1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Interactive Soil Quality assessment in Europe and China for Agricultural productivity and Environmental Resilience (EU-iSQAPER)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Department for Agronomy, University of Ljubljana - Slovenia

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Conservation tillage with incorporated mulched plant residues (mulch-till) of harvested crop or a green manure that are part of the rotation). Crop residues are partially incorporated/mixed in topsoil layer (down to 10 cm) using a disc harrow, chisel plough, sweeps, field cultivators, that leave more than 30% of the soil surface covered with crop residue. Technology contributes to less soil disturbance, increase of soil organic matter, better soil structure and better water holding capacity of soils.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

1. The technology of conservational tillage with incorporated mulched plant residues (mulch-till) is applied in flatlands around the Municipality of Vrhnika with an average altitude of 290 m.a.s.l. Average annual precipitation is 1400 mm. The area is characterized with often stormy precipitation events and occasional summer droughts. A farmer applies this technology on various soil types from silty loam to silty clay Gleysol to organic Histosol soils (peat). Soils in the area are generally moderately deep to deep with medium soil organic matter (Gleysol) of 3-7% or with a high share of organic matter (Histosol) of >20% (Ljubljana moors). The area has good availability of surface water and groundwater of good drinking quality. Gleysol areas are drained (drainage systems) to prevent floods to enable cultivation. Histosol areas are drained (open-channel drainage systems) to enable arable crop production. However, due to high groundwater and many surface water sources, certain areas are regularly flooded during flood events mostly in late autumn, winter and spring. Salinity is not a problem due to high precipitation and leaching. Farmer practices rotational agriculture. Less than 5% of income coming from off-farm activities. The examined farm household has an average wealth and is fully mechanized/motorized. the farm has good access to services and infrastructure. The examined farm is medium in scale with land partly owned by the land user and partly leased from other private owners.The general biodiversity of the area is medium on Gleysols to high on Histosol where nature protection Landscape Park of Ljubljansko Barje (The Ljubljana Moors Landscape Park) is located.

Part of the farmers land parcels is located inside boundaries of Krajinski park Ljubljansko barje /Ljubljana Moor Landscape park. Park takes a lot of actions to secure peat soils. This almost 16,000 hectares large lowland marshy plain is marked by an interminable mosaic of grasslands, broadleaf woodlands, fields, ditches and hedges.

The farmer decided to abandon conventional ploughing technology and to start with conservational tillage technology when he noticed that the organic layer of peat soils in these areas started to become thinner. Farmer introduced this technology to preserve peat soils of Ljubljana Moors on his parcels in 2015. With ploughing, peat was mixed and decomposing - mineralise. In 18th-century peat layers of up to 2m depth were exploited for the same use as firewood. Only shallow layers of peat soil (up to 1 m) are still covering agricultural areas. As peat is a source of fertility farmers are seeking ways of preserving it. Farmer Anton Mrzlikar took a lead and started with conservational tillage with incorporated mulched plant residues (mulch-till).

Video https://vimeo.com/97415985 presents the effects of conservational tillage with incorporated mulched plant residues (mulch-till) on soil stability. This is a simulation of abundant summer rain and its impact on the tilled soils in terms of water infiltration capacity and erodibility. The result of this simulation is presented very clearly. It shows the difference between long-term conventional versus conservation tillage (mulch-till). Conventional tillage ploughs the top 25-28 cm of the soil at least once or twice a year. The soil is inverted, its structure breaks down and the surface is left bare. The first raindrops break the structural aggregates causing soil surface siltation and blockage of the soil pores. Thus vertical water flow is blocked and redirected as surface runoff, causing distinct erosion. If fertilizers and pesticides are used, the water flow will transport them, along with the soil particles, to surface waters where they cause pollution or surface ponding on the fields. This leads to an uneven distribution of substances across the field surface.
In conservation tillage (mulch-till), a shallow, 10 cm layer of topsoil is mixed with organic residues which are thus retained near and on the surface. In this way, soil structure is reinforced with good soil water infiltration and absorption. Despite heavy rainfall, the soils do not show any signs of erosion. There is no surface flow. Water drains into the soil vertical flow where it is available to the plants.

2. The farmer usees of 4-row-disk harrow tillage machinery (vario-disc) on arable fields for all crop types. When cultivating fields he crosses fields 1 - 2 times (depends on soil moisture). Every few years he uses chisels to break and shatters (aerate) the soils (depends on crop type - cereals and drought years). After main/first crop he seeds various cover crops (if fodder is needed they harvested it otherwise is used for green manure). He uses manure 30-40 t/ha. He applies typical dairy cow farm rotation (cereals/maize/soya/grass-clover mix). Cover crops are classified as rapes, cereals, oats, grass-clover, grass.

3. The main function is an increase of organic matter, retain water, increase soil biodiversity, stabilise soil structure in the soils and reduce water erosion, as well as reduce energy consumption and costs. This leads to better (1) productivity due to nutrients slow-release, (2) better water holding capacity and (3) decreased soil compaction threat. The technology was introduced to prevent decomposition of organic matter on Ljubljana moor peat soils.

4. Major inputs needed to establish is to change machinery and to gain new knowledge and experiences. They had to buy 4-row disc harrows, chisels plough and new seeders (maize). Seeding machines for cereals and oilseed rape are hired from other farmers. It is important that soils are covered all year round. Soils must be dry when cultivated.

5. The benefits are (1) increase in soil organic matter, (2) increase soil water holding capacity, (3) to maintain soil productivity, (4) increase in yields quantity and quality, (5) reduce energy consumption, (6) reduce workload - 3-4 times less time used for cultivation, (7) reduce costs.

6. Land users like (1) reduced workload and energy consumption, (2) positive impact on soil fertility and stability, (3) preserves organic matter - decrease peat soils decomposition, (4) as soils need to be covered all the time they produce more feed for cows, (5) smooths surface fields, (6) with disc harrow is easy to till soils even when residues are present on fields, (7) less soil compaction
Land users dislike: (1) investment cost for new machinery are high, (2) time to change in doing things and practice, (3) on clay soils (Gleysol) surface ponding is occurring, (4) soils need to be drier for tilling in comparison to ploughing.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.4 Videos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2015

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Farmer introduced this technology to preserve peat soils of Ljubljana Moors on his parcels in 2015. With ploughing, peat was mixed and decomposing - mineralise. In 18th-century peat layers of up to 2m depth were exploited for the same use as firewood. Only shallow layers of peat soil (up to 1 m) are still covering agricultural areas. As peat is a source of fertility farmers are seeking ways of preserving it. Farmer Anton Mrzlikar took a lead and started with mulch-till.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• No (Continue with question 3.4)

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• minimal soil disturbance

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

It is impossible to prevent degradation in the form of peat soil mineralisation in agricultural soils.

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

EUR

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.9

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Preparation of fields: Leveling depressions, reconstruction of drainage channels, using chisels to loose, break and aerate soil in deeper layers	two year before implemenation, dry soil.
2.	Purchase of 4-row disc harrow	1st year
3.	Purchase of seeder for maize	1st year
4.	Purchase of seeder for cover crops	1st year
5.	Hire seeder for cereals (wheat, barley)	1st year
6.	Home made chisel plow for loosening the soil	2nd year
7.	Purchase of spraying machine	3rd year
8.	Purchase of GPS navigation system	3rd year

Comments:

The agricultural technology activities are listed in chronological order. Rotation cycle takes 3 years

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Equipment	chisel plow material (home made)	EUR/piece	1.0	6500.0	6500.0	100.0
Equipment	seeder fo cover crops	EUR/piece	1.0	2500.0	2500.0	50.0
Equipment	seeder for maize	EUR/piece	1.0	7500.0	7500.0	50.0
Equipment	4-row disk harrow	EUR/piece	1.0	23000.0	23000.0	50.0
Equipment	sprayer	EUR/piece	1.0	12.5	12.5	25.0
Equipment	GPS navigation	EUR/piece	1.0	2500.0	2500.0	100.0
Equipment	hire seeder for cereals	EUR/ha	15.0	50.0	750.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					42762.5
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					47513.89

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

50% - Agency for agricultural payments (EU funds); 25% - sharred among farmers

Comments:

Cost for hiring seeder is calculated for 15ha as cereals cover 15ha of arable land.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Maintenance of 4-disc harrow	6 time per year, before or after use of equipment
2.	Maintenance of Spayer	before use nozzels check, after use cleaning
3.	Maintenance of seeder for maize	before and after use
4.	Maintenance of seeder for cover crops	before and after use

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Maintenance of 4-disc harrow	hour	6.0	6.25	37.5	100.0
Labour	Maintenance of Spayer	hour	6.0	6.25	37.5	100.0
Labour	Maintenance of seeder for maize	hour	4.0	6.25	25.0	100.0
Labour	Maintenance of seeder for cover crops	hour	1.0	6.25	6.25	100.0
Equipment	Lubricant cartridge for4-disc harrow	cartridge	18.0	5.0	90.0	100.0
Equipment	Nozzels for Spayer	nozzel	20.0	4.0	80.0	100.0
Equipment	Lubricant cartridge for seeder for maize	cartridge	4.0	5.0	20.0	100.0
Equipment	Lubricant cartridge for seeder for cover crops	cartridge	1.0	5.0	5.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					301.25
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					334.72

Comments:

There is a big difference between conventional and conservation tillage in time spend cultivating fields.
Farmer estimates reduction in workload (no ploughing) for 3-4 times in comparison to the conventional ploughing system.
Farmer points out an increase in green mass yield (clover, grass) due to cover crops which can be used as feed for livestock or green manure. He said that the most important part of this conservational system (mulch-till) is to prevent weeds to germinate, and that's why soil needs to be covered at all times.
He also states that top and subsoil layers are loose.
He states that he still uses the same amount of plant protection products.
The use of herbicides and fertilisers is at the same range as before the shift in practice, but he expects improvements in the future when he will further enhance knowledge on crop types, rotation and cover crops.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The starting cost - The type of machinery is needed that has to be robust and heavy to much-till and seed into the soil.
The machinery must be in use to return a profit. Working hours are reduced now (no ploughing). Machine operators with more competences can reduce costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Organic matter on Gleysol is around 6% and on Histosol (peatland) more than 30%. Bellow the peatland is clay (called "polžarica", or "snail clay")

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

On Ljubljana moor, seasonal floods are occurring regularly due to the high water table.

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

This true especially for the Ljubljana moor.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• leased
• individual

Water use rights:

• individual

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Comments:

2/3 of land is hired from The Farmland and Forest Fund of the Republic of Slovenia

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well
seasonal temperature	summer	increase	well
annual rainfall			well
seasonal rainfall	spring	increase	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	well
drought	well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

Comments:

Benefits are on short term slightly negative due to investment costs, but in the long term they are positive - they pay off.
Maintenance benefits are positive for short as well as on long-term returns as less machinery and less land management activities is needed.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

Only one farmer in the area that uses this technology. On the map you can observe his fields. In the last year many of his collegues observed advantages of this technology and hires his machinery as agriculture service of tillage. In majority of times before cover crops seeding.

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Reduction of workload (no ploughing, less time spent on the field)
Change in farmers mindset is longlasting; they are forced to gain new knowledge on technology impact on soil condition With more knowledge and better handling of technology, the cost of maintenance and time spent in the field can reduce significantly.
Increase in green mass yield (clover, grass) - it can be used as feed for livestock or green manure. Soil covered all year round + residues impact increase in soil organic matter, soil water content, biological activity, soil structure, less soil compaction.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Cost and time reductions are substantial - 3-4 times less in comparsio to conventional - ploughing.
Farmers became aware of the importance of conservation soil management and its impact on soil properties and finally on the process of production-chain (soil-feed-milk). With proper shaping of knowledge (advising, education) - Conservational tillage has the potential to develop into the direction of organic farming.
Soil structure and fertility improve

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
On heavy soils (Glaysoils) surface ponding can occur if the farmer is not experienced with using technology.	Observe weather regularly and follow meteorological forecasts. Try to avoid wet periods.
Weed may be a problem in the warmer part of the year, mainly after cereals are harvested.	They use herbicide and adapt or improve crop types in rotation.
Peatland on Ljubljana moor. There are small parcels and soil in springtime is wet prohibiting to cultivate at any time (high water table).	Observe weather regularly and follow meteorological forecasts. They have to observe soil water content conditions periodically at peatland parcels.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Farmers still need to use herbicides as weeds are a problem especially in the early stage of crop growing (narrow-leaf) and in the last stage when crops go into senescence and light gets to the ground (broad-leaf).	As this is a conventional type of farm, they use herbicides. However, with the promotion of organic agriculture, the expansion of vegetable production, and innovations in GPS and sensors technology hoeing/weeding machines/equipment is getting popular. This problem is even more problematic in light/alluvial soils.
Surface ponding on heavy soils is a problem in case of longlasting rain periods in spring, which are due to climate change more often in the described area.	It is crucial to use chisel plow in this soils to break soil layers deeper and provide drainage potential of this soils. In light alluvial soils, this problem is not observed.
When a farmer in under Slovenian agricultural conditions decides to change from conventional to conservation tillage, it has to change all machinery.	Farmers need to get as much as possible information on technology. Farmers have to make a business plan. EU funds can help with subsidy payments for investments on the farm (approx. 50-60%).

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

OHRANITVENA OBDELAVA TAL –STANJE V SLOVENIJI

URL:

http://www.digitalna-knjiznica.bf.uni-lj.si/du1_ograjsek_simon.pdf

Title/ description:

Izzivi uvajanja konzervirajoče (ohranitvene) obdelave tal

URL:

http://www.kmetzav-mb.si/Lombergar_18/Lomb_5_2_18.pdf

Title/ description:

NOVE TEHNOLOGIJE IN SODOBNI TRENDI OBDELOVANJA TAL

URL:

http://www.kgzs-ms.si/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/STAJNKO_NOVE-TEHNOLOGIJE.pdf

Title/ description:

Ohranitvena obdelava : primerjava lastnosti mehansko obdelanih in neobdelanih prsti

URL:

https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-LTCNTC4J

Title/ description:

SZOORT - Slovensko združenje za ohranitveno obdelavo in rodovitnost tal

URL:

http://www.szoort.si/

Title/ description:

Ohranitveni način obdelave tal

URL:

https://www.program-podezelja.si/sl/247-eup/izmenjevalnik-idej/seznam-izzivov/759-ohranitveni-obdelave-tal