Rice Farming

Scott and Dean Meins may have caused some growers to shake their head in disbelief when they first started growing furrow-irrigated rice, or row rice, seven or eight years ago.

But now the two brothers, who farm near Stuttgart, Ark., are fielding questions from fellow growers interested in trying the water- and labor-saving practice.

“It will pencil out,” Scott Meins says. “It’s hard to say exactly how it will pencil out, because you’re putting a price on time and labor. But there’s a lot less labor, and you don’t have to put in flood gates or make levees.

“When it comes drain time, you don’t have to pull the gates, so labor is one of the really big factors.”

Conservation potential
The practice has caught the attention of Merle Anders, a systems agronomist at the Rice Research and Extension Center in Stuttgart, Ark.

“These systems, I think, would really fit into some of the NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) issues and certainly the environmental systems,” Anders says. “Closed systems show great water savings, reduction in stream pollution and better standards all the way around.”

But like going no-till, Anders says growers should approach row rice as a new production system and not just one different production practice.

Research conducted in the early 1990s showed that row rice coupled with tail-water return systems used about 30 percent less water than conventional flood-irrigated rice.

Anders also believes the systems may lend themselves to conservation tillage, where farmers could leave the beds intact for three to four years before having to redo the field.

How widespread is row rice?
To determine how widespread row rice production is, University of Arkansas agricultural economist Brad Watkins plans to survey growers in Arkansas. He will be conducting face-to-face interviews with those currently using the system and those who have used it in the past but have quit.

Several studies on row rice were conducted in the early 1990s, but Watkins says they typically looked at only one variety on one specific soil type. And most didn’t compare row rice to flood-irrigated rice.

In addition to looking at the system’s strengths and weaknesses, Watkins wants to determine production costs and compare them to conventional flood rice.

He hopes to find out “why they do it and what are their difficulties to help other farmers who are thinking about getting involved in row rice.” Watkins plans to have preliminary survey results late this year or early 2005.

The information gleaned from the survey could then be used to guide future research, Anders and Watkins say.

“I think we can learn a great deal from those who have used this practice,” Watkins says.

Long-time row-rice supporter
Alvin Holzhauer, who farms in partnership with his wife, Norma, near Gillett, Ark., has experimented with row rice off and on for several years. When rice prices are good, he’ll plant row rice on marginal ground. When prices are low, he foregoes row rice because making a profit with conventionally grown rice on good ground is even a challenge.

This season, he had 18 acres of Cocodrie row rice on sloping, marginal ground and plans to plant 40 acres in 2005.

He irrigated it with collapsible poly tubing, allowing the runoff to go into an adjacent bayou to be reused. Because of timely rains, Holzhauer only had to irrigate the row rice about a half dozen times and figures it used about half the water that his conventionally flooded fields did.

The field yielded 183 bushels per acre at 18.6 percent moisture. Conventionally grown Cocodrie on his first-class ground yielded 210 to 220 bushels per acre.

Nevertheless, Holzhauer says he’s pleased with the row rice, considering some of his fields of CL 161 yielded only about 180 bushels per acre.

“I was tickled pink with that 183,” Holzhauer says of the row rice yield.

This fall, he burned the stubble in the row rice field and immediately planted wheat without any field work. Next spring, he’ll burn the wheat stubble after harvest and plant no-till soybeans.

Because row rice allows him to go no-till as well as conserve water, Holzhauer says the system has a fit under certain conditions.

“I don’t think it will ever take the place of conventional rice on really good ground, but it has its place on less-than-first-class ground,” he says.

Another row-rice convert
Always willing to try new practices, the Meins planted their first furrow-irrigated field of Cypress several years ago on hilly ground with lots of levees that was difficult to irrigate conventionally. Weed and disease control was a challenge.

Since then, new herbicides—Facet, Command and Prowl—have come on the market that help them control grasses and broadleaves, making row rice easier.

Over the years, the brothers have also planted Cocodrie and Bengal. This year, they planted Wells and the medium-grain hybrids, XP-712 and XP-716.

Blast still remains a problem because they don’t maintain a flood, a practice that helps suppress the fungal disease. So fungicide is a given in their row rice.

But Meins says he’s looking forward to 91-1093, a variety that the University of Arkansas is developing with strong blast resistance.

Although they have 220 acres in row rice this year, Meins says they typically plant 80 to 100 acres.

They bed up the fields like they would their corn and soybean fields. They use gated collapsible poly tubing to deliver the water to each furrow.

Not every field on their farm lends itself to row rice, however. Meins says they choose fields for row rice based on whether they can pick up the water at the end of the furrow and pump it to another field.

“It’s more economical if you can claim your water,” Meins says. “In fields where we can pump it back up, you don’t fret as much about running the water down the ditch and it being gone.”

And row rice allows them more flexibility than traditional rice when irrigating other crops.

“We may run the water down the rows in rice for two days, then go to soybeans, then back to the rice,” Meins says. “You can always adjust the water to different crops. With levees, it might be five days or seven or 10 days before we can go to another crop.”

Fertility practices also vary slightly between row rice and conventional rice, although both crops require about the same amount of nitrogen at about the same time, Meins says.

“Every year is an experiment with something like that,” Meins says. “You have a different variety, so you have different amounts of fertilizer.”

Next year, he says they may try Agrotain, a product that helps reduce ammonia volatilization when fertilizer is applied and you can’t flood quickly.

Yields also vary. Some years, the row rice yields 5 percent less than conventionally irrigated rice. During exceptionally hot years, row rice may yield 10 percent less. Other years, yields may be comparable.

Although the two brothers currently prepare conventional and row-rice fields the same, Scott says row rice lends itself to conservation tillage or reduced tillage.

“We’re considering leaving the beds and trying to do more minimum tillage by just refreshing the beds from crop to crop, but we haven’t gotten there yet,” Meins says.

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

Internet Hotlinks

University of Missouri—“Guidelines for Producing Rice Using Furrow Irrigation”
http://muextension.missouri.edu/xplor/agguides/crops/g04361.htm

Mississippi State University—“An Economic Evaluation: Straight Vs. Contour Levee Rice Production Practices [and furrow-irrigated rice] in Mississippi”
http://msucares.com/pubs/bulletins/b1063.htm

Like ducks in a row Furrow-irrigated rice offers conservation, labor-saving advantages
By Vicky Boyd Editor
Scott and Dean Meins may have caused some growers to shake their head in disbelief when they first started growing furrow-irrigated rice, or row rice, seven or eight years ago. But now the two brothers, who farm near Stuttgart, Ark., are fielding questions from fellow growers interested in trying the water- and labor-saving practice. “It will pencil out,” Scott Meins says. “It’s hard to say exactly how it will pencil out, because you’re putting a price on time and labor. But there’s a lot less labor, and you don’t have to put in flood gates or make levees. “When it comes drain time, you don’t have to pull the gates, so labor is one of the really big factors.” Conservation potential The practice has caught the attention of Merle Anders, a systems agronomist at the Rice Research and Extension Center in Stuttgart, Ark. “These systems, I think, would really fit into some of the NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) issues and certainly the environmental systems,” Anders says. “Closed systems show great water savings, reduction in stream pollution and better standards all the way around.” But like going no-till, Anders says growers should approach row rice as a new production system and not just one different production practice. Research conducted in the early 1990s showed that row rice coupled with tail-water return systems used about 30 percent less water than conventional flood-irrigated rice. Anders also believes the systems may lend themselves to conservation tillage, where farmers could leave the beds intact for three to four years before having to redo the field. How widespread is row rice? To determine how widespread row rice production is, University of Arkansas agricultural economist Brad Watkins plans to survey growers in Arkansas. He will be conducting face-to-face interviews with those currently using the system and those who have used it in the past but have quit. Several studies on row rice were conducted in the early 1990s, but Watkins says they typically looked at only one variety on one specific soil type. And most didn’t compare row rice to flood-irrigated rice. In addition to looking at the system’s strengths and weaknesses, Watkins wants to determine production costs and compare them to conventional flood rice. He hopes to find out “why they do it and what are their difficulties to help other farmers who are thinking about getting involved in row rice.” Watkins plans to have preliminary survey results late this year or early 2005. The information gleaned from the survey could then be used to guide future research, Anders and Watkins say. “I think we can learn a great deal from those who have used this practice,” Watkins says. Long-time row-rice supporter Alvin Holzhauer, who farms in partnership with his wife, Norma, near Gillett, Ark., has experimented with row rice off and on for several years. When rice prices are good, he’ll plant row rice on marginal ground. When prices are low, he foregoes row rice because making a profit with conventionally grown rice on good ground is even a challenge. This season, he had 18 acres of Cocodrie row rice on sloping, marginal ground and plans to plant 40 acres in 2005. He irrigated it with collapsible poly tubing, allowing the runoff to go into an adjacent bayou to be reused. Because of timely rains, Holzhauer only had to irrigate the row rice about a half dozen times and figures it used about half the water that his conventionally flooded fields did. The field yielded 183 bushels per acre at 18.6 percent moisture. Conventionally grown Cocodrie on his first-class ground yielded 210 to 220 bushels per acre. Nevertheless, Holzhauer says he’s pleased with the row rice, considering some of his fields of CL 161 yielded only about 180 bushels per acre. “I was tickled pink with that 183,” Holzhauer says of the row rice yield. This fall, he burned the stubble in the row rice field and immediately planted wheat without any field work. Next spring, he’ll burn the wheat stubble after harvest and plant no-till soybeans. Because row rice allows him to go no-till as well as conserve water, Holzhauer says the system has a fit under certain conditions. “I don’t think it will ever take the place of conventional rice on really good ground, but it has its place on less-than-first-class ground,” he says. Another row-rice convert Always willing to try new practices, the Meins planted their first furrow-irrigated field of Cypress several years ago on hilly ground with lots of levees that was difficult to irrigate conventionally. Weed and disease control was a challenge. Since then, new herbicides—Facet, Command and Prowl—have come on the market that help them control grasses and broadleaves, making row rice easier. Over the years, the brothers have also planted Cocodrie and Bengal. This year, they planted Wells and the medium-grain hybrids, XP-712 and XP-716. Blast still remains a problem because they don’t maintain a flood, a practice that helps suppress the fungal disease. So fungicide is a given in their row rice. But Meins says he’s looking forward to 91-1093, a variety that the University of Arkansas is developing with strong blast resistance. Although they have 220 acres in row rice this year, Meins says they typically plant 80 to 100 acres. They bed up the fields like they would their corn and soybean fields. They use gated collapsible poly tubing to deliver the water to each furrow. Not every field on their farm lends itself to row rice, however. Meins says they choose fields for row rice based on whether they can pick up the water at the end of the furrow and pump it to another field. “It’s more economical if you can claim your water,” Meins says. “In fields where we can pump it back up, you don’t fret as much about running the water down the ditch and it being gone.” And row rice allows them more flexibility than traditional rice when irrigating other crops. “We may run the water down the rows in rice for two days, then go to soybeans, then back to the rice,” Meins says. “You can always adjust the water to different crops. With levees, it might be five days or seven or 10 days before we can go to another crop.” Fertility practices also vary slightly between row rice and conventional rice, although both crops require about the same amount of nitrogen at about the same time, Meins says. “Every year is an experiment with something like that,” Meins says. “You have a different variety, so you have different amounts of fertilizer.” Next year, he says they may try Agrotain, a product that helps reduce ammonia volatilization when fertilizer is applied and you can’t flood quickly. Yields also vary. Some years, the row rice yields 5 percent less than conventionally irrigated rice. During exceptionally hot years, row rice may yield 10 percent less. Other years, yields may be comparable. Although the two brothers currently prepare conventional and row-rice fields the same, Scott says row rice lends itself to conservation tillage or reduced tillage. “We’re considering leaving the beds and trying to do more minimum tillage by just refreshing the beds from crop to crop, but we haven’t gotten there yet,” Meins says. Contact Vicky Boyd at (209) 571-0414 or vlboyd@att.net. Internet Hotlinks University of Missouri—“Guidelines for Producing Rice Using Furrow Irrigation” http://muextension.missouri.edu/xplor/agguides/crops/g04361.htm Mississippi State University—“An Economic Evaluation: Straight Vs. Contour Levee Rice Production Practices [and furrow-irrigated rice] in Mississippi” http://msucares.com/pubs/bulletins/b1063.htm
Return To Top