Higher yields, fewer inputs | Value could be $1,000 per acre more
MINOT, N.D. — It’s a given in the real estate business that property next to the ocean is worth significantly more than property adjacent to a cement factory.
In the agriculture business, it’s also a given that “good” land is worth more than “poor” land.
With that principle in mind, Jim Halford, a producer and businessperson from Indian Head, Sask., says cropland where no till has been practiced for two decades or longer is superior to other agricultural land.
Therefore, according to his calculations, long-term no-till land should be worth $1,000 per acre more than farmland that doesn’t have the same history of zero tillage.
Read Also
Canada’s plant hardiness zones receive update
The latest update to Canada’s plant hardiness zones and plant hardiness maps was released this summer.
Halford told the annual Manitoba North Dakota Zero Tillage Farmers Association annual workshop in Minot in early January that long-term no-till land produces higher yields and requires fewer inputs compared to short-term no-till land. Consequently, it should be worth more.
However, he also said he hasn’t heard anecdotal evidence of farmers paying a premium for this type of land.
“I don’t know when this is going to start happening in the real world of land sales,” said Halford, founder of Vale Farms Ltd., an agricultural equipment company that manufactured the Conserva Pak Air Hoe Drill before John Deere bought the technology in 2007.
Guy Lafond of Agriculture Canada’s research centre at Indian Head has conducted trials on Halford’s farm since 2002, comparing land that has been no till since 1978 to land where no till began in 2001.
Lafond grew a two-crop rotation of canola and spring wheat at both sites and varied the rate of nitrogen applied on the plots.
Data from 2002-09 has led Lafond to determine that wheat and canola yields were substantially higher in long-term no-till plots for all levels of applied nitrogen.
For example, long-term no-till wheat yielded 50.3 bu. per acre with 54 lb. per acre of nitrogen while short-term no-till wheat yielded 39 bu. per acre.
At the same nitrogen rate, long-term no-till canola produced 27.1 bu. per acre while the short-term plots yielded 20.8 bu. per acre.
Lafond attributed the yield difference to more organic carbon and increased nitrogen cycling in the long-term no-till field.
“These results imply that LTNT (long-term no-till) soils provide more N to support crop growth during the growing season,” he noted in a paper summarizing the research.
Halford said it’s obvious that the long-term no-till soil on his farm is more capable of mineralizing nitrogen, but it’s difficult for farmers to market mineralization when selling their land because it’s a difficult soil factor to measure.
“It’s not the type of thing you can go out on a piece of land and take a soil sample and necessarily have the answer right there,” said Halford.
“You don’t get that (mineralization) from a soil test…. It’s not available as a conventional soil test.”
Halford said it’s also possible to cut the rate of nutrient application on a long-term no-till field, which provides additional cost savings for producers.
“In our long-term improved soils, we haven’t been using phosphorus on our wheat crops for about the last eight years,” he said.
“I’m not advocating stopping fertilizing, but maybe you don’t need quite as much and maybe you don’t need it every year.”
Although he’s convinced that long-term no-till soil on his farm is more productive and more valuable, Halford also said more studies should be done on other soil types.
“Don Flaten (University of Manitoba soil scientist) has come to our place (and said) this is the greatest site in the world, but it’s only got one problem, it’s only one site,” Halford said.
- at 54 pounds of nitrogen, long-term no-till land produced 11.3 extra bushels of wheat compared to his short-term no-till land. At $5.50 per bu. for wheat, that represents $62.15 more per acre
- at 81 lb. of nitrogen, long-term no-till yielded 3.5 extra bu. of canola. At $8.50 per bu. that equals an additional $29.75 per acre
- Halford saves $8.10 per acre by cutting back phosphorus in the years he grows wheat
- in total, the yield benefits and nutrient savings on his long-term no-till land equals $50 per acre per year
