Onland-Pflug von Hansueli Häberli (Hansueli Häberli)

Bodenschonende Landnutzung mit dem On-Land-Pflug (Switzerland)

Bodenschonende Landnutzung mit dem On-Land-Pflug

Description

Im Biolandbau ist der pfluglose Ackerbau noch immer schwierig. Um seinen Boden vor Verdichtung zu schützen und den Boden zu schonen, kann jedoch ein On-Land-Pflug eingesetzt werden, welcher im Vergleich zum konventionellen Pflug (20-25cm tief) nur 10-15cm tief pflügt.

Schon früh war dem Bauern eine bodenschonende Landnutzung wichtig. Seit den 1980er-Jahren werden die Felder deshalb ohne Herbizideinsatz bestellt. 2005 wurde der Betrieb schliesslich auf einen Biobetrieb umgestellt. Der pfluglose Ackerbau ist dabei noch schwierig. Trotzdem versucht der Bauer den Boden möglichst schonend zu bestellen. Das bedeutet, dass er seit 2002 den Boden nur noch oberflächig mit Scheibenegge, Federzahnegge oder zur Stoppelbereitung nach der Getreideernte mit dem Flügelschargrubber bearbeitet. Die Bearbeitungstiefe liegt dabei bei ca. 8 cm. Trotzdem kann er nicht ganz auf den Pflug verzichten. Der Umbruch der Kunstwiese erfolgt mit dem Onland-Pflug und auch zur Bekämpfung der Drahtwürmer wird dieser eingesetzt.

Purpose of the Technology: Mit dem Einsatz des Onland-Pflugs soll der Boden schonender bearbeitet werden, als mit dem konventionellen Pflug. Zudem wird dieser Onland-Pflug nur noch teilweise eingesetzt. Oft werden Felder auch gegrubbert oder Mulchsaat betrieben. Dies ermöglicht eine nachhaltige Bodenbearbeitung.

Location

Location: Kirchlindach, Bern, Switzerland

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • n.a.

Spread of the Technology:

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction

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 - maize
  • Grazing land

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
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cp: soil pollution
SLM group
  • minimal soil disturbance
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A3: Soil surface treatment, A4: Subsurface 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: n.a.
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
n.a.
Establishment activities
  1. Maschine anschaffen: ausleihen, kaufen, Lohnarbeiter anstellen (Timing/ frequency: None)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (n.a.) Total costs per input (n.a.) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Maschine anschaffen: ausleihen, kaufen, Lohnarbeiter anstellen ha 1.0 18000.0 18000.0 33.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 18'000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 18'000.0
Maintenance activities
  1. Einsatz Onland-Pflug bei Wechsel von Kunstwiese zu Mais (Timing/ frequency: None)

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
Thermal climate class: temperate
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
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Yes
  • No

Occurrence of flooding
  • Yes
  • No
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
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
health

poor
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

poor
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Socio-cultural impacts
community institutions
weakened
strengthened

conflict mitigation
worsened
improved

Improved livelihoods and human well-being
decreased
increased

Ecological impacts
surface runoff
increased
decreased

soil crusting/ sealing
increased
reduced

soil compaction
increased
reduced

Soil structure
decreased
increased

Off-site impacts
buffering/ filtering capacity (by soil, vegetation, wetlands)
reduced
improved

Cost-benefit analysis

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

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

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

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
very well

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?
  • Yes
  • No
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
  • Der Onland-Pflug fördert auch die Betriebsstrategie des Bauern hinsichtlich Humus-Aufbau.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Der Onland-Pflug führt zu einer geringerer Bearbeitungstiefe von maximal 15cm. Damit wird die Bodenstruktur geschont und Verdichtung vermieden.

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Onland-Pflug kann verschieden eingestellt werden. Dabei soll eine möglichst geringe Tiefe beibehalten werden. Dies erfordert technisches Wissen.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Der Anbau von Hackfrüchten ist eine Herausforderung, da er eine gewisse Tiefe benötigt. Die Agrarpolitik sollte auf Bearbeitungstiefen und Erosionsbekämpfung noch mehr Einfluss nehmen. Direktzahlungen sollten mit dem Schutz des Bodens enger zusammenhängen.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome

References

Compiler
  • Deborah Niggli
Editors
Reviewer
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Sept. 8, 2015
Last update: Sept. 5, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International