Sustainable Agriculture Demonstration Award  Annual Report 2004

Project Title:  Small Scale Conservation Tillage:  Strip-till of select annuals intercropped with a continuous cover to improve soil health.

Producer/Project Leader:  Stanley J. Hildebrand and Chadwick G. Knaepp

Address:  Sandhill Farm

                Rt 1 Box 155

                Rutledge MO 63563

Phone Number:  660-883-5543

E?]mail:  stan@sandhillfarm.org

*Please note: Questions #1 - 3 are taken from your original application.  If there are any changes to these items, please explain below.  If there are no changes, you may go on to question #4.

1.   Describe the problem you addressed and why this problem is important to your farm and to other producers in your area.

2.   What are the objectives of this project?

3.   Describe your farm operation.

Send completed report and final budget by mail or e?]mail to both addresses below.  Use the following subject line for e-mail reports:  Demo Awd Final Report.  For an e-mail version of the final report form, please visit the Sustainable Agriculture website at: http://agebb.missouri/edu/sustain

Joan Benjamin                                                                           Dr. Sandy Rikoon

Missouri Department of Agriculture                                             c/o Sharon Naylor

Sustainable Agriculture Program                                                   Rural Sociology                   

P.O. Box 630, 1616 Missouri Blvd.                                        Room 204 Gentry Hall, UMC

Jefferson City, MO  65102                                                      Columbia, MO  65211

E?]mail: Joan.Benjamin@mda.mo.gov                                              E-mail: RikoonSandy@missouri.edu

If you have questions, please call Joan Benjamin at: (573) 522?]8616

4.   Describe in detail how you used this grant to address the problem (use additional pages if necessary). Please include:

     A.   Work activities and timetable (what steps did you take and when?)

     B.   Results (what did you accomplish?)

     C.   What did you learn from your project?

• What would you do differently if you were going to do your project again?

Note: Chad Knepp left Sandhill Farm in the spring of 2003 to live at Dancing Rabbit ecovillage – about 3 miles from Sandhill. He was still involved with the project – but not as fully.

Chad has been doing related experiments with low tillage agriculture in the form of sheet mulching. You can find out more at:  http://galatea.org/slash_and _berm.html

1. See 2002 and 2003 reports for those years.

In 2004 we continued the strip cropping (where we till 12’ strips on hillsides and plant 4 rows of row crop) mentioned in the last two reports. We did not do any strip-tilling (tilling 10-15” strips in a cover crop) – as described in the original grant proposal. This was due to the poor results we had last year – see 2003 report. Last year’s report indicated that we would continue on a very small scale – but a tight schedule during planting led us to skip the more labor intensive strip-tilling (due to having to modify the tiller every time we till strips). (In retrospect, I feel we made a good choice because we had an unseasonably early frost which could easily have destroyed the crop – as in did in 2003).

      In the accounting, we did not include any of our activities in 2004 – except a trip to the Small Farm Conference, where Stan discussed the project informally with various folks and the field day at Sandhill, which included several field tours and a discussion of the project.

1. 1) 2004. We did not do any soil analysis, moisture or compaction testing in 2004 – since we did not do any strip-tilling.

 As in 2003, we planted soybeans in the 12’ strips on hillsides. The soybeans did very well as this was an excellent year for soybeans in this part of the country. We noted more deer damage in the soybeans in strips than in the larger fields – presumably because the deer preferred to walk on sod and munch on the beans to walking in the larger fields. The outside rows of soybeans (the ones closest to grass strips) sustained a lot more damage than the average.

2) The Project. We collected soil analysis data and soil compaction readings. There were no significant differences between the test (strip-till) and the control.

1. 1. We demonstrated that it is possible to raise a good crop using strip-tilling; we did less tillage overall in those fields. The down side was that it actually took more labor because we had to modify the tiller whenever changing from strip-tilling to our normal practices.

2. We learned that white clovers worked well for this project in the sense that they did not grow fast enough to shade the crop. The clover dying in the field (see 2003 report) still remains a mystery.

3. We learned/realized a design flaw in the project:  we proposed to compare effect of strip-tilling on soil fertility and structure, and compaction. Because of our established pattern of crop rotation, the experimental fields were different every year. Having different practices for one year only was not enough time to demonstrate any differences in the variables mentioned above – see 2002 report.

4. Weed control in strip-tilling was our major challenge – we had not anticipated this at all. The basic problem was that the tiller threw too much dirt out of the tilled strips, which resulted in the dirt level in the rows being lower than the rest of the field thus rendering our rotary hoe ineffective (our rotary hoe is a solid axis type). It is possible that a different tiller and/or a different rotary would have been more effective.

5. From an intuitive and visual perspective:  strip-tilling still has a lot of appeal to us. There was definitely less soil erosion and it appears soil fertility and structure would be enhanced. We are encouraged enough by our experience so that we plan to do more experimenting in the future.

6. The biggest surprise was how well strip cropping worked for us – see 2002 & 03 reports. By strip cropping we refer to tilling 12’ swaths on the contour on hillsides and then planting 4 rows of crop. This was not a part of the grant proposal, but was facilitated by having the tiller available. Working these strips with the tiller kept the soil in place much better than other tillage tools such as the disc or plow. This appears rather ironic since a major problem in strip-tilling was that the tiller spread dirt out of the row (the difference being that the tiller spreads dirt over a space of inches – which was critical for the strip-tilling but not the strip cropping).

Item #6 is having the most lasting impact on our farm operation; it is possible that we may refine the original strip-tilling idea so that it will work for us. The strip cropping has already become an integral part of our farming practices. This is also the aspect that had most appeal to other farmers who came to our field day and who I talked to at the Small Farm conference.

1. 1. The trial would be done on a few selected fields and due to our crop rotation, it would necessitate a longer time period. This would allow for the collection of data (soil fertility, structure, compaction, etc) that would compare strip-tilling to our normal practices.

2. When researching what type/brand of tiller to purchase, we would research to see if any keep more of the dirt in the row and/or have the tiller modified to minimize the problem.

3. Design the project to assess the impact of strip cropping rather than strip-tilling.

5. How did you share information from your project with other producers?

(Please include the number of people who attended field days or presentations.)

1. Presented the findings in progress at the Farmer’s Forum at the Small Farm Conference in 2003.
2. Gave at least 3 informal tours to folks who showed up unannounced and indicated interest.
3. Field Day/demonstration:  these were in conjunction with our annual sorghum festival – the last Saturday in September. We had field trips on wagons during the festival that included visual examination and a discussion of the project as well as our entire farm operation.

Attendance at our festival/field days 2002-04 was 200-300.

      D. Posting the results on our website. The initial grant application and the 2002 report are on our website at present. The 2003 report and the final report are scheduled to be posted soon.

6.   Final Budget instructions: List how grant funds were used in the second column.  List your contributions to the project in the third column – include donations, use of your own funds, and in?]kind contributions of labor, facilities, supplies, etc.  Calculate your own contributions according to what they would have cost if you had to hire the work out.  For example: calculate your labor at $/hour, calculate your land costs at $/acre it would cost you to rent the land, calculate use of your own equipment at $/acre or $/hour it would cost to rent the equipment.

Please note:

• Annual Expenses: Grant funds may be used to pay 100% of annual expenses such as travel, yearly operating expenses and supplies, and lease of land and equipment.
• Durable Assets: Grant funds may be used to pay for up to 50% of durable assets, such as fencing, equipment, water systems, computer programs.
•  Labor: Grant funds may be used to pay for up to 50% of labor. (This rule applies to grants received in the year 2000 or later.  Grants received in 1995 - 1999 may use grant funds to pay for 100% of labor.)
• Outreach: Grant funds may be used to pay for 100% of Outreach costs, which include expenses for field days, workshops, reports, publicity, refreshments, etc.
• Any unspent grant funds must be returned.

LABOR EXPENSES

Subtotal                                             $_915.00__________                        $ 915.00___________

SUPPLIES, TRAVEL, EQUIPMENT, AND OTHER EXPENSES

Subtotal from above items                          $_2186.76_________            $ 775.38 __________

Subtotal of labor expenses                                $_  915.00_______                      $ 915.00_________

Total Grant Funds Used                            $ 3101.76_________                           

Total Contributions                                                                                              $1690,38_________