultural methods. This means that many practices that coincide with good agricultural
management practices under conventional tillage hold true for conservation tillage.
Many farmers express concern and resistance to switching to a new tilling system from
the one with which they are familiar. Legitimate concerns about increased herbicide
costs, increased weed, pest, and disease problems are common doubts expressed by many
farmers. Conservation tillage demands a change in practices and mindset from
conventional tillage systems. Adjustments have to be made in machinery, planting,
fertilizer use, and crop sequence. Certain problems can arise in adjusting to a new system.
However, these problems can be avoided by adopting practices that complement
conservation tillage practices and prevent potential problems. Amongst these practices
include an effective Integrated Pest Management program should include strong
components for managing weeds, diseases, and pests. The appropriate incorporation of an
effective crop rotation, residue management program, and cover crops can help make for
a smooth transition into the use of conservation tillage.
10
Integrated Weed Management
Conservation tillage systems generally require more intensive weed management.
Virtually all conservation tillage practices use various cultural practices as well as
herbicides to control weeds. Systems such as no till only resort to cultivation to eliminate
weed problems in emergency cases. Other conservation tillage techniques are more
liberal with tillage use to control weeds. However, all drastically reduce the amount of
cultivation in controlling weeds (Hill, 1996).
One of the changes that occur in conservation tillage is a shift in weed problems from
annual to perennial weeds. Large seeded weeds become less of a problem, while small
seeded weeds generally become harder to control (Hill, 1996).
Some farmers have been reluctant to switch to no till systems for fear that their decreased
fuel and labor costs will be offset by increased herbicide costs. While initial herbicide use
generally increase for the first few years, in a system that is well managed herbicide use
is equal or less than in a conventional system. A case study discussed further in the paper
documents a farmer who minimizes herbicide use through the use of cover crops (Hill,
1996).
Many no-till farmers reduce herbicide use below recommended applications once they
become familiar with no-till. These farmers usually do so after gaining a familiarity and
comfort in their tillage system. In doing so they maximize their benefits by decreasing
costs and the use of inputs. Once again it should be stressed that every situation is
different, and in order to create an ideal conservation tillage system one needs to
experiment and to a certain degree work through trial and error (Hofstetter, 1994).
Some tillage systems have even succeeded in eliminating herbicide use. Innovative ridge
till farmers have designed systems that rarely apply herbicide use, except in emergency
cases. A case study further in the paper provides an example of one such farmer.
Ridge till systems offer a viable option for decreased herbicide use. In the process of
creating ridges soil is shaved off the top of the ridge knocking off 70% of the weed seeds.
Some farms such as the Thompson Farm in Iowa use no herbicides but rely on the use of
cover crops and light cultivation to control weeds. For the Thompsons the goal is to keep
weed off the ridges. This often means that there might be weeds in the valleys, but as
long as they remain there and not in the ridges they represent little competition to the
crops (Pesek. et al, 1989).
In the prairies of South Dakota research has focused on developing an ideal no-till system
for semi-arid prairies. Part of this process is the control of weeds through various
practices such as crop rotation, competition, and sanitation to control weeds. Intensified
crop rotation has the result of increasing crop competition with weeds. Early planting, the
use of narrower rows, and side dressing with fertilizer to give crops a jump start help
crops outcompete weeds (Beck, 1997).
11
Sanitation is used to decrease weed pressure. The first factor that comes into play is the
use of weed free seeds. Cleaning agricultural machinery between fields helps to reduce
weed contamination from one field to the next. Cultivating and spraying along fence rows
to prevent weed invasion is also of crucial importance. Spraying with herbicides
following harvesting and planting helps to keep weeds in check (Beck, 1997).
Other important strategies for controlling weeds include the ability to identify weeds as
well as scouting fields on a regular basis to identify and solve weed problems as they
arise. Spot spraying of herbaceous and woody perennials is a particularly good practice
for controlling these weeds.
Aside from no-till, conservation tillage techniques leave the option of light cultivation,
such as shallow disking to eliminate weed problems. Often a combination of chemical
and mechanical weed control combine for effective weed control. The benefit is
decreased herbicide cost, on the other hand, the benefits of improved soil structure and
organic matter is offset by increased cultivation. In the case of ridge till, herbicide use
and costs can be drastically cut (Beck, 1997).
Soil Moisture
A crucial factor in the success of a conservation tillage program is selecting the
appropriate tillage method and cropping sequence to match soil conditions and moisture.
A crucial factor in the success of a conservation tillage program is selecting the
appropriate tillage method and cropping sequence to match soil conditions and moisture.
No-till in fact offers farmers more flexibility in arid conditions than does conventional
tillage. A no-till system offers the advantage of increasing soil moisture through
eliminating plowing. Most conventional practices in semi-arid prairies involve a cropfallow-crop cycle. However, with the added moisture in no-till, a rotation can be
intensified. In addition stubble helps to capture and hold snow in a field, preventing it
from drifting. As the snow melts, it is gradually absorbed into the ground adding to soil
moisture (Beck, 1997).
In areas of higher rainfall and soil moisture where a no-till system may be difficult to
implement because of excessive soil moisture, conservation tillage practices such as ridge
or strip tillage can help improve soil drainage and allow soil to heat up quicker, allowing
plants an early start ahead of weeds.
Integrated Pest Management
Just as Integrated Pest Management forms an integral part of conventional systems, so
does IPM form a part of conservation tillage systems. Crop rotation assumes greater
importance in conservation tillage systems because there is an added element of residue
that could play host to plant diseases in planting the same crop consecutively. While
many conservation tillage systems plant the same crop consecutively, this is not always
the wisest management practice. In many cases yields are higher for crops when they are
12
planted in rotation with other crops, rather than in to the same crop.
Pest problems in conservation tillage practices are no greater than in conventional
systems. However, there may be a shift in pest problems. Part of this may be due to
residue left over from the previous season. This problem can be resolved in various ways.
The simplest is a diverse crop rotation, whereby even if the pest is present in the residue,
the process of planting a different crop the following season will deprive the pest of an
adequate host. Another solution is to chop up residue thereby destroying and reducing the
number of pests. Cover crops also are a viable option in certain circumstances due to the
fact that they attract beneficial insects that serve as predators and parasitoids to pests.
Selecting resistant varieties is strategy that can be used to reduce pest problems (Hill,
1996).
Plant Diseases
Will the presence of residue increase host agents for plant diseases and create a more
humid and beneficial atmosphere in which plant diseases can thrive? This is a particular
concern in areas where wheat is planted into the stubble of the previous harvest’s wheat.
If managed properly there should be no increase in the amount of plant diseases. This
problem can be mitigated by using different varieties of wheat, selecting in specific for
disease resistance. Whenever possible Crop rotation should play a role in decreasing the
ability of residue from a prior harvest to contaminate the present crop. (Bailey, 1996 and
Hill, 1996)
Residue Management
One of the main factors for determining a conservation tillage system’s success is the
maintenance of at least 30% crop residue on the surface. Ideally residue should be evenly
spread and distributed over fields. Conservation tillage will reduce the amount of residue
incorporation into the soil, keeping as much residue on the surface where it can help
minimize soil and wind erosion.
Problems can arise with residue. One of the most common problems is uneven spreading.
The result are patches of residue causing wetter and colder conditions to exist than other
parts of the field. Another result is ineffective herbicide contact with weeds and increased
weed problems. Thick layers of residue may pose a challenge to tillage equipment. In
some instances it may be necessary to thin out the amount of residue in order to ensure
effective planting. (Hill, 1996)
Soil Fertility
Reducing and eliminating tillage helps increase soil fertility. Residue left on the soil not
only serves in the capacity of soil conservation it also adds organic matter to the soil as it
decomposes. In addition reduced plowing reduces the decomposition of organic soil
matter. Soil fertility, tilth, and structure are improved by conservation tillage practices.
Residue left on the surface decomposes adding organic matter to the soil.
13
Added organic material means an increased amount of carbon. Additional nitrogen needs
to be added in the form of chemical fertilizer or leguminous crops in order to balance the
carbon nitrogen ratio.
Cover crops add organic matter to the soil as well as provide conservation benefits. Cover
crops help to suppress weeds by allelopathy (such as with cover crops such as rye) or
through competition with weeds. Cover crops also offer the advantage of adding organic
matter (and in the case of legumes, nitrogen) to the soil, helping to decrease fertilizer
costs. This is particularly important for the CIS where decreased subsidies have made
chemical fertilizers prohibitively expensive. Erosion protection against wind and rain are
an added advantage of cover crops. Excess water from heavy rainfall and waterlogged
soils can be absorbed by cover crops.
Environmental Effects
Concerns have been raised about the increased use of herbicides and its potential for
negative impact particularly on water systems. These concerns cannot be taken lightly.
Herbicides such as atrazine, gramaxone, and 2-4D can have potentially negative
consequences on the environment and humans if not applied judiciously. However, the
problem is all relative to the proximity of agricultural land to the water table, and to
streams. The low amount of rainfall received by semi-arid prairies makes the likelihood
of contamination from runoff or infiltration of the water table unlikely. These concerns
hold more weight in areas of high rainfall (Cameron and Oram, 1995).
In many respects the added reside in conservation tillage helps to reduce and eliminate
runoff that of agrochemicals. Herbicides such as glyphosate (round up) are the most
benign to the environment. It rapidly decomposes and has little if no known negative side
effects. The question of environmental contamination as a result of herbicide misuse
should not be taken lightly, particularly in an area of the world where past use of
agrochemicals was often excessive and irresponsible, often leading to negative
environmental consequences.
Economic results
Although Conservation tillage was originally created and promoted for its ability to
drastically reduce soil erosion it also has the added benefit of being equal to in cost or
more economical than conventional tillage methods. The savings are realized in reduced
fuel, labor, and machinery costs. Fewer trips on fields reduce fuel costs, which also
translates into less time spent tilling, decreasing labor costs. Many farms have become
self sufficient and no longer need to hire outside labor. Machinery experiences less time
in use and therefore less wear and tear. Tractors can be smaller and often last much
longer in conservation tillage systems than in conventional. However, costs vary from
crop to crop, and from system to system. No one conservation tillage technique is the
most economical or fitting for every situation. Profits are maximized when an appropriate
conservation tillage technique is matched with the proper soil and cropping conditions.
14
All conservation tillage systems use less fuel than conventional tillage. However, savings
differ as tillage is reduced. No-till saves the most fuel, while chisel plowing uses more
fuel than other conservation tillage practices, it still saves more fuel than conventional
tillage practices. On a 600 acre farm these savings would translate into fuel savings
ranging from $720 in the use of chisel tillage, to a savings of $2,172 in no-till systems
compared with conventional tillage (Hayes, 1984).
Herbicide costs differ between different tillage systems. No-till uses the most herbicides
out of all tillage systems, followed by conventional tillage. These two practices use the
most herbicides because they apply herbicides to the whole field. Other conservation
tillage systems such as ridge till and strip till reduce herbicide use by banding it to the
areas where planting occurs. Farmers practicing ridge tillage have at times managed to
cut $40/acre in herbicide costs through additional cultivation and cultural techniques for
controlling weeds. (Cramer, 1991)
It is often difficult to gauge and compare costs from different systems. However, various
studies indicate that for the most part conservation tillage systems are as profitable and
productive (and in some cases more so) than conventional tillage. This is without even
considering long term productivity due to soil conservation. Accounting for these factors
make conservation tillage even more economically attractive than conventional tillage
systems.
According to the Conservation Tillage Information Center investment in conservation
tillage equipment for a 1,200 acre farm costs 50% less than investing in conventional
tillage equipment. Expenses are as follows: Tractor ($80,000), soybean/grain drill
($20,000), corn planter ($25,000), and a sprayer ($15,000) (Cameron and Oram, 1995).
The following tables offer a look at the economic savings that conservation tillage
systems have to offer in terms of reduced fuel use as well as reduced amount of actual
tillage time to prepare and plant crops.
Table 3: Diesel fuel requirements for various tillage systems (gallons/acre)
Operation
Chop Stalks
Moldboard Plow
Chisel Plow
Fertilize, Knife
Disk
Disk
Plant
Cultivate
Spray
Total
Source: Jasa, 1991
Moldboard
Plow
Chisel
Plow
Disk
Ridge
Plant
0.55
No-till
0.60
0.74
0.74
0.52
0.43
0.60
0.60
0.68
0.86(2)
0.62
2.25
1.05
0.60
0.74
0.60
0.74
0.74
0.52
0.43
0.52
0.43
5.28
3.34
15
3.03
2.69
0.23(2)
1.43
Table 4: Comparative labor costs
Systems
Hrs/acre
No-till
0.60
Till Plant
0.73
Rotary Strip
0.83
Tillage
Disk Tillage
0.84
Rotary tillage
0.87
Chisel tillage
1.05
Conventional
1.22
tillage
Source: Hayes, 1984
Cost/acre ($4/hr)
2.40
2.92
3.32
3.36
3.48
4.20
4.88
Advantages of Conservation Tillage
The Conservation Tillage Information Center in West Lafayette, Indiana lists fourteen
major benefits from implementing conservation tillage. These benefits are the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reduced labor requirements
Time Savings
Reduced machinery wear
Fuel savings
Better long term production
Improved surface water quality
Decreased erosion
Higher soil moisture
Improved water infiltration
Decreased soil compaction
Improved soil tilth
More wildlife
Reduced release of carbon gases
Reduced air pollution
Source: Conservation Tillage: A Checklist for U.S. Farmers, 1996
Out of all these benefits there are several that are most pertinent to the situation in the
CIS. From a conservation stand point soil erosion is an immense problem. Soil problems
such as erosion, compaction, and fertility can be resolved through conservation tillage.
These are major problems for immediate and long term agricultural productivity in the
CIS. Conservation tillage will result in decreased erosion through increased residue,
which helps to reduce runoff and provides cover against wind erosion. Conservation
tillage requires fewer trips over the soil. In many places in the CIS there is a narrow
window period for planting. Often tractors must plant during muddy conditions. The
result often adds to soil compaction, with heavy machinery travelling over wet soil.
16
However, conservation tillage can reduce compaction. Less time is needed to plant due to
decreased tillage operations. At the same time smaller tractors can be used with
conservation tillage equipment because there is no need to drag a plough through soil.
Farms in the CIS need to increase efficiency in order to be profitable. Conservation
tillage provides numerous economic benefits. Amongst them are reduced cost for
machinery maintenance, as well as fuel savings from reduced tillage. Initial costs for
purchasing equipment can be offset by these economic savings.
Environmental benefits
Conservation tillage offers numerous environmental benefits. Added crop residue and
minimal tillage both provide the effect of drastically reducing agricultural runoff of soil
and agrochemicals. The result is minimized impact on the water ecosystem.
Case Studies
Innovative Ridge Till
The Thompson farm in Iowa offers an innovative option for ridge till in the CIS. The
Thompson’s farming practices are unique because of the near absence of herbicides and
chemical fertilizers in their system. Alterations in their ridge till equipment allow them to
incorporate manure into ridges. The ridge till system used on the Thompson farm has
succeeded in virtually eliminating herbicide use, and decreasing fertilizer costs by adding
manure and cover crops to the soil.
Weed control is through a combination of factors. The process of Ridge tilling eliminates
70% of weed seeds by knocking the top layer of soil off the ridge in between rows. The
second step in weed control is based on a five year crop rotation of corn-soybeansmeadow-meadow- meadow or a three year rotation of oats with a green manure-cornsoybean. Manure and sewer sludge is applied prior to planting of corn and soybeans.
Rotary hoeing is performed twice a season to control weeds. Corn and soybean varieties
are selected for fast and tall growing varieties, in order to out compete and shade weeds.
In extreme cases where weeds cannot be controlled through mechanical and cultural
practices herbicides are applied directly to hard weeds to kill such as thistle.
An experiment was conducted on the Thompson farm to compare ridge till without
herbicides, with herbicides, and a conventional till system without herbicides. The
conventional system experienced the worst weed problems. Broadleaf weeds were a
problem in the ridge till system with herbicides, while the ridge till system with no
herbicides experienced slightly higher yields than the ridge till with herbicides.
The Thompson’s believe that the use of herbicides selects a narrow group of weeds that
thrive on the conditions on land where the herbicides are being used.
(Pesek et al. 1989)
17
The ridge till and organic system used by the Thompson’s is an applicable model for
areas in the CIS where ridge till is an appropriate system. There is almost no herbicide or
chemical fertilizer use, both of which pose limiting economic factors to farmers in the
CIS. At the same time there are many farms that have manure. However, the ridge till
system is very different from tilling systems that farmers in the CIS are accustomed to.
While weeds are not a problem on ridges, they are present in between them. To the eye of
a conventional farmer a field under ridge till cultivation may appear to have a weed
problem, while in reality the weeds do not pose a problem to the crops on the ridges. The
system also requires a change in management practices. Farmers will need to be
convinced of its effectiveness and trained in its use.
Cover Cropping In Conservation Tillage Systems
Rich Bennett of Napolean, Ohio has incorporated cover crops on his 650 acre (260
hectares) into his wheat, corn, and soybean rotation. The results are increased soil
fertility, lower costs, as well as decreased chemical fertilizer, and herbicide use.
Several weeks following the wheat harvest in July Rich Bennett lightly disks the soil to
kill weeds. A cover crop of hairy vetch is planted in September. Directly after seeding the
soil is lightly disked again to kill late emerging weeds and incorporate vetch into the soil.
The vetch is allowed to grow until April, when it is sprayed with a quart of 2,4-D per acre
(2.5 quarts/ha). Only a fifth of the recommended amount of nitrogen is applied to the
corn, amounting to 30 pounds per acre of nitrogen is applied to the soil. Soil tests help to
determine if additional nitrogen is needed. A combination of one light cultivation and
cover crop of mulch help to suppress weeds.
Following the corn harvest, corn stalks are chopped up and rye is planted as a winter
cover crop. In the spring the rye is sprayed down with a pint of roundup per acre,
amounting to one third the recommended amount. Herbicide costs amount to $6 per acre
a fourth to a seventh of the cost of conventional systems.
(Hofstetter, 1994)
Conservation Tillage in the Ukraine
In Ukraine, minimum tillage practices have centered around the Poltova oblast. Dr.
Nikolai Shikula the head of Soil Science and Geology at the Ukraine Agricultural
Academy has been working on minimum tillage practices and sustainable agricultural
techniques for the past 17 years. Much of his work has been conducted at the
Ordjonikidge collective farm in Poltava. The farm has 4000 ha of land and has been rated
the best farm out of 500 farms with similar characteristics in Poltova oblast.
Two types of reduced tillage practices are used. The first involves a form of a deep plow
penetrates the soil up to 25cm helping to break the plow pan without inverting the soil.
18
The second method is a shallow plow that penetrates 5-6cm of the soil. According to Dr.
Shikula approximately 5-6% of agricultural land in the CIS is under minimum tillage
practices (10.5 to 11 million acres). Much of what is considered minimum-till in the
Ukraine, would not qualify as conservation tillage practices in North America. However,
these practices have helped to conserve soil while increasing yields (see table 2).
Table 5: Yields from Ukrainian Minimum conservation methods
Crop
Increase in Yield (kg/ha)
Winter wheat
102
Corn
680
Sugar beets
4,100
Source: Cameron and Oram, 1995
Total Yield (kg/ha)
6,050
7,290
52,900
Monsanto has also been working with farmers in the Ukraine. Much of their work has
focused on promoting no-till practices. Economic conditions put herbicides out of reach
of most farms. In response to economic conditions Monsanto has bartered herbicides in
exchange for a portion of wheat harvests. They have also provided nozzles for
agricultural machinery to help reduce and optimize herbicide use on agricultural land.
However, more systematic work on conservation tillage practices for specific conditions
for Ukraine is required (Cameron and Oram, 1995).
Russian Conservation Practices
Russian estimates on minimum tillage practices in the CIS far exceed those made by Dr.
Shikula in the Ukraine. According to Russian estimates from 1983-1993 58 million ha of
land has been under minimum tillage. Cereals, sugar beets, and potatoes have all been
cultivated using conservation tillage. Most of the conservation tillage in Russia has
focused on winter wheat. Tillage represent 35% of farm production costs. One of the
noted advantages of conservation tillage has been a decrease in energy costs of up to 25%
as a result of decreased tillage. Conservation tillage practices in Russia include a rotation
between deep and shallow tillage to deal with heavy soils that are easily compacted.
Wide tires are used to help to distribute the weight of tractors (Cameron and Oram,
1995).
The Case of Moldova
Moldova offers an interesting study on conservation tillage programs for the CIS. Despite
its small size (3.4 million hectares of which 1.75 million ha of agricultural land in annual
crops) Moldova’s mild climate and fertile Chernozem soil helped make it a major
agricultural producer for the Soviet Union.
However, soil erosion is a problem in Moldova. Agricultural practices place little focus
on soil conservation techniques, emphasizing production over conservation.
Approximately 30% of agricultural lands are severely eroded and an estimated 25 million
tons of topsoil is lost per year.
19
USAID implemented a conservation tillage project through their Environmental Policy
and Technology Project (EPT). The project set up three experimental stations around
Moldova, coinciding with the three regions of the country. One of the sites was on an
experimental farm, while the other two were on cooperative farms.
The chief agronomist from one of the cooperative farms and the farm manager from
another cooperative farm were brought to the U.S. for a study tour, part of which focused
on conservation tillage. They had the opportunity to meet with farmers and researchers
working on conservation tillage, and most importantly to see how conservation tillage
works. A variety of conservation tillage equipment was brought to Moldova allowing for
different conservation tillage practices to fit different needs and circumstances. Scientists
from the Institute of Soils, Biochemistry, and Soil Amelioration conducted in depth
studies on the work done in conservation tillage in Moldova.
Cultural considerations played a large role in selecting an appropriate conservation tillage
practice. Farmers and policy makers in Moldova were reluctant to involve themselves in
the project. During Soviet times agriculture was based on excessive use of agrochemicals.
Many of the project participants had become aware of the negative consequences of such
actions, and had a negative association with the herbicide and chemical fertilizer use.
Another challenge was resistance from farmers to reduce tillage. The move to introduce
no-till practices was met by resistance by local farmers, who were accustomed to fields
free of stubble and residue.
After careful analysis of farmers concerns the project chose chisel plow tillage as an ideal
conservation tillage technique to introduce into Moldova. The use of chisel plowing
offered the farmers a situation in which they felt more comfortable. Some tilling was
performed, but adequate residue was left on the surface to control soil erosion.
One of the cooperatives that was selected implemented conservation tillage on 735 ha
and 250 ha on neighboring private farms. Fuel savings alone amounted to 60 to 70
percent, accounting for a $15,000 in savings. The second cooperative was slow to
implement conservation tillage practices. Members of the cooperative were resistant to
change. Cooperative members feared that the conservation tillage machinery was too
large and heavy and would result in soil compaction. Another doubt was that the
machinery would not create adequate seedbeds. However, after positive results with
conservation tillage on the other cooperative, opposition subsided and conservation
tillage practices were implemented there as well.
Education has played a big role in promoting conservation tillage. Educational programs
have been set up for farmers, students, and representatives from the agriculture, health,
and environmental protection organizations. Tours were offered for the various sites
where conservation tillage practices were implemented.
Moldovan specialists were trained and assisted until they became comfortable with
equipment use. Technical assistance was readily available to explain theory and practice.
20
However, conservation tillage is not the only answer to the question of soil conservation
and agricultural sustainability. These practices need to be implemented along with a host
of other practices including crop rotation, and if possible the incorporation of cover crops
into the rotation in order to increase soil fertility and decrease weed pressure.
(Hill et al. 1997)
Brazil
“Friends of the Soil” clubs in Brazil serve as an interesting case for using a farmer to
farmer approach for promoting conservation tillage. Over the past twenty five years
different regions of Brazil have adopted conservation tillage techniques such as no-till
with remarkable success. At the present there is over 8 million hectares of land under notill production in Brazil. An impressive point to make is that farmers have switched to notill on their own personal initiative with little help from the government in terms of
subsidies or advice. Reduced erosion, economic savings, a simpler production process,
and increased soil moisture have provided incentive for farmers to switch to no-till
farming. Farmers have played a leading role in passing on no-till information and
technology to other farmers through organizations called “Friend of the Soil”. These
clubs offer farmers the opportunity to share experiences with each other, helping many to
correctly and efficiently apply no-till techniques and technology (Landers, 1998).
21
Similarities in Agro-Climatic Situation Between North America and
CIS Countries
The Commonwealth of Independent States covers a wide geographic zone within which
lie various climatic zones. Many of the agro-climatic conditions are very similar to those
in North America. This consists of growing season, rainfall, and soil conditions.
Similarities in soil and climate types in both regions are part of the reason that North
American model could be tested an refined to meet the specific needs of the CIS
countries.
The growing season in the CIS varies according to latitude. In the southern areas the
growing season is up to 160 days per year, while the season is only 80-100 days in the
utmost northern areas where agriculture can be practiced. The fall and spring are very
short, allowing little time for planting and harvesting. (Puterbaugh, 1993)
Rainfall varies greatly across the CIS. Some regions in the Northern Caucasus receive up
to 1000 millimeters (mm) of rainfall a year, while other areas in Kazakhstan receive as
little as 164 mm per year. Rainfall and growing season are the major determinants for
where and when crops can be planted. Wheat can be planted in areas of low precipitation
such as in areas of Kazakhstan and Russia, whereas corn requires more rainfall and is
more suited for the Northern Caucuses, Russia and the Ukraine. (Puterbaugh, 1993)
Climate conditions in North America are similar. The cold semi-arid regions of the
Pacific Northwest and the Northern Great Plains receives about 350-400 mm of rain per
year, while the east, piedmont, and areas of the coastal plains and delta receive up to
1,400 mm per year. The Canadian prairies are very analogous to those in the CIS with
similar growing period and rainfall. Rainfall in Saskatchewan averages from 300-500 mm
per year, with a growing period of 100-120 days per year. (Cameron and Oram, 1995)
Table 6: Climactic similarities in CIS and North America
Climate Type
Mediterranean
Cold Climate with low
rainfall
Cold with high rainfall
Mild semi-warm
Temperate marine climate
Area in Commonwealth of
Independent States
S. Crimea, Sea of Azav, S.
Kazakhstan
W. Siberia, Volga Valley (west
of Urals), N. Kazakhstan
Great Western Plains (Near
Moscow, Perm, and Volozhek)
W. Russia, Belarus, and Kiev
area of Ukraine
Leningrad area
Source: Cameron and Oram, 1995
22
Area in North America
Oregon, Idaho, Washington
Minnesota, North Dakota,
Manitoba, and Saskatchewan
Ontario, Quebec
U.S. Corn Belt-Indiana,
Michigan, Wisconsin,
Illinois, Michigan, and Great
Lakes area
Soils
Parts of the CIS have rich and fertile soils that helped to make areas of the Ukraine and
Russia the breadbasket of Europe at the turn of the century. These soils are classified by
the name Chernozem. They are rich in organic matter with a thick black layer of topsoil
that is pH neutral. Chestnut and desert soils are not as fertile as Chernozems. However,
they possess many of the same qualities such as being well drained, with good soil
structure, and easy to cultivate. Podzolic soils have fewer positive traits than the other
two soil types. They are less fertile, and are poor at retaining nutrients. These soils often
demand large amounts of fertilizer. Podzolic soils have poor water retention often
resulting in inefficient use of fertilizer (Puterbaugh, 1993). The following table describes
the individual quality of the different soil types and where they can be found in the CIS.
Table: Soil types in CIS and NA
Table 7: Soil type in CIS and North America
Soil Type
Chernozem
Qualities
Rich in humus, neutral
pH, high soil fertility
Chestnut
Well drained and
structured and easy to
cultivate, less fertile
than Chernozem
poor soil quality, poor
water and nutrient
retention
Podzolic
Sod-Podzolic soils
Area of CIS
Most of Ukraine,
North Caucusus,
Western Volga,
southern Urals,
Northern Kazakhstan,
and southern areas of
Siberia
Eastern N. Caucasus,
lower Volga, central
Kazakhstan
Area of N.A.
Northern Kansas,
Missouri, Iowa,
Minnesota, and North
and South Dakota,
and Saskatchewan
Baltic States, Central
Region, Northwest
Region, Volga
Vyatsk, northern
Urals, and Siberia
North and Northeast
of Moscow and
Leningrad
With the same
qualities, except soil
has clay making it
heavy and able to
retain water
Source: Cameron and Oram, 1995 and Puterbaugh, 1993
Farm Size
Farm sizes in North America differ according to location. Farms are usually larger in the
semi-arid plains, while they are smaller in the corn belt of the United States. In the semiarid zones of Canada farm sizes average 240 ha in Manitoba to 440 ha in Saskatchewan.
Farms that are solely dedicated to wheat production had 800 ha of land. In the U.S., farms
23
in the semi-arid regions averaged 608 to 800 ha, while the corn belt has farms that
average approximately 200-400 ha (Cameron and Oram, 1995).
Collective and state farms in the Commonwealth of Independent States, particularly in
Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan contain much larger amounts of land. On the average
state farms have 13,500 ha of land, of which 4,500 is used for farming, while collective
farms have 5,900 ha of land on the average, with 3,100 ha used for farming (Csaki,
1993).
24
Possibilities for Adopting Conservation Tillage in the CIS
In North America, government agencies, policies, universities, and farmer organizations
have played a role in promoting conservation tillage. While U.S. and Canadian
agricultural policies differ, both countries have promoted conservation tillage. In the U.S.
the prime factor in conservation tillage promotion has been federal legislation in the form
of the 1985 and 1990 farm bills. These bills required farmers to implement conservation
tillage on land designated for conservation. If they failed to do so they were penalized by
removing subsidies for crops grown on that land. Canada on the other hand relies on
promoting conservation tillage by setting up agricultural development funds to promote
conservation tillage. Demonstrations have been set up to show farmers how conservation
tillage works (Cameron and Oram, 1995). Research, promotion, and extension through
universities has also been part of both the Canadian and American strategy for promoting
conservation tillage practices. In the United States the Conservation Tillage Information
Center at Purdue University is a major clearinghouse for information and research on
conservation tillage.
Cooperation between Canada and the U.S. has also advanced conservation tillage. The
Manitoba-North Dakota (ManDak) Zero Tillage Association promotes conservation
tillage practices in the semi-arid prairies of North America.
Extension and research on the part of universities has helped promote conservation
tillage. Research that validates the environmental and economic benefits has helped get
the word out about the benefits of conservation tillage. Many projects aimed at
conservation tillage research have included farmers as equal participants in designing and
running experiments. The result is an opportunity for farmers to share their knowledge
and experiences with researchers helping them to augment their knowledge and orient
research in the direction of farmers needs.
Manufacturers of agricultural machinery and agrochemicals have also played a large role
in conservation tillage. The drop in price for glyphosate (roundup) made no-till an
economically affordable practice. Conservation tillage equipment has improved by leaps
and bounds over the past twenty years. Many farmers have adapted conservation tillage
practices. So much so that if one goes to an agriculture trade show in North America it
will probably be difficult to find a moldboard plough (Walker, personal communication).
Economic benefits also play a role in conservation tillage acceptance. These savings are
realized in three forms: Savings in fuel, labor, and lower depreciation and maintenance
costs for agricultural machinery. Fuel costs can be reduced by 25%, while depreciation in
machinery is less than in conventional tillage due to less use and wear and tear on the
machinery. Decreased labor is realized as a result of fewer passes over the field
(Cameron and Oram, 1995).
25
Barriers and Solutions for Adopting Conservation Tillage in the CIS
Barriers to implementing minimum tillage practices do exist. Farmers exposed to the
ideas of minimum tillage in the Commonwealth of Independent States are skeptical.
Many who were obligated to implement such practices during the Soviet era, ceased to do
so once the Soviet Union dissolved. In some cases poorly applied minimum tillage
operations resulted in weed infested fields, increased diseases, and soil compaction
(Libert, 1995). Policy has not focused on conservation, nor provided economic benefits
for doing so. Farms have a bias for tilling. They see the need to control weeds, keep fields
clean, and incorporate residue and stubble (Cameron and Oram, 1995). This could pose a
barrier to the implementation of conservation tillage. Farmers used to having plowed
fields clean of stubble or residue may find it difficult to adjust to leaving both stubble and
residue on the soil. This may be particularly acute in practices such as ridge till, where at
time weeds are allowed to grow between ridges.
Probably the greatest barrier to implementing conservation tillage in the CIS is the lack of
equipment. At the present, conservation tillage equipment is not manufactured in the CIS.
Equipment will have to be imported into the region. The initial expense of purchasing
such equipment will be prohibitive unless there is some sort of financial aid or incentive.
With out agricultural loans there is little possibility for farms to afford the initial expense
of conservation tillage equipment. Various articles addressing conservation tillage in the
Commonwealth of Independent States have cited the need for government incentives
such as low interest loans or subsidies to purchase conservation tillage equipment
(Cameron and Oram, 1995) and (Hill, et al., 1997). Promoting custom service is another
possibility. Others have proposed offering grants to research institutions and farms. In
exchange for providing certain equipment the recipients will also have to conduct on
farm tests and demonstrations. Newly privatized individual farms may have trouble
fitting into the mechanized framework. In some of the CIS countries these small private
farms are the driving force behind agricultural production. Methods need to be found to
help these farms share the costs and use of conservation tillage equipment.
Agricultural policies at the present time in the CIS have not placed any emphasis on
conservation practices. There are no incentives nor is there legislation that obligates
farmers to practice conservation techniques. This is different than the United States
where both the 1985 and 1990 farm bills promote conservation tillage and other soil
conservation techniques.
Research institutes in Russia and Ukraine are currently conducting some conservation
tillage research. However, their impact is limited. They have little funds available to
expand research. Much of their research focus is on techniques developed in the
Commonwealth of Independent States.
Need to use some herbicide associated with conservation tillage practices may pose a
barrier to farmers in the CIS. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union chemical use has
dropped off as market prices have been put into effect. While herbicides are available in
the CIS their price may be prohibitive. Many state and collective farms incorporate
26
manure into their fields. Application of this manure with conservation practices such as
no-till requires machinery such as injectors and spreaders. However, other conservation
tillage practices are more flexible. Some farmers using ridge till have adjust their
machinery allowing them capability of incorporating manure into their ridge, while light
cultivation is used in other systems allowing farmer to incorporate manure into the soil.
As in the case of Moldova, farmers were reluctant to adopt conservation tillage practices
such as no-till because of herbicide use and reduced tillage. This type of concern needs to
be taken seriously. No-till is only one of the conservation tillage options available. While
it may be the most effective in reducing soil erosion in certain circumstances, it can only
be effective if properly implemented. Farmers must be willing to implement the
technique. Concerns need to be taken seriously and worked through with farmers in order
to facilitate implementation.
In colder areas there is a concern that conservation tillage practices are impossible
because the soil does not heat up as fast as in conventional tillage. While crop residue
does keep soils cooler, solutions do exist to help seedbeds in conservation tillage achieve
early germination. Systems such as ridge till and strip till help soil drain better and raise
the soil helping it to heat up sooner and achieve early germination.
As in any new process adjusting to conservation tillage requires adaptation to new
practices. In many cases increased and more refined management skills are necessary to
deal with various challenges that exist in a conservation tillage system. Amongst these
are management of residue, weeds, pests, diseases, and proper fertilization. While these
issues can be effectively dealt with an appropriate management plan needs to be followed
in order to avoid falling into potential problems.
Existing agricultural equipment in the CIS is old and run down. Part of the reason that
equipment has not been replaced is due to a lack of money to buy new equipment.
Government policies that provided low interest loans or subsidies for the use and
implementation of conservation tillage would greatly assist in promoting conservation
tillage practices.
Moldova offers an interesting case study for replication. A conservation tillage program
was implemented by USAID. Their situation should be studied to better understand the
challenges and process involved in how they set up and implemented the project. One of
the best lessons learned from them is how they designed a program. Using concerns and
desires on the part of the Moldovans, the project was designed to fit the concerns, needs,
and desires of the Moldovans.
Conclusion
Conservation tillage is made up of various practices that leave at least 30% crop residue
on the surface. No-till, ridge till, and mulch till are the three main conservation tillage
practices. Implementing conservation tillage practices offers numerous benefits including
economic savings in reduced fuel and labor costs, increased production, soil fertility, and
27
a reduction in soil erosion and environmental sustainability.
Conservation tillage as practiced in North America represents a viable alternative for
existing agricultural practices in the CIS. Each of these practices offers different
advantages and disadvantages. The goal is to select a conservation tillage practice that fits
the criteria for the conditions in the system for which it will be applied. However, there
are certain differences that need to be taken into account. Economical constraints may
limit the amount of chemical fertilizers and herbicides that can be used in the CIS.
Innovative North American farmers have succeeded in reducing agrochemical use in
various conservation tillage systems. These innovations offer examples of conservation
tillage techniques applicable to economic and agricultural conditions in the CIS.
Various analogies exist between the CIS and North America. Among these similarities
are agroclimatic conditions such as rainfall, soil, and growing periods. Another similarity
is the size of farms.
As in any new method of production adjusting to conservation tillage requires adaptation
to new practices. In many cases increased and more refined management skills are
necessary to deal with various challenges that exist in a conservation tillage system.
Amongst these are management of residue, weeds, pests, diseases, and proper
fertilization. These issues can be effectively dealt with by developing an appropriate
management plan. Implementing conservation tillage practices poses various challenges.
An effective conservation tillage program developed for use in the Former Soviet Union
will have to have flexibility, offering the option of a variety of practices to meet different
conditions and needs. Experienced farmers and researchers from North America can help
implement an effective conservation tillage program.
Existing agricultural equipment in the CIS is old and run down. Part of the reason that
equipment has not been replaced is due to a lack of money to buy new equipment.
Government policies that provided low interest loans or subsidies for the use and
implementation of conservation tillage would greatly assist in promoting conservation
tillage practices.
In North America research institutions have played a great role in promoting conservation
tillage. There are already several institutions across the CIS involved in conservation
tillage and soil conservation. These institutions should be supported in their effort.
There is great potential for increasing agricultural production and sustainability in the
CIS. However, numerous barriers stand in the way. Effective conservation tillage could
help to create necessary changes in agricultural practices and mentality to help agriculture
in the CIS transition to a more economical, productive, and sustainable agricultural
system.
28
References
Almare, Raymond, and Copeland, Steve. 1994. “Constraints in conservation tillage
systems.” In ed. Carter, Martin R. Conservation Tillage in Temperate Agroecosystems.
CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL. pp. 6-13.
Bailey, K.L. 1996. “Diseases under conservation tillage systems.” Canadian Journal of
Plant Science. Vol 70 #3-4. pp. 635-638.
Beck, Dwayne. 1997. Diverse No-Till Crop Rotations in the Northern Great Plains.
Dakota Lakes web site. http://www.dakotalakes.com..
Cameron, Doug, and Oram, Peter. 1995. Minimum and Reduced Tillage: Its Use In North
America and Western Europe and Its Potential Application In Eastern Europe and
Central Asia. IFPRI and Canadian Trust Fund. Unpublished Document.
Carter, Martin R. 1994. Conservation Tillage in Temperate Agroecosystems. CRC Press.
Boca Raton, Fl.
Cramer, Craig. 1991. Controlling Weeds with Fewer Chemicals: How to Cut Your
Herbicide Costs and Protect the Environment. Rodale Institute. Emmaus, PA.
Csaki, Csaba, and Nash, John. 1998. The Agrarian Economies of Central and Eastern
Europe and The Commonwealth of Independent States: Situations and Perspectives,
1997. World Bank Discussion Paper No. 387. Washington, D.C.
Csaki, Csaba. 1993. “Agricultural Production In the Former USSR.” In Science,
Agriculture, and Environment In the Former Soviet Union. Pp. 31-62. American
Association for the Advancement of Science. Washington, D.C.
Conservation Tillage Information Center Residue Management Survey. 1997.
[Conservation Tillage Information Center];
http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/CRM/TillageTypes.html.
Hill, Peter. 1996. Conservation Tillage: A Checklist for U.S. Farmers. Conservation
Tillage Information Center CTIC. West Lafayette, Indiana.
Hill, Robert L., Holderbaum, James F., Boinchan, Boris, and Decker, A. Morris. 1997.
“Moldova: Moving Towards a Sustainable Agriculture” in Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation. Vol 53 #4 pp. 215-219.
Hayes, William. 1984. Minimum tillage farming/No-Tillage Farming. No-Till Farmer,
Inc., Brookfield, Wisc.
Hofstetter, Bob. 1994. “Farmers Lead the Way to No-Till Covers.” In The New Farm:
Magazine of Regenerative Agriculture. Sep/Oct 1994 vol. 16. Pp. 20-23.
29
Janssen, C. and Hill, P. 1994. What Is Conservation Tillage. [Purdue Extensions
Publications] http://www.agcom.purdue.edu/AgCom/Pubs/CT/CT-1.html.
Jasa, Paul et al. 1991. NebGuide: Conservation Tillage and Planting Systems. G91-1046.
Cooperative Extension, Institute of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Landers, John N. 1998. “Technology Transfer Mechanisms for the New Zero Tillage
Techniques in the Savannahs of Central Brazil and Its Benefits for the Environment.”
Document presented at workshop in Madagascar in March, 1998.
Libert, Bo. 1995. The Environmental Heritage of Soviet Agriculture. Biddles Ltd.
Guildford, U.K.
McCain, Dan, and Towery, Dan. 1996. “Forward” in Conservation Tillage: A Checklist
for U.S. Farmers. Conservation Tillage Information Center CTIC. West Lafayette,
Indiana.
Nazarenko, Victor. 1993. “The Policy Environment for Agricultural Development” in
Science, Agriculture, and Environment In the Former Soviet Union. American
Association for the Advancement of Science. Washington, D.C. pp. 63-77.
Pesek, John et al. 1989. Alternative Agriculture. National Academy Press. Washington,
D.C.
Puterbaugh, Thomas L. 1993. “The Geography, Climate, and Soils of The Former Soviet
Union. In Science, Agriculture, and Environment In the Former Soviet Union. American
Association for the Advancement of Science. Washington, D.C. pp. 1-30.
Walker, J.S. Agri Pro International. Personal Communication, June 14, 1998.
30