Rice Farming

Back when most rice producers still had their reservations about no-till, Steve Prather of Leland, Miss., decided to put it to the test.

But before he plunged straight into the relatively unproven planting practice, he wanted to make sure it really could reduce fuel, machinery and labor costs while helping prevent erosion.

After gathering as many facts and suggestions as he could, Prather started no-tilling without a “fancy” or expensive no-till drill, which could have run him anywhere from $20,000 to $35,000, he says.

The first year Prather used his regular grain drill. The next year, he removed its rubber closing wheels and switched to steel closing wheels. By the third year, he traded the old grain drill for a more suitable one. By then he was a believer—and has remained so for the past 10 years.

“It’s cheaper and just more efficient,” he says. “It doesn’t take nearly as much equipment, doesn’t take as much money—less fuel, less labor.”

Although Prather says it’s not practical to no-till his whole farm, he no-tilled all 530 of his rice acres last year. He estimates saving $30 or more per acre on no-till fields compared to those he tills conventionally.

Prather does have to spend initially on burndown herbicides since he’s no longer cultivating for weeds on his no-till land. But he says he uses the same chemical rates he would in conventional tillage.

This usually consists of a Roundup/2,4-D tankmix or an initial 2,4-D application followed by Roundup as needed. Barnyardgrass often becomes problematic later in the season, so he uses Stam or Facet for that.
“There are some costs you’re swapping out,” says Pat Bollich, an agronomist at Louisiana State University’s AgCenter. “Even though you reduce the amount of tillage, some of (the costs) are going to be picked back up in herbicides with your initial burndown treatment. You need to know what weeds you have out there and what type of chemicals will control them prior to planting.”

No-till depends on weather, location
While Prather uses no-till consistently, many other rice farmers shift from year to year.

No-till rice plantings in Mississippi dipped 29 percent between 2000-02, according to a recent National Crop Residue Management survey by the Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC) in West Lafayette, Ind. The survey also indicates a 49 percent drop in Arkansas and an 81 percent drop in Missouri. Texas no-till rice plantings stayed the same and no figures are available for California.

However, Louisiana saw a 20 percent increase during the same period.

“I expect that to continue as people get more comfortable with the system and we continue to develop research results that show no-till is not only profitable but environmentally sound,” Bollich says.

Specific numbers are unavailable for no-till rice acres prior to the 2000 survey. Previously, they were combined with spring-planted small grains, according to Dan Towery, CTIC natural resources specialist. No-till was defined in the surveys as a system in which no more than a third of the soil was disturbed from harvest to planting.

“I think the number of farmers who no-till perhaps has been slowly increasing, but there are extreme fluctuations from year to year depending on weather conditions,” says Merle Anders, rice systems agronomist at the University of Arkansas Rice Research and Extension Center near Stuttgart. Anders has been conducting a study to determine the extent of no-till’s profitability.

The no-till question
Anders’ study shows conventional tillage can be more profitable some years and less profitable in others.

Profitability depends on conditions such as rotation sequences (rice-rice, rice-corn or rice-soybeans), crop stubble management and seeding technique.

“A lot of the people who do no-till are zero-grade and they will basically burn the field and then water seed it,” Anders says. “In the study, we don’t burn fields. We’re dealing with some very large quantities of organic matter, drilling and using different rotations.

“These are some of the most difficult situations, and it is in these situations that we see the best and worst. In the long run, it is our objective to look at the hardest problems and correct them.”

But even in cases where no-till is less profitable in a single year, it will enhance soil productivity in the long run, which means yields can increase after four to 10 years, Anders says.

And greater water retention in soil could help Arkansas producers as aquifers and other natural groundwater sources continue to diminish.

Chandler Mazour, technical market manager for BASF in Research Triangle Park, N.C., says similar academic studies in soybeans also proved no-till did not increase profitability when first introduced.

“But it tremendously increased the flexibility, ease and simplicity of use that has become so increasingly important to producers,” Mazour says. “As their farm size increases, they need flexibility and ease of use so they can cover additional acres.”

Kill two birds with one stone
Aside from the practical benefits no-till affords, such as saving producers many trips over their fields and cutting down on management costs, it could harbor a less obvious benefit.

Tom Riley, a UA Extension specialist in environmental and natural resources in Little Rock, says the 2002 farm bill could reward producers—albeit indirectly—for no-tilling.

Farm bill programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Conservation Security Program (CSP), the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) and the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) all are designed to reward producers for land management conditions that already exist in no-till systems.

“What the programs allow is conservation cost-sharing for specific practices that reduce erosion, reduce sediment loading in streams, protect water quality, benefit wildlife habitats and some other things that no-till rice might lend itself to,” Riley says.

However, that’s not to say farmers would actually receive cost-share funds for no-till rice, he says.

Congress has not finalized funding for the farm bill’s conservation programs. When it does, different states are likely to interpret the rules in different ways.

“Farmers and wildlife enthusiasts can use their local conservation districts to help advocate recognition of no-till’s water quality and wildlife benefits,” Riley says. “That would encourage the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) to include no-till rice as a cost-shared best management practice for both benefits.

“The practice would then become part of the overall management plan, so an EQIP application, for example, would become more competitive.”

Wayne Wiggins, who farms 2,800 acres of rice, soybeans, wheat and corn in Egypt, Ark., doesn’t quibble about no-till expenses. He says “farming ugly” has few real disadvantages if conditions are right.

He hasn’t changed his fertilizer rates. If Wiggins has to flush fields after planting, it’s usually no more than he would do in conventional tillage, he says. Wiggins does use a gibberellic acid seed treatment on semi-dwarf varieties to promote seedling vigor. Because the moister, cooler soils of no-till can encourage fungal seedling diseases, he also uses a fungicidal seed treatment.

Muddy ground during harvest is the only real obstacle Wiggins faces with no-till. Because of ruts created during the 2001 harvest, Wiggins cut his no-till rice acres from 1,100 to 770 in 2002.

“We’re very successful, but each year is different,” he says. “I had very little no-till last year because we rutted the ground up the previous fall. And if you ruin your seedbed (harvesting) in the fall, then it’s hard to no-till in the spring.”

Once the harvesting equipment leaves deep ruts, even the toughest no-till drill will have trouble boring into the soil after they dry.

“On the silt loam soils, you generally need a no-till drill just because of the crusting,” says Rick Norman, UA soil fertility and plant nutrition professor. “A regular drill does not weigh enough to cut through that crust.”

Contact Vicky Boyd at (209) 571-0414 or vlboyd@att.net.

To till or not to till? Producers, experts say no-till saves money when conditions are right
By Lindsay Jones Production editor
Back when most rice producers still had their reservations about no-till, Steve Prather of Leland, Miss., decided to put it to the test. But before he plunged straight into the relatively unproven planting practice, he wanted to make sure it really could reduce fuel, machinery and labor costs while helping prevent erosion. After gathering as many facts and suggestions as he could, Prather started no-tilling without a “fancy” or expensive no-till drill, which could have run him anywhere from $20,000 to $35,000, he says. The first year Prather used his regular grain drill. The next year, he removed its rubber closing wheels and switched to steel closing wheels. By the third year, he traded the old grain drill for a more suitable one. By then he was a believer—and has remained so for the past 10 years. “It’s cheaper and just more efficient,” he says. “It doesn’t take nearly as much equipment, doesn’t take as much money—less fuel, less labor.” Although Prather says it’s not practical to no-till his whole farm, he no-tilled all 530 of his rice acres last year. He estimates saving $30 or more per acre on no-till fields compared to those he tills conventionally. Prather does have to spend initially on burndown herbicides since he’s no longer cultivating for weeds on his no-till land. But he says he uses the same chemical rates he would in conventional tillage. This usually consists of a Roundup/2,4-D tankmix or an initial 2,4-D application followed by Roundup as needed. Barnyardgrass often becomes problematic later in the season, so he uses Stam or Facet for that. “There are some costs you’re swapping out,” says Pat Bollich, an agronomist at Louisiana State University’s AgCenter. “Even though you reduce the amount of tillage, some of (the costs) are going to be picked back up in herbicides with your initial burndown treatment. You need to know what weeds you have out there and what type of chemicals will control them prior to planting.” No-till depends on weather, location While Prather uses no-till consistently, many other rice farmers shift from year to year. No-till rice plantings in Mississippi dipped 29 percent between 2000-02, according to a recent National Crop Residue Management survey by the Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC) in West Lafayette, Ind. The survey also indicates a 49 percent drop in Arkansas and an 81 percent drop in Missouri. Texas no-till rice plantings stayed the same and no figures are available for California. However, Louisiana saw a 20 percent increase during the same period. “I expect that to continue as people get more comfortable with the system and we continue to develop research results that show no-till is not only profitable but environmentally sound,” Bollich says. Specific numbers are unavailable for no-till rice acres prior to the 2000 survey. Previously, they were combined with spring-planted small grains, according to Dan Towery, CTIC natural resources specialist. No-till was defined in the surveys as a system in which no more than a third of the soil was disturbed from harvest to planting. “I think the number of farmers who no-till perhaps has been slowly increasing, but there are extreme fluctuations from year to year depending on weather conditions,” says Merle Anders, rice systems agronomist at the University of Arkansas Rice Research and Extension Center near Stuttgart. Anders has been conducting a study to determine the extent of no-till’s profitability. The no-till question Anders’ study shows conventional tillage can be more profitable some years and less profitable in others. Profitability depends on conditions such as rotation sequences (rice-rice, rice-corn or rice-soybeans), crop stubble management and seeding technique. “A lot of the people who do no-till are zero-grade and they will basically burn the field and then water seed it,” Anders says. “In the study, we don’t burn fields. We’re dealing with some very large quantities of organic matter, drilling and using different rotations. “These are some of the most difficult situations, and it is in these situations that we see the best and worst. In the long run, it is our objective to look at the hardest problems and correct them.” But even in cases where no-till is less profitable in a single year, it will enhance soil productivity in the long run, which means yields can increase after four to 10 years, Anders says. And greater water retention in soil could help Arkansas producers as aquifers and other natural groundwater sources continue to diminish. Chandler Mazour, technical market manager for BASF in Research Triangle Park, N.C., says similar academic studies in soybeans also proved no-till did not increase profitability when first introduced. “But it tremendously increased the flexibility, ease and simplicity of use that has become so increasingly important to producers,” Mazour says. “As their farm size increases, they need flexibility and ease of use so they can cover additional acres.” Kill two birds with one stone Aside from the practical benefits no-till affords, such as saving producers many trips over their fields and cutting down on management costs, it could harbor a less obvious benefit. Tom Riley, a UA Extension specialist in environmental and natural resources in Little Rock, says the 2002 farm bill could reward producers—albeit indirectly—for no-tilling. Farm bill programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Conservation Security Program (CSP), the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) and the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) all are designed to reward producers for land management conditions that already exist in no-till systems. “What the programs allow is conservation cost-sharing for specific practices that reduce erosion, reduce sediment loading in streams, protect water quality, benefit wildlife habitats and some other things that no-till rice might lend itself to,” Riley says. However, that’s not to say farmers would actually receive cost-share funds for no-till rice, he says. Congress has not finalized funding for the farm bill’s conservation programs. When it does, different states are likely to interpret the rules in different ways. “Farmers and wildlife enthusiasts can use their local conservation districts to help advocate recognition of no-till’s water quality and wildlife benefits,” Riley says. “That would encourage the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) to include no-till rice as a cost-shared best management practice for both benefits. “The practice would then become part of the overall management plan, so an EQIP application, for example, would become more competitive.” *Wayne Wiggins, who farms 2,800 acres of rice, soybeans, wheat and corn in Egypt, Ark., doesn’t quibble about no-till expenses. He says “farming ugly” has few real disadvantages if conditions are right. He hasn’t changed his fertilizer rates. If Wiggins has to flush fields after planting, it’s usually no more than he would do in conventional tillage, he says. Wiggins does use a gibberellic acid seed treatment on semi-dwarf varieties to promote seedling vigor. Because the moister, cooler soils of no-till can encourage fungal seedling diseases, he also uses a fungicidal seed treatment. Muddy ground during harvest is the only real obstacle Wiggins faces with no-till. Because of ruts created during the 2001 harvest, Wiggins cut his no-till rice acres from 1,100 to 770 in 2002. “We’re very successful, but each year is different,” he says. “I had very little no-till last year because we rutted the ground up the previous fall. And if you ruin your seedbed (harvesting) in the fall, then it’s hard to no-till in the spring.” Once the harvesting equipment leaves deep ruts, even the toughest no-till drill will have trouble boring into the soil after they dry. “On the silt loam soils, you generally need a no-till drill just because of the crusting,” says Rick Norman, UA soil fertility and plant nutrition professor. “A regular drill does not weigh enough to cut through that crust.” Contact Vicky Boyd at (209) 571-0414 or vlboyd@att.net.*
Return To Top