FY05 - NDSU Extension Service
PROGRAM #203 - CROPPING SYSTEMS IN THE 21ST CENTURY


Program Planning Team: Duane Berglund (co-chair), Dave Franzen (co-chair), Roger Ashley, Les Backer, Dwain Barondeau, Ron Beneda, Gerald Bergman, Carl Bradley, Gary Brewer, Keith Brown, Brad Brummond, Pat Carpentier, Pat Carr, Alan Dexter, Greg Endres, Eric Eriksmoen, Jay Fisher, Dan Folske, Clint Gienger, Phillip Glogoza, Terry Gregoire, ElRoy Haadem, Mike Hanson, Ken Hellevang, Dale Herman, Chet Hill, Bill Hodous, Vern Hofman, Brian Jenks, Mohamed Khan, Jan Knodel, Scott Knoke, John Kringler, Mike Liane, Terry Lykken, George Maher, Rich Maine, Kent McKay, Marcia McMullen, Randy Mehlhoff, Randy Melaas, Dwain Meyer, Ken Nichols, Tom Olson, Duane Preston, Rudy Radke, Joel Ransom, Jimmie Richardson, Mike Rose, Steve Sagaser, Blaine Schatz, Tom Scherer, Al Schneiter, Dale Siebert, Ron Smith, Brian Sorenson, John Swenson, Andrew Thostenson, Al Ulmer, LoAyne Voigt, Todd Weinmann and Richard Zollinger

Overall Situation

Low crop prices, variable weather conditions, international trade fluctuations and increased environmental concerns face all producers in North Dakota. Farmers have been experiencing disappointing exports, low commodity prices, production problems from pests and diseases, and losses due to excessive rainfall/flooding in some areas and excessive drought in other areas. The low prices can be traced to the world recession and the overproduction of certain crops.

In the short term, North Dakota farmers will likely be turning even more intensely to what has been, in the past, the one tried-and-true formula for maintaining profitability by reducing the costs of production. Which costs or inputs to reduce is the big question? For those farms that are the hardest pressed during the current period of slack demand from abroad, small efficiencies can mean the difference between survival and failure. Farm businesses that are not so hard pressed can continue to forge ahead with modernizations that will leave them better positioned once demand begins to pick up. These changes not only will affect farm profitability over the near term but also will affect supply conditions over the longer term.

Cash receipts from crops in the most recent report accounted for 69.3 percent of the total farm income in North Dakota. Government payment for crops constituted 10.6 percent of total farm income, while livestock products accounted for 20.1 percent of the agricultural income. Crop agriculture is the major farming activity in the state. A need exists to explore the production and utilization of diverse crops which can offer the opportunity for enhanced economic growth both by diversification of production agriculture and by value-added systems for agriculture.

In addition, in this cycle of low crop prices, over-production, uncertain weather factors, high disease incidence, and increased input costs, "risk management" strategies in crop production and overall farm management cannot be over emphasized. Producers must initiate short-term and long-term "risk management strategies", enlist better marketing strategies including identity preserved opportunities plus integrated crop management must be put into place to remain viable crop producers in the years ahead.



PROGRAM COMPONENT
 PROFITABILITY WITH ROTATIONS


Key Theme(s):         Crop Selection and Crop Sequences
                                       Alternative and New Crops
                                        Integrated Crop Pest Management
Situation:

Low crop prices, variable weather conditions, international trade fluctuations and increased environmental concerns face growers throughout North Dakota. Farmers will need to turn to other means in crop production to increase profitability. They no longer can rely solely on wheat, durum and barley to carry them through as their primary cash crops. One tried and true formula is to reduce inputs plus to diversify the cropping system as to minimize risk in the production and marketing side of the farm business.

Producers who grow continuous cereal grains or plant broadleaf crops too intensely in the rotation will face reduced yields over time, and greatly qualify for greater disease problems and other pest problems such as weeds and certain insects to increase. Producers are encouraged to incorporate agronomically sound crop rotations in their farming practices. Crop rotations have been shown to reduce problems with disease and insects, improve soil fertility, and increase quality to subsequent crops in the rotation. Many producers do not fully realize yield reduction, grain quality losses resulting directly from diseases and pest problems.

Producers must know to manage crops to minimize the impact of these problems without use of expensive inputs yet maintain their bottom profit line. Rotations will help manage and control diseases in both cereal grain crops and broadleaf oilseed crops. Diseases such as fusarium head blight (scab), leaf diseases and root rot can be greatly reduced in wheat, durum, barley and oats with the proper rotation plan which includes alternative broadleaf crops. Whereas, white mold (sclerotinia) can be somewhat controlled in sunflower, canola, drybean, soybean, crambe, safflower, and pulse crops with a good rotation plan plus use of several approved fungicides if timely applied.

Producers need to understand how to plan, develop, and implement agronomically sound rotations that are effective in reducing costs, improving yields, improving quality, reducing risk, and increasing the net income to the entire farm.

Inputs

Educational Curriculum(s)-

Other Resources-

Outputs-

    Educational Program Activities-

Methods and Services to reach/deliver to clientele

Audiences

Outcomes

Short term

 Intermediate

 Long term

Evaluation and Assessment Plan

Short term

 Long term

 

PROGRAM COMPONENT
INTEGRATED CROP MANAGEMENT


Key Theme(s):         Cropping Systems; Farm Economics; Risk Management; Soil Conservation; Soil Health; Disease Management.

Situation:

Low crop prices, variable weather conditions, international trade fluctuations and farm program changes have changed the focus of Extension from individual aspects of crop production to a systems approach to improve economic sustainability. Cropping decisions are often made with consideration of possible yield, loan rates and probable harvest price, with less consideration of risk reduction (other than crop insurance), input costs and the impact of cropping decisions on subsequent crop production, soil health and environmental consequences. Crop sequence research has shown that crops impact subsequent crops through their affects on soil fertility and risk of insect damage, disease incidence and severity and weed populations and intensity. Some crops enhance production potential of certain subsequent crops, while decreasing yield and quality in others. Farm program changes may increase interest in soil conservation. Consideration of the interaction of crop production practices and soil conservation may be required to achieve greatest financial return. There is a need to encourage growers to utilize a systems approach to crop rotation, which takes into account the previous and subsequent crop in the crop sequence, yield drag or enhancement due to the crop choice, input costs, labor considerations, farm program benefits, pest management consequences, soil fertility interactions and soil health and environmental consequences.

Inputs

Outputs

    Educational Program Activities-

        Agents and specialists work together to give a systems perspective to production and marketing issue in their news releases and programming.   

    Methods and Services to reach/delivery- 

Audiences

Outcomes

    Short term

    Intermediate

    Long term

Evaluation and Assessment plan

Short-term

Intermediate

Long-term

PROGRAM COMPONENT
WEED MANAGEMENT


Key Theme(s):      

  1. Non-cropland noxious weed control: Absinth wormwood, Canada thistle, leafy spurge

  2. Non-cropland invasive weed control: Saltcedar, yellow toadflax, yellow starthistle, knapweeds 

  3. Problem cropland weed control: Canada thistle, nightshades, kochia, wild buckwheat, and lanceleaf sage 

  4. Resistant weed control and control of resistant volunteer crop: Roundup Ready canola and Roundup Ready corn volunteers 

  5. New and emerging technology in weed control: Drift control, reduced water volume, adjuvants, and herbicide resistant crops.

Situation:

Non-cropland noxious weed control and non-cropland invasive weed control:  Noxious and invasive weed populations and losses from the weeds are increasing in non-cropland, CRP, pasture, rangeland, and public land. Control of these weeds reduces profits for land owners and increases cost to public agencies and organizations. Landowners and land managers require information to aid in weed identification, and aid in understanding plant biology, effective economical control options, and ways to utilize new ideas and technology. Limitations to successful control include rough fields caused by rodent mounds that inhibit ground application, lack of inexpensive products that provide long-term control, drift to susceptible plants, maintaining a legume component in the required grass/legume mixture of CRP, and confusion of product choice.

Problem cropland weeds:

Relatively high growing season precipitation and an increase in row crop production has, in part, caused a change in herbicide usage and resulted in a shift in weed species. Many weeds emerge each year in most crops but are controlled through chemical control and tillage normally used in crop production. Canada thistle, nightshades, kochia, wild buckwheat, and lanceleaf sage have increased and become problem weeds. Problem weeds increase herbicide costs, reduce yields, and lower economic returns for growers.

Resistant weed control and control of resistant volunteer crop:

Preferential and wide spread use of ALS inhibiting herbicides for broadleaf weed control and ACC-ase enzyme inhibiting herbicides for grass weed control have caused resistant biotypes to become more prevalent. ALS resistant kochia and ALS resistant wild oat are common across North Dakota. ALS resistant eastern black nightshade has been documented in many areas in eastern North Dakota. Each year other weeds are tested for herbicide resistance. Based on the past rate of increase in documented resistance, the number of resistant biotypes and the level of resistance will continue to increase.

Herbicide resistant crop technology, primarily Roundup Ready corn, soybean, and canola, has been readily adopted by North Dakota growers. Some reasons for rapid adoption are simplicity in weed control strategies, lower herbicide costs, crop safety, and effective control of problem weeds. Farmers who grow Roundup Ready crops in rotation are already asking for recommendations to control Roundup Ready volunteer crop, namely control of Roundup Ready canola in Roundup Ready soybean. Other resistant crop technology is or will be soon available, such as Clearfield wheat, canola, and sunflower. Situations will arise where control of these and other resistant crop volunteers will be sought. These weeds may increase herbicide costs and affect economic crop production.

New and emerging technology in weed control: Drift control, reduced water volume, adjuvants, and herbicide resistant crops:

A substantial database of new technology in herbicide use and weed control has been developed. Many growers are unaware of these recent finding or how they can be incorporated into present weed control strategies. Several drift control nozzle types are available to reduce off target movement of spray droplets without reducing weed efficacy. Many herbicides applied at water volumes of 2.5 to 10 gpa give equal or greater weed control than the herbicides in spray volumes greater than 10 gpa. Weed scientists at NDSU have developed commercial adjuvants that increase herbicide performance, allowing reduced herbicides rates.  Many aspects of weeds control and herbicide use and distribution in herbicide-resistant crops are explored each year. These new technologies and others in development may lower chemical cost and improve economics of crop production.

Inputs:

Outputs:

Educational Program Activities:

Methods and Services to reach/deliver:

Audiences:

Outcomes:

Short term

Intermediate term

Long term

PROGRAM COMPONENT
HOME & COMMERCIAL HORTICULTURE, TURF & FORESTRY

Key Theme(s):   Home Lawn & Gardening, Forest Crops, Forest Resource Management

Situation

Interest continues in horticulture (herbs, vegetables, and cut flower crops) forestry, and turfgrass management. In both the private and commercial realm, individuals have shown an increasing interest in these subjects to not only enhance their lives, but to generate income as well.

Inputs

Ron Smith, Todd Weinmann and Steve Sagaser

Outputs

Evaluation

Solicit responses from field day attendees on what impact plantings and tour information will have on their practices; survey homeowners in Fargo and Dickinson who instituted some xeric principles or plant selections.

Outcomes

PROGRAM COMPONENT
MARKET DRIVEN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION SYSTEMS


Key Theme(s):       Identity Preserved, End Use Characteristics, Biotechnology, Traceability, Crop Utilization, Organic, and Market Driven
Situation:

Farmers are constantly looking for sectors of the agricultural industry that provide new opportunities for additional profit. Some opportunities arise from changing markets driven by consumer and processor demands and typically require farms to change from a commodity driven to a end-use, specific characteristic, specialized product driven system. Product driven farms need to determine what processors need in order to respond to consumer demands and then alter their cropping systems practices as necessary to produce that product. Product farms need to utilize practices for sourcing seed, field production and crop handling to limit adventitious co-mingling and market directly to the processor. A formal identity preservation system is usually necessary. Traceability of the product through the system is necessary especially related to liability and safety concerns.

The development of genetically modified crops has increased interest in identity preservation systems. The merits of various crop production systems are currently being debated and consumer need to understand the science and practices behind these systems in order to make informed food buying decisions.

Inputs

Outputs

Educational Program Activities:

Methods and Services to reach/deliver

Audience(s)-

Outcomes

Short term

Intermediate

Long term

Evaluation and Assessment plan

PROGRAM COMPONENT
INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT (IPM)

Key Theme(s):    Integrated Pest Management

Situation:

Pests decrease yields, quality and income, and often increase input costs. IPM manages pests using a variety of control methods in ways that are economically sound and environmentally safe. With seven years of above normal precipitation in much of North Dakota, crop problems due to diseases, insects, and weeds have magnified and become very damaging to farm profitability. In addition, home owners and the turfgrass and ornamentals industry also employ pesticides. Additional information on potential pest risks and appropriate and economic management options is needed for several client groups.

Inputs

Marcia McMullen, IPM Coordinator, Richard Zollinger, Phil Glogoza, Carl Bradley, Vern Hofman, Ken Hellevang, Kasia Kinzer, Ron Smith, Roger Ashley, Terry Gregoire, Greg Endres, Jan Knodel, and Kent McKay.

Outputs

The audience consists of farmers, crop consultants, crop scouts, Extension advisors, ag industry personnel, vegetable, turfgrass and ornamental producers, golf courses and homeowners, wildlife and environmentally focused groups. Educational programs will be conducted using the following methods:

Outcomes

Educational materials will be developed:

  1. Survey results of corn, bean, sunflower producers to assess informational needs, pest problems - ongoing

  2. Field survey results of wheat, barley, and canola to assess disease risks - ongoing.

  3. Evaluation results of pest management practices used in 2000

  4. Web page on IPM

  5. Disease forecasting web page

  6. Web-based information on growing degree days, insect thresholds, pheromone trapping results

Evaluation Plan

  1. Data collected from audiences contacted in surveys

  2. Changes in pesticide use from most recent surveys

  3. Number of crop advisors receiving training and evaluation results at

PROGRAM COMPONENT
PESTICIDE APPLICATOR TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION

Key Theme(s):   Pesticide Application


Situation

Weed, insect, and disease problems are major production constraints for ND producers. The use of pesticides to control these pests have been clearly demonstrated. Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides were applied one or more times to 18.8, 1.3, and 0.6 million acres, respectively in ND in 1996.
Approximately 14,000 private applicators, 1,300 private fumigators, and 4,100 commercial applicators or retail dealers were certified to sell, purchase, or apply restricted use pesticides in 2002. Each of these persons must be recertified every three years.

The trend towards increasing restrictions on pesticides is clear as the public and regulators become wary of their use. Further, the economic, legal, and environmental consequences of off target drift of pesticides has been identified as a priority issue at the federal regulatory level and by the 1999 and 2001 ND Legislatures. Finally, pesticide use is becoming more complicated by the introduction of genetically modified crops and emerging application technology. The benefit of pesticide applicator training and certification is that pesticide applicators will be able to legally and knowledgeably purchase and apply pesticides. Knowledgeable pesticide applicators will use care and good judgment to apply pesticides effectively, efficiently, and in an environmentally sound and socially acceptable manner.

Inputs

Andrew A. Thostenson, Mike Liane, Pesticide Advisory Board, Pesticide Control Board, ND Department of Agriculture, Certain State Specialists, and Extension Agents.

Outputs


Evaluation Plan:

  1. Certification exam results will determine competency for certification.

  2. Surveys of participants attending meetings will be used to determine attitude changes.

  3. The North Dakota Poison Control Center will monitor and report the number of accidental pesticide exposures.

  4. The North Dakota Department of Agriculture will monitor and report the number and type of complaints and violations of the pesticide law.

  5. Evaluation information will be used to assess program effectiveness, identify areas for improvement, and to ascertain emerging pesticide issues.

Outcomes


PROGRAM COMPONENT
SAFETY IN CROP PRODUCTION


Key Theme(s):      Farm Safety

Situation

The use of machinery, pesticides, anhydrous ammonia and other chemicals is essential to the production of all crops in North Dakota. Injuries of all kind happen in crop production. Education can reduce the number of injuries when it is delivered persistently. Injury and fatality is not essential to the production of crops in North Dakota. Safety education efforts must be conducted to minimize the loss.   Bioterrorism in the crop production sector, including storage and shipping are real threats today and into the future.

Inputs

George Maher and nearly everyone else on the program team.

Outputs

Outcomes