My recent postings made ME feel better, but no doubt left many of you
protruded at my style. That's the price of this out-of-control technology!
I'm concerned about too much row crops because of sediment delivery. Here
in Wisconsin a majority of farmers practice conservation tillage in all its
forms. Most are at or below "T", tolerable soil loss levels on most farms.
Well, that's what it says on paper anyway. Yet delivery to surface waters
is still very high. We have crop residue, contour strips, water ways,
no-till, etc., etc. In our area, fields on our dairy farms can average 2
acres (hell, we've been practicing site specific farming, of a sorts, for
years--HA!). That's because of all the strips and countors. Makes nice
pictures. And I always marvel that farmers put up with it! Good for them.
We have State Conservation Farmers of the Year who have been doing a good
job since grandad put in strips in 47'. But the sediment delivered to
rivers, lakes, wetlands and streams is still too high. For example, in one
175 sq. mi. (453 sq. km) watershed the estimated delivery from cropland
alone (no urban or other rural sources considerd) is over 22,000 tons
(about 20,00 metric tons) each year. This is how most of the phosphorus
and bad chemicals get in to the water.
So, no-till and conservation tillage have done wonders for soil erosion
control doubt about it. Is it good enough in the long run (sustainable)?
This is where my remarks about asking the right questions came from and the
concerns about looking at whole systems (the cattle back to Iowa thing,
rotational grazing, comunities, etc).
There now, that was more coherent, eh?
Regards,
Karl Hakanson
Natural Resources Educator
Univ. of Wisc.-Coop. Extension
Baraboo, Wisconsin-USA
tel: 608.355.3258
karl.hakanson@ces.uwex.edu
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".