After a month with LandWISE researching the implications should Tukituki Plan Change 6 rules be applied to the Heretaunga Plains, our two Interns have returned home.
Makenzie and Rachel at the Flaxmere Community Gardens
While in Hawke’s Bay, they met a number of farmers, policy makers and community stakeholders in order to understand different perspectives. Their report is available here.
We were also able to involve them in an afternoon of soil surface shear strength assessment at Eskdale. Appropriate health and safety equipment supplied by Centre for Land and Water staff.
Equipment used to assess soil surface shear strength on forested rolling hills at Eskdale
At the MicroFarm, we just harvested our second lot of peas. We tracked their water use since planting to build on learning from our first crop (see the December 2013 issue of “Grower” reproduced here>).
Once again, HydroServices’ Melanie Smith established three neutron probe access tubes in each of two crops. These were read weekly and analysed to tell us paddock soil moisture content down to 80 cm.
Both pea crops were planted on the same day with the same drill. Paddock 1 is dryland and Paddock 2 has drip irrigation installed 200mm deep.
Figures Paddock 1 and Paddock 2 show soil water content for each crop.
Paddock 1_PeasPaddock 2_Peas
We see the crops tracked about the same at the start. In mid-December, Paddock 2 received two 9mm irrigations from our buried dripline.
Melanie estimated that the irrigation was 80% efficient, so only added about 7.5mm to the budget each time. Paddock 1 is not irrigated, and continued to drop towards stress point.
Paddock 1 reached Refill Point on Boxing Day two days before rain fortunately lifted it back out of stress. Paddock 1 again hit stress point on about 6th January. With no more significant rain, it stayed stressed. With irrigation applied as required, Paddock 2 remained stress-free throughout.
Overall, the two crops used similar amounts of water through until early January. After that the 0 – 30 cm soil reached stress point, and water use from the unirrigated Paddock 1 began to taper off. The steeper lines in the bottom part of the graphs show it began to get more water from deeper in the profile.
By harvest, Paddock 1 was using only about half as much water as the drip irrigated Paddock 2 and drawing it from much deeper in the profile.
The difference in what a crop did use and what it could have used if the water was available is described by Potential Soil Moisture Deficit. We estimate that by harvest, Paddock 1 suffered about 100mm of PSMD. I am not sure what the pea response is to stress. I am told it is a “very elastic” crop. For many crops this would indicate a growth reduction of about 20%.
So did irrigation pay?
We sampled each crop pre-harvest and found Paddock 2 had about 30% more fresh weight canopy than Paddock 1. The difference was easily seen, being significantly taller and generally more “lush”. The peas in Paddock 1 reached harvest maturity at least three or four days before the irrigated peas in Paddock 2.
We get paid for peas not canopy. We also sampled yields and quality as measured by TR (pea tenderness) and found differences.
There was a lower tonnage in Paddock 2, but the quality (and pay-out value) was much higher.
At harvest the Paddock 1 tonnages were reasonable at 6.85 t/ha paid yield. But TR was 137; a bit high and the lowest pay-out grade.
We delayed harvesting Paddock 2 for two days. The paid yield was similar at 6.55 t/ha but the TR was 102, a 30% higher pay-out grade.
Paddock 1 returned $2,059/ha and Paddock 2 returned $2,625/ha gross, so a benefit of $566/ha from irrigation.
We applied 81 mm so our return from irrigation was $6.99/ha/mm applied. Many people quote an irrigation cost of about $2/ha/mm so let’s claim a benefit of $5/ha/mm applied.
Looking at it another way. If we had a 20ha paddock, irrigation would have made us about $8,000 better off. If we also sold pea hay, the benefit would be even greater.
Answer: Irrigation pays!
Thanks to: Centre for Land and Water, ThinkWater, Netafim, HydroServices, McCain Foods, Ballance AgriNutrients, BASF Crop Protection, FruitFed Supplies, Agronica NZ, Nicolle Contracting, Drumpeel Farms, Greville Ground Spraying, True Earth Organics, Tasman Harvesting, Plant & Food Research, Peracto NZ
LandWISE is hosting two students from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
Rachel Eatherly and Makenzie Read are interns through a Massey University programme and are at LandWISE for the month of June. They are both studying Natural Resources and Environmental Economics, which influenced their decision to study abroad in New Zealand through Massey University’s Agricultural College.
Makenzie is concerned with methods of maintaining economic growth while minimizing the impact on water sources. Rachel is interested in sustainable farming practices to minimize the impact on the environment while also increasing profits and production. So the interests of both align very well with LandWISE.
While at LandWISE, Rachel and Makenzie are considering the implications of applying the Tukituki Plan Change 6 to cropping on the Heretaunga Plains. In particular, they are examining the levels of awareness, the scale of potential impact, and what changes may be required if Plan Change 6 were to be implemented. They appreciate the support they have received from farmers, council, industry and other stakeholders. We will post their report once complete.
Their visit to New Zealand began with a two week tour starting in Christchurch. Travelling with five other colleagues and Massey representatives through Otago to the West Coast and Marlborough they saw our fascinating South Island landscapes and visited farms as well as natural areas. They then travelled around the North Island including stops at National Park, LIC in Hamilton, Auckland, Rotorua and Taupo before arriving in Hawke’s Bay.
Rachel and Makenzie at Mt Nicholas Station on Lake Wakatipu
Awapuni Function Centre, Palmerston North. 21-22 May 2014
Just two days to go to LandWISE 2014! The final programme and some tasters of individual presentations are on the website.
In a change to previous years, our “outdoor session” on Day 2 includes a bus tour of a small catchment with intensive land use – vegetable cropping and dairy farming – and a regionally significant lake. This will be in the middle of the day, with buses returning to the conference venue for the final afternoon presentations and panel discussion.
We have a focus on farm plans to avoid or minimise off-farm impacts, especially from sediments and nutrients. This is a critical issue now, and farmers need to understand how new expectations may affect their day to day activities.
Many thanks to our Conference Sponsors and the many speakers and others who bring you this opportunity. We especially thank our Platinum Sponsors, BASF Crop Protection, AGMARDT and John Deere.
Please pass this message on to your friends and colleagues you believe would gain benefit from attending.
Around 300 people attended the Silver Fern Farms Hawke’s Bay Farmer of the Year Field Day on 8 May. Hugh and Sharon Ritchie won the award and opened Horonui, Drumpeel and Wainui farms to public gaze.
A good selection of images from the day can be found on Kate Taylor’s website, rivettingkatetaylor.com. A sample image of folk at Drumpeel is below (thanks Kate)
Kate Taylor’s photo of people visiting Drumpeel during the Farmer of the Year Field Day
The weather put on a good show as 120+ utes travelled across the three farms.
Horonui has most of the rolling hill country and is the largest part of the the animal enterprise. Check Kate’s photos to see more. The flats are used for cropping with a 50ha area block irrigated by a towable pivot fitting with variable rate technology.
Drumpeel has been the cropping base since Hugh’s parents David and Sally took over the farm and began developing it. Now fully irrigated it has been the site of many trials and field days over the years by FAR and companies testing seed and plant protection options. Hugh himself is constantly testing new ideas!
Hugh has hosted many LandWISE events and supported LandWISE Smart Farming investigations including pH mapping, EM soil scanning, minimum tillage, strip-tillage. Generally he’s been ahead of us.
The Drumpeel linear move irrigator was a test-bed for LandWISE nozzle option research into improving application uniformity. This has been a passion of Hugh’s since his Nuffield Scholarship when he visited Charles Burt at the Irrigation Training and Research Center in California.
Wainui is a new aquisition that adjoins Drumpeel. The Ritchies have just completed their first summer of cropping. A large centre pivot on Wainui has variable rate irrigation which should give increased flexibility and use a set amount of water most efficiently. A programme of GPS surveying and levelling to enhance drainage at Wainui has begun. This will be discussed at the upcoming LandWISE Conference in Palmerston North on 21-22 May.
Once again, congratulations Hugh and Sharon and their family and staff.
Hugh Ritchie has been using the power of his in-tractor GPS to efficiently map his farmland and generate optimum drainage plans. He is gaining significant benefits from both improved surface drainage and buried tile drains.
High accuracy tractor guidance system displays automatically record data from GPS and various machine controllers, meters and monitors. An accurate (+/- 20mm) auto-steer system typically consists of a GPS receiver and radio antenna mounted on the vehicle roof, a display or console within the cab, electronics to a steer assist or hydraulic steering system and a base station.
Trimble’s Field Level software is set up in the FMX console in Hugh’s tractor. Designed with assistance from drainage contractors in US and UK, Field Level is the key to very cost effective tile laying. The software surveys the paddock as the tractor drives along a planned drain line, the GPS measuring surface elevation to within 5cm. Field Level calculates the optimum design to fit the desired slope from the top end of the drain to the outlet. Guidance keeps the tine foot in the right place.
The software is also used to capture position and elevation data to create accurate 3D maps for surface drainage. Using the tractor as a survey tool, Hugh maps his paddocks then exports the data to OptiSurface which calculates best cut-and-fill plans to guide water to desired points in the paddock. The generated cut-and-fill plans are sent back to the tractor which guides either a scraper or levelling blade to shape the land.
Conference Presentation by Ian Yule, Massey University, Palmerston North
Ian Yule is Professor in Precision Agriculture at Massey University in Palmerston North where he has been working for 17 years. During that time he has worked and researched on Precision Agriculture within New Zealand and overseas.
Ian has contributed in a number of areas in cropping as well as pasture based systems and has tended to work in applied areas which have the potential to benefit farmers. He is an engineer by training and education and holds a PhD from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne in England where he worked before coming to New Zealand. He is also a committee member of the Precision Agriculture Association of New Zealand (PAANZ), a body recently set up to try and further the adoption of Precision Agriculture in New Zealand.
Precision Agriculture has been in existence for around 25 years and while it started as appearing to offer the total solution to our problems it hasn’t really been adopted to the full extent that it could have been. My own view is that it was too much based around soil fertility and an oversimplification of the relationship between plant nutrition and production. Farming is actually much more complex than this. However we should not lose sight of the fact that significant progress has been made and the rate of progress is increasing.
Possibly there were issues around the reliability and availability of equipment in the earlier adoption phase. Adoption surveys around the world also indicated that most growers thought of it as complex, requiring IT skills which they didn’t have and adding complexity. Academics and researchers got very excited about it but they didn’t necessarily see the added complexity and presented it as an all or nothing type of situation. This made the hurdle to adoption even larger.
In my own opinion one of the major hurdles is that precision agriculture is not a substitute for knowledge but is highly dependent upon it, and that knowledge is very particular to the farm, farmer and situation. All too often we have forgotten about the main decision maker, the farmer. Farming is a complex and risky operation and one size does not fit all. I think one of the most encouraging things is that PA might now be seen as a series of enable technologies which present some exciting opportunities to farmers and growers. They can build their farming system brick by brick, but have an overall objective in mind. It is probably correct to recognise that most have struggled with data management and turning that data into useful information.
The quality, ease of use and reliability of equipment is improving and many growers have found a direct benefit from using technology either through reduced operating costs and increased efficiency or increased output. Most farms have not reached their full potential and there are still significant opportunities to increase profitability while reducing environmental risk.
It is interesting to note that even our most progressive farmers have done completely different things in this space. It shows that they have been able to examine and measure the performance of their own farming system and identify their greatest weaknesses and address those first. PA also shows that there are many challenges ahead, both for family run farms and larger corporate farming operations.
The presentation is intended to highlight some of the strengths, weaknesses, promises and pitfalls of Precision Agriculture and perhaps offer some insights into how growers might make further progress with their own efforts.
We were pointed to a post on the use of light to control powdery mildew in greenhouses. This is yet another example of growing awareness of the fantastic complexity of life and the many and varied roles that light and light quality play on growth of crop, pests and diseases.
The collaborative project by Cornell researchers and colleagues in Norway studied the effect of light on powdery mildew – a group of tiny, transparent parasitic fungi that infect many crops, including cucumber, grapes and berries.
Work by Aruppillai Suthaparan of the Norwegian University of Life Sciences and Cornell plant pathologists Robert Seem and David Gadoury, published in the May issue of the journal Plant Disease, found that UV-B light suppressed cucumber powdery mildew and was especially effective when applied at night. They could use light to suppress the pathogen without the use of costly fungicides.
The researchers infected cucumber plants with powdery mildew and applied UV-B for short spurts of five, 10 and 15 minutes. They found that UV-B exposure reduced cucumber powdery mildew infection from about 90 percent of leaf area to about 5 percent, and also reduced the formation of spores.
Analysing satellite data to identify land use and crops
David Pairman, Heather North and Stella Belliss, Landcare Research
Remote sensing scientists at Landcare Research, in collaboration with Environment Canterbury, have developed a new capability for mapping agricultural land use from satellite imagery. The methods are aimed at gathering regional statistics on areas of various land use types, and their change over time. The maps of land use and crops can also be laid over other topographic data, for example soil maps, to see what land uses are occurring on what soils.
The maps, even though covering large areas (e.g. a 60 x 60 km satellite image) are detailed enough to show individual paddocks.
An extract from a landuse map is shown at the left. This is an enlargement of summer 2011/12 classification, showing land use timing at paddock-level
Assuming suitable images can be acquired (the weather plays a part), it is possible to carry out a land use classification every 6 months, i.e. a summer and a winter land use map each year. This ability for frequent updating, and provision of paddock-level information, have prompted the researchers to ask farmers whether they see uses of such mapping for more local- or catchment-level applications of value to themselves.
The LandWISE Conference seems the ideal forum to put this question to a tech-savvy group of farmers. David will present land use maps from summer and winter classifications in Mid-Canterbury, and ask for input on potential farm-scale uses, such as alleviating some of the work in filling in agricultural statistics questionnaires, or other possibilities.
To find out more, come to the conference and tell David your reactions, ideas and aspirations.
The National Soils Database (NSD) is a crucial part of our soil data legacy in New Zealand. It is the fundamental dataset that underpins our soil knowledge of New Zealand.
Sam Carrick recording information from a soil pit (Landcare Research photo)
It comprises the profile data collected in over 1,500 soil pits scattered throughout New Zealand. It is the record of almost all we know of the soil chemistry and soil physical properties of our soils. From it we have determined how we classify our soils, interpret our soil maps and understand how soil properties vary with geology, rainfall, vegetation, topography, and land management across the New Zealand landscape.
Sharn Hainsworth is a pedologist with Landcare Research. One of Sharn’s projects was a study of soil maps, soil data and actual soils in the Ruataniwha Basin in Hawke’s Bay. He found more detailed information about the properties and spatial distribution of soils in the Ruataniwha Plains is required to evaluate the potential changes in productivity, versatility and environmental impacts from the proposed irrigation scheme.
Sharn is a presenter at LandWISE 2014 – Ever Better: Farmers, land and water. He will explain how soil maps and reports and new information products are delivered in S-map Online and he will outline initiatives to continue enhancing the information available.
Hugh Ritchie has been using the power of his in-tractor GPS to efficiently map his farmland and generate optimum drainage plans. He is gaining significant benefits from both improved surface drainage and buried tile drains.
The software is also used to capture position and elevation data to create accurate 3D maps for surface drainage. Using the tractor as a survey tool, Hugh maps his paddocks then exports the data to OptiSurface which calculates best cut-and-fill plans to guide water to desired points in the paddock. The generated cut-and-fill plans are sent back to the tractor which guides either a scraper or levelling blade to shape the land.
An extract from a landuse map is shown at the left. This is an enlargement of summer 2011/12 classification, showing land use timing at paddock-level
