Vaderstad Carrier

Minimum tillage in UK arable cropping systems: Tivington (United Kingdom)

non-inversion tillage (eng); conservation tillage (eng)

Description

Non-inversion tillage to create a seedbed

Non-inversion tillage to provide suitable seedbed for following crop.

Purpose of the Technology: Even and cost-effective crop establishment, saving time and benefiting the environment. Maintenance: annually, per crop,

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: innovative farmer reducing impacts of farming on the environemnt, expanding his businesss and saving time

Location

Location: Minehead, Somerset, United Kingdom

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • -3.48867, 51.19701

Spread of the Technology:

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation:

Type of introduction
winter wheat emerging through partially incorporated residue

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping: cereals - wheat (spring), oilseed crops - sunflower, rapeseed, other
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation
Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion, Wo: offsite degradation effects
  • physical soil deterioration - Pk: slaking and crusting
SLM group
  • minimal soil disturbance
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A3: Soil surface treatment

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: £
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 0.56 £
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
slope (steeper slopes require more horsepower), state of the soil, climate, crop
Establishment activities
n.a.
Maintenance activities
  1. Year1: shallow sub-soil (Timing/ frequency: 3rd-4th week in August / annual)
  2. Year1: spray with non-selective herbicide (glyphosate) (Timing/ frequency: late August/ early September / annual)
  3. Year1: drill (Timing/ frequency: late August/ early September, 3-4 days after spraying / annual)
  4. Year1: roll (optional) (Timing/ frequency: after drilling / annual)
  5. Year2: surface cultivation (more in Annex 3) (Timing/ frequency: mid August / per crop)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (£) Total costs per input (£) % of costs borne by land users
Equipment
Equipment (year1)-machine hour
Equipment (year2)-machine hour
Equipment (year3)-machine hour

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Average annual rainfall in mm: 800.0
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
  • Other
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased


In early years

Timeliness of operations
increased
x
decreased


Operation twice as quick as ploughing

Economic viability
decreased
x
improved

Input constraints
increased
x
decreased


Possible increasing herbicide costs

Hindered farm opperations
decreased
x
increased


timing of operations critical

High machinery costs
low
x
high


High capital investment but low running costs

Socio-cultural impacts
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
x
improved

Preparation for new legislation
None
x
None


CAP reform, Soil Action Plan for England, EU Water Framework directive

Acceptance by society
Low
x
High


Age difference: Technology tends to be taken up by younger farmers

Ecological impacts
soil moisture
decreased
x
increased

soil cover
reduced
x
improved

soil loss
increased
x
decreased

Quantity before SLM: 0.01
Quantity after SLM: 1

soil crusting/ sealing
increased
x
reduced


Possibility

soil compaction
increased
x
reduced

animal diversity
decreased
x
increased


More earthworms compared to land that has been ploughed

Off-site impacts
downstream siltation
increased
x
decreased

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Climate change

-

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Increased work rate making operations quicker
  • Better trafficability
  • Less at risk of weather
  • Earlier drilling. It is a systems approach - minimum tillage combined with early drilling and low seed rates
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Increased work rate

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Better planning
  • Improved soil organic matter
  • (Possible) soil structure improvements
  • Improved soil ecology and other wildlife benefits
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Dependent on dry weather Co-operation with other farmers or larger acreage
  • Machinery more complex and expensive A combination of crop rotation, pesticides and stale seedbeds
  • Increasing grass weed populations Does not necessarily mean spending money eg utilising old equipment on farm like subsoilers. However, need the right attitude
  • Need to be experimental Accept advice for varying sources, talk to different people
  • Advice can be fragmented/ confusing
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Technological knowledge of farmer Training and education, dissemination
  • Initial high capital investment Extended finance
  • Possible increasing weed populations More diverse management options - cultural and chemical
  • Need to expand acreage to cover capital costs More diverse crop rotation but perhaps this is insufficient to retain economic viability

References

Compiler
  • Ceris A. Jones
Editors
Reviewer
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Feb. 24, 2011
Last update: Aug. 11, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • SOWAP project: www.sowap.org
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International