Called Crop Aid SS — short for “Saline Solution” — the product is designed to be sprayed directly on saline areas in the fall or early spring.

Darren Sander, Crop Aid’s owner and operations manager, said the product does not treat the soil directly. Instead, it’s formulated to treat water as it moves through the soil profile.

Sander said the product works by breaking the bond between water molecules and soil particles, reducing water’s surface tension. This allows water to move down through the soil more easily, carrying salt away from the root zone. Sander claims the treatment also limits the capillary action that can draw salt back up toward the soil surface.

“Everyone’s been trying to treat the soil, and it’s the water that’s the problem,” Sander said in an interview during the Langham, Sask., farm show held in mid-July.

Crop Aid SS is positioned as an alternative to traditional soil amendments such as gypsum or organic matter, which are often applied directly to the soil in an effort to address salinity. Sander said farmers using the product have seen some saline areas improve within one or two years, though more severe patches may require repeated treatments over several seasons.

The product is applied using standard sprayer equipment, and Crop Aid recommends targeting only the saline patches rather than full-field applications. According to Sander, typical treatment costs are less than $20 per acre.

He said the product’s effectiveness has been evaluated primarily through on-farm trials rather than third-party research. Participating farmers report positive results, but Sander acknowledged results can vary depending on factors such as water table depth and spot severity.

Crop Aid SS was launched alongside the company’s bio-stimulant product, Crop Aid Plus, which Sander said is designed to improve soil structure and reduce compaction across entire fields. Together, the two products are marketed as part of a “whole-field approach” to managing saline issues.

To date, Crop Aid SS has not been independently validated through formal research trials.

The post New soil treatment targets saline patches in fields appeared first on Grainews.

It’s important to note that soil sampling and testing are excellent tools to assess nutrient levels in your fields. That information sets the stage for smarter fertilizer planning in the spring. It’s also relevant that fewer than 20 per cent of fields in Western Canada are sampled each year. To me, that’s a huge missed opportunity to understand your soil and build a solid fertilizer plan.

When to soil sample

Ideally, sampling in early spring gives the most accurate measurement of soil nutrient status for spring-seeded crops. However, springtime is often too short and rushed to allow proper analysis and developing your fertilizer plans. So, if soils are moist, late fall (after soil temperature has dropped to 5-7 C) is often the most practical time. If soils are very dry, sampling in early fall is fine.

Nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur levels can fluctuate from fall to spring, especially in moist soils with warmer-than-normal winters. Variations in nutrient levels from fall to spring are more likely in the Chinook regions of the southern Prairies. I don’t recommend sampling frozen soils during the winter simply because of the difficulty in obtaining representative sampling depths.

Further, I encourage farmers to go out with the person doing the soil sampling on their farm. It allows you to develop a good sense of how soils vary across fields and to see where samples are taken to ensure representative sampling. When you are with the sampler, you know where and how the samples were taken.

What are the options for sampling?

Many fields across the Prairies have moderately rolling topography, resulting in soil variability across the landscape. This can pose a challenge in deciding how to take representative soil samples. Samples must be representative of the field or each soil/crop management zone of a field. Work with your fertilizer dealer or agronomist to help you decide how to sample each field.

Briefly, here are a few ways fields can be soil sampled:

Random sampling of a whole field: Works best in fields with relatively uniform soil and topography. It involves taking representative soil samples throughout the entire field, but make sure to avoid unusual areas.

Sampling soil/crop management zones: Works best in fields with variable soil and topography. Uniquely different zones are mapped based on soil characteristics, topography, and/or crop yield potential. Representative soil samples are taken within each management zone. This method works well in fields with variable soil. Each management zone can be randomly sampled or benchmark sampled (see point 3). Work with an experienced agronomist to map each soil/crop management zone carefully.

Benchmark soil sampling: Involves sampling a one-to-two-acre area that is representative of most of the field or soil/crop management zone. Each year, the same area is soil sampled. When a field is variable in soil or topography, three or more benchmark locations may be needed to account for that variability.

When selecting soil/crop management zones with your agronomist, make use of crop yield maps, aerial photos, topographic maps, soil salinity maps and/or satellite imagery information. Also, use your personal field knowledge and observations of crop growth differences (crop establishment, vigour, colour, and growth) and landscape/topography of each field to identify where different soil types occur.

Number of sampling sites

I suggest taking samples from a minimum of 20 sites for each field, soil/crop management zone or benchmark area. Les Henry used to suggest 30 sites, which is even better. The more sampling sites taken, the more representative your samples will be of the field.

A common mistake is only taking six or seven soil cores from a field or management zone, which is not enough and may result in unreliable information for your fields and the development of inaccurate fertilizer recommendations. Why? Typically, each soil sample sent to a soil testing lab weighs about two lbs. One acre of land, six inches deep, weighs about 2,000,000 lbs. If a 160-acre field is soil sampled to a six-inch depth, a two-lb. soil sample must represent about 320 million pounds of soil. The soil sample would represent less than one-millionth of the field. So, it is critically important that an adequate number of soil cores be taken!

Choosing depth increments

There are various recommendations for sampling depth. My preference is to separate each soil core into depth intervals of zero-to-six, six-to-12 and 12-to-24 inches (0-15, 15-30 and 30-60 cm) and place the three sampling depths into three clean plastic pails. Do not use metal pails! Do this at each site sampled. Many agronomists suggest zero-to-six- and six-to-24-inch (0-15 and 15-60 cm) depths, which is easier and faster but does not give as useful information on nutrient stratification.

Most research on nitrate and sulphur in Western Canada’s annual crops has been based on sampling to 24 inches. Sampling in three depth increments gives a clearer picture of how these nutrients are distributed through the soil profile.

Phosphorus and potassium are less mobile, so keep the zero- to six-inch depth sample separate.

After the 20-plus soil cores are taken, thoroughly mix each composite sample and lay out the soil samples to completely air dry to stop nutrient changes. If moist soil samples are sent directly to the lab in sealed bags, soil microbes can alter the levels of plant-available nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur, causing incorrect estimates of soil nutrient levels. If samples are sent directly to the lab in a moist condition, they must be shipped in coolers and kept below 5 C and arrive at the lab the next day for drying.

Sample analysis

The key macronutrients to test for are nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), and sulphur (S). Measure N, P, K, and S in the zero-to-six- and six-to-12-inch depths, and N and S in the 12-to-24-inch depth. For most soils in Western Canada, testing for calcium (Ca) or magnesium (Mg) isn’t usually necessary, since these nutrients are rarely deficient.

It is a wise idea every few years to check levels of soil micronutrients copper, iron, manganese and zinc. Testing for micronutrients every year is only necessary if one or more micronutrients are in the marginal or low range; otherwise, testing every few years is fine.

It is important to note the tests for boron and chloride are not reliable, so I do not recommend testing for them. The problem is with the soil test methodology and critical levels used, which often result in unnecessary fertilizer recommendations.

Checking organic matter, pH and soil salinity is worthwhile for keeping an eye on your soil. Other tests, like cation exchange capacity, base saturation, or base cation saturation ratios, generally aren’t useful for planning fertilizer. CEC doesn’t change much because it depends on clay content, and base saturation mainly flags soil problems such as sodic soils. Research shows that BCSR adds little value in Western Canada, so you can skip the cost.

Finally, make sure the soil testing lab that does your soil analysis uses the correct soil test methods. For Alberta farmers, all soil test P calibration has been with the Modified Kelowna method since 1990 by Alberta Agriculture. It is also the recommended P method by Saskatchewan Agriculture. Soil samples from Alberta and Saskatchewan should be sent to a lab that uses the modified Kelowna method for the best 4R interpretation and fertilizer recommendations.

For Manitoba farmers, all soil test P calibration has been with the Olsen method (also referred to as the bicarb method), so use a lab that uses the Olsen method. Other soil test P methods, such as the Bray method, have never been calibrated to Western Canada’s soils. I do not recommend methods that have not been calibrated for western Canadian soils.

Next, interpret your soil tests. Make sure you seek the advice of several agronomists when developing your fertilizer plans for next spring.

The post Soil sampling for Prairie farmers: How to test for nutrients and avoid common mistakes appeared first on Grainews.

However, it is not an inexpensive fix, nor is it a simple solution, and it won’t work for every farm. That’s why farmers and agronomists need to do their homework and be mindful of important considerations when deciding whether tile drainage is a good fit.

How tile drainage works

Essentially, tile drainage works by removing water that exceeds a field’s water-holding capacity. It does this by lowering the water table.

A typical tile drainage system has three components:

• Lateral lines of perforated pipe that collect excess water from a field;
• Tile mains or headers that transport that water below ground; and
• Outlets operated by gravity or mechanical means that pump the water into a ditch or other collection area.

Drainage can be installed in different ways. One is through pattern tiling, where every acre of a field is tiled, and another is through selective tiling, which involves tiling only certain areas of a field.

Tile drainage can be also used to artificially set water levels in a field, which ensures water is available when needed to nourish crops and removed when there’s too much.

This is done through controlled tile drainage systems. These require water storage areas such as holding ponds, as well as additional infrastructure, such as risers, gates and valves that regulate water flow within the system.

Lay of the land

A key factor when deciding whether tile drainage is a good fit for farms is the suitability of the land itself.

Tile drainage is generally more straightforward and therefore simpler to install on level or gently sloping farmland. However, there are times when tile drainage can be a good solution for fixing water problems in areas that are anything but flat.

That’s been the case for Dustin Williams, who farms near Souris, Man. In an interview with Grainews, Williams described his land as particularly well-suited for tile drainage. It has a fair amount of elevation and slope in spots that cause problems with saturated soils and water ponding in low areas. Because the soil is sandy, water can move through it relatively quickly, which can cause groundwater deficits in drier conditions.

Williams opted to start installing tile drainage on his farm in 2020, after a two-day downpour drowned one of his canola fields the previous year.

“It just rotted out,” Williams said, adding it was the fourth time in 10 years the low-lying field had produced either a suboptimal crop or no crop at all.

“It was just due to the water ponding and soil staying saturated for too long. We made the decision to start improving the land.”

Williams contracted NextGen Drainage Solutions, a tiling company in Pilot Mound, Man., to install 150 acres of subsurface tile in the problem field. Waterlogging wasn’t an issue after that, he said, adding he plans to add drainage tiles to more acres in the coming years.

Fix for saline soils

Farms with salinity problems are another place where tile drainage, in the right circumstances, can work wonders.

Saline soils can have quite a negative effect on crops by reducing root development, plant growth and ultimately yield. In severe cases, they can kill crops and make the land unsuitable for agriculture.

By removing excess water and lowering the water table, tile drainage systems can prevent salts from being drawn into the rooting zone.

Olaf Boettcher, president of Saskatoon-based Precision Drainage Solutions, has been installing tile on Saskatchewan farms since 2017. He said in a recent interview that soil salinity is a problem across Western Canada and a big driver behind the growing interest in tile drainage.

For many of Boettcher’s customers, high water tables have contributed to waterlogged fields and made flooding more likely, and also led to large salt accumulations in the soil. Tile drainage addresses both problems by lowering the water table.

“High water tables drive the salts up. And then, even in the dry periods or later on in the growing season, that creates problems,” Boettcher said. “A lot of guys are looking at tile drainage for that reason.”

According to Boettcher, tile drainage works best in areas with higher rainfall because there is more excess water, which flushes salts downward in the soil profile.

Boettcher said many of his customers stick with their tile drainage projects even during drought years because they see it as a long-term solution to salinity problems.

Irrigation recharges groundwater in fields and can cause water tables — and sometimes salinization — to rise. This is another area where tile drainage can address problems.

Craig Millar farms 5,000 acres of dryland and irrigated grains and oilseeds near Birsay, Sask. The farm is in the Luck Lake Irrigation District near the Diefenbaker Lake reservoir in south-central Saskatchewan.

Millar said he opted to have drainage tiles installed on 30 acres under one irrigation pivot a few years ago. He hoped it would stop the spread of soil salinity that seemed to expand a bit every year, and he’s been pleased with the results.

“We were pleasantly surprised to see after a few growing seasons that the saline area is actually decreasing in size,” Millar said. “The tile drainage is helping carry the salts away.”

He noted that nearly all the land under irrigation pivots on his farm would likely benefit from some amount of tile drainage. Millar now has his own tile plow, with which he plans to treat more problem spots under more acres in the years to come.

“I’m really excited about tile drainage. I believe it could benefit much of the land within the Luck Lake Irrigation District.”

Aaron Hargreaves, a Manitoba producer, said tile drainage could be the best tool in the toolbox for managing saline soil in fields.

As part of a panel discussion at the 2024 Manitoba Ag Days, Hargreaves spoke about how he and his farming partners tried several practices to fix salinity issues on their 17,000-acre operation near Brandon.

None were as effective as tile drainage, which he said has had a positive effect on many problem fields. Yields have increased dramatically, and the reduced saline has allowed the farm to plant crops that would have fared poorly in the past. One of those crops is pinto beans.

“Pinto beans are extremely sensitive to salinity, but they are growing well in that area of the farm now. We couldn’t even grow canola in the field four or five years ago,” said Hargreaves.

He offered this piece of advice to Prairie producers who have installed tile drainage or are considering it: Be patient.

“It can take time (to have an effect). In an area like Nesbitt (about 30 km south of Brandon), we’ll see results lots of times in one or two years to fix the spots where the salinity isn’t too strong. Where it’s really bad, it’s still going to take a long time.”

Hargreaves said one unexpected benefit of tiling has been the “huge” effect on weed control, especially kochia. The invasive tumbleweed thrives on saline soils.

“Roundup-resistant kochia is prevalent in our area. In a tiled area in our field, we are reducing the amount of kochia in that field by 75 to 90 per cent easy. It’s a hugely effective tool in the management of kochia,” said Hargreaves.

More benefits of tile drainage

A group of farmers interviewed by last fall identified fixing soil salinity as a key benefit of tile drainage, but listed numerous others.

A big one was boosting a farmer’s bottom line. They noted improved soil and field conditions should translate into higher yields and improved crop quality.

Also on their list:

• A tile drainage project removes standing water or waterlogged conditions, making it possible to put more acres into production.
• Tile drainage can improve the timeliness of field operations. Farmers can seed or combine sooner, for example, after heavy rain.
• With tile drainage, farmers are better equipped to manage through extreme weather conditions, providing important peace of mind.
• In some cases, municipalities might see reduced damage to infrastructure, such as roads, because flooding conditions are better managed or prevented.

One of the producers, Owen Orsak, said improved efficiency is the greatest benefit he’s seen after installing tile drainage on his farm in southwest Manitoba.

“It is more efficient time-wise, fuel-wise and input-wise. I’m not steering around potholes to get the field seeded. I’m not spending three hours trying to get the seed drill unstuck because the operator got too close to a wet spot, and I’m not trying to turn the sprayer around these wet spots and creating a lot of overlap,” said Orsak.

“It used to be a 260-acre field with 28 wet spots, so I would seed 240 acres and probably combine 220 acres. Now I can seed 260 acres and combine 260 acres.”

Gord Unger is plant manager at Advanced Drainage Systems, a tile manufacturing plant in Carman, Man. As acreage managed under tile drainage systems has grown over the past 25 years since the plant was built in Manitoba, he’s seen how it can make it easier for producers to work their fields and reduce wear and tear on farm machinery.

“They don’t have to go around wet holes in the fields (and) because the soil is easier to till, it’s easier on the equipment and it uses less fuel,” he said.

According to Boettcher, an important agronomic benefit of tile drainage is that it reduces surface runoff and can increase water filtration.

“It improves your soil tilth and soil structure, so your roots go deeper, sooner in the season and make more (drought-resistant) plants. You get a deep root system early and it gives the plant access to more nutrients and water,” said Boettcher.

Ed Froese, owner-operator of Innovative Agri Tiling, a tile installation company in Reinfeld, Man., noted drainage tiles installed in the right areas and at the right depth remove excess water that is harmful to root growth but will still maintain adequate soil moisture levels.

Froese said by regulating water levels in a field this way, tile drainage enables young plants to develop good root systems and become better equipped to deal with potential stressors such as disease and drought. It also helps crops grow longer roots that can tap into a lower water table during the hot summer months.

Tile drainage economics

Many believe the biggest upside of tile drainage is improved productivity. Higher yields usually mean more money in the bank for producers.

Unger said he believes that on average, farmers can expect to see about a 20 per cent yield improvement on tiled land.

Some studies from Iowa, Ohio and Ontario have shown increases in yield of four to 45 per cent for corn and soybeans grown in fields with subsurface drainage. Another study in Minnesota showed yield increases of 10 to 30 bushels per acre for corn and four to 15 bushels per acre for soybeans.

Williams said it didn’t take long for him to realize the value of tile drainage once he started using it on his farm. All he had to do was look at the yield monitor on his combine.

“With my land, it’s very apparent where I have water issues, and the more I watch my yield maps, the more I realize that the vast majority of my (yield) losses in a given year are actually because of poor water management,” he said.

“I know that it’s because water is sitting here. It’s causing salinity, it’s causing kochia, it’s causing a decline in plant health, an increase in root rots — all of those things. They all have a big influence on the final numbers.”

Tile drainage can help farmers looking to increase productivity and profitability without expanding the land base. Producers can increase the number of arable acres within their farms rather than buying additional farmland.

Froese said that is the case for many of his customers, who are opting to improve their existing land rather than purchasing more acres because “land prices have jumped up so high.”

One way a producer or agronomist can determine whether tile drainage will increase profitability by identifying and assessing the main yield constraints on the farm.

If the biggest yield-limiting factor is something like disease, saline soils, delays in planting or a lower-than-expected grade, for example, that’s often the result of not enough water or too much of it at the wrong time. That is the central problem tile drainage is meant to fix.

David Whetter, a Manitoba soil scientist and agricultural-environmental consultant, touched on the economic benefits of tile drainage during a seminar at 2024 Manitoba Ag Days show in Brandon, Man. He said it’s hard to quantify the effect tile drainage can have on yields in the Canadian Prairies because there’s so little regionally specific data.

“A sad story is that we don’t have a lot of good local data, at least not that’s out in that public realm. We have to lean on other regions to look at data, and even then, there’s not a lot of data out there. Manitoba or Prairie region results are really needed here,” said Whetter.

The biggest downside of tile drainage is cost. It can carry a hefty price tag. However, costs vary widely depending on the size and complexity of projects, as well as a farm’s terrain and the type of tiling being installed.

Unger said the cost of installing tiling systems on farmland typically runs somewhere between $1,000 and $1,500 per acre. Froese pegged the average cost at about $1,200 per acre.

Pattern tiling typically costs more to install than selective tiling systems because it involves a larger area. According to Hargreaves, its advantages include allowing a field to be seeded earlier, leading to more uniform crop maturity. Machinery is also less likely to get stuck on hilltops.

In most years, farmers will find selective tiling is generally adequate in fields that have good natural drainage, he added. Because the overall cost per field is usually less with selective tiling, he also believes it can provide a faster return on investment.

Froese said tile drainage systems generally cost more when lift systems are needed to transport excess water from fields lacking natural drainage.

It’s generally less expensive to install drainage tiles during dry periods. There’s no mucking around and soils are generally easier to work with.

As far as return on investment for tile drainage systems, it differs from farm to farm. Unger said he believes it has generally improved with rising prices for agricultural land.

“They used to say the number on average was 10 years to pay the cost for drainage tiling back,” he said. “But as land prices have increased, and as farmers are also finding they can be more productive with their land, that time frame has definitely shrunk. I know of some who have paid their tiling bill back in three to four years.”

Unger added that because tile drainage is such a large capital expense, most farmers will start with one field or area that would benefit the most and then add acres over time rather than going all-in right away.

“They’ll do a certain area that’s giving them trouble because it’s so wet and they’re not getting any yield on it. They might start with that, and then after that, they’re kind of hooked. They will keep going for the most part, adding more and more acres every year.”

Planning tile drainage projects

Deciding whether tile drainage makes financial sense is an important first step, but there are numerous other factors to consider. Whetter said that’s why it’s important to do the homework before embarking on any tile drainage project.

“It’s a big investment and producers know their land the best. My advice is to make sure that you’re part of the design process in terms of that kind of gut feel. Does the design make sense? Are the right areas being drained? Seek advice where there’s any uncertainty just to make sure you can optimize your investment.”

According to Whetter, a key consideration should be the drainage coefficient — that is, the number that describes the maximum rate of water removal for which a tile is designed.

For example, a drainage coefficient of a quarter inch of excess water in a day is the typical design standard. What this means is if there’s one-inch excess rainfall event, it will take four days on average to remove that excess water from a field. The higher the drainage coefficient, the higher the cost of the drainage system.

Whetter said another design consideration is depth of tile or pipe. A minimum depth of 2.5 feet is typically required to maintain pipe integrity, he said. In Manitoba, for example, tiles are typically installed at three to four feet.

It’s also important to consider any restrictive layers in the soil, Whetter said. This can include areas where sand is located on top of clay, or where there is significant compaction that can make installation more difficult and affect tile performance.

In some parts of the Prairies, farmers sometimes must contend with excess water and drought in the same growing season. Whetter said that’s why getting the water table at just the right height is so important with a tile system.

“The golden rule is to drain just enough water for crop growth but not a drop more,” Whetter said, adding variable soil landscapes throughout Western Canada also complicate decisions around tile drainage.

“The takeaway here is the snowflake analogy. Every field is unique, and it really requires a field-specific solution, particularly when we get into these variable landscapes.”

Hargreaves said he and his partners found that in cases where selective tiling was installed, narrower spacing of the perforated pipe is more effective. In most cases they have spaced the pipes 25 feet apart rather than the standard 50 feet.

He also suggested it can be better to err on the side of caution when installing tile drainage. In instances where a saline problem in a field is quite narrow, for instance, he recommended that tiling be extended well past the outer edge.

“We found it definitely works better, way better, if you go well beyond where you see crop loss to make it work as best you can,” said Hargreaves.

Boettcher stressed water from a drainage tile system must have someplace to go, so access to a suitable outlet, such as a natural waterway, ditch or on-farm retention pond, is a must. If a farm lacks an outlet, or if it’s near a protected wetland or some other area that makes drainage problematic, it’s probably not a good candidate for tile drainage.

Permitting

Proper planning also includes ensuring projects don’t just transfer a water problem to a downstream neighbour or have an adverse effect on the environment or wildlife habitat.

Consider where the water will drain and who will be affected. Also note what water bodies will be affected. This is where permitting comes in.

Brandon Leask is an agricultural water engineer with Alberta Agriculture and Forestry who provides technical assistance with respect to water management and helps educate farmers about provincial regulations related to tile drainage projects.

In an interview with Grainews, Leask noted Alberta has fairly stringent regulations around agricultural tile drainage, so he recommends that producers seek the services of a tiling installer.

“It’s not a minor process unless you’re really knowledgeable about it. Hire a contractor to assess the situation for you, to design it for you, to apply for the approvals and (do) everything else for you, because it’s not a simple process,” Leask said. “There’s a lot of pieces in the puzzle.”

Boettcher said it’s important for farmers and agronomists planning tile drainage projects to familiarize themselves with water stewardship regulations. They can be complex, he said, which is why many farmers prefer to have a professional tile installer deal with the permit process.

Permits are always an important consideration in Saskatchewan, he added, especially in certain areas such as the Quill Lakes region, where risk assessments can make it more difficult to get regulatory approval.

“We don’t really work in some of those areas because it’s pretty hard to get permits there,” he said.

To take the CEU quiz for this article, CLICK HERE.

MORE INFO: Controlled tiling systems

In a conventional tile drainage system, drainage occurs directly from the tiles to a downstream water body. In controlled tile drainage, the flow of water is controlled by mechanisms installed at the system’s drainage outlets.

Controlled tile drainage is becoming a more popular practice that can reduce agricultural run-off of nitrogen and phosphorus via tile drains, and provide agronomic and financial benefits to producers. Some research from Ontario and the United States suggests controlled tile drainage can increase corn and soybean yields by three to 11 percent.

A 2017 research paper from the Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association stated controlled tile drainage should be considered a risk mitigation practice that can help protect producers from crop losses and could potentially stabilize yields over the long term.

Controlled tile drainage systems are more expensive to install and operate, however. The additional cost of controlled tile drainage depends upon the number of control structures per field. Additional costs can include lift stations to move subsurface water from a lower to higher elevation when natural gravity flow isn’t sufficient.

Hargreaves noted lift stations are expensive and most require an electrical source to operate. They also need to be regularly monitored and serviced.

“They increase the cost of the project a lot and sometimes that makes it not worth doing. If you’re just trying to do a 10-acre low area, it costs $40,000 or $50,000 to put in a lift station, plus the tile. Your costs start to go pretty darn high.”

Some jurisdictions offer financial incentives for installing controlled tile drainage systems. Under Manitoba’s Ag Action program, for example, controlled tile drainage qualifies as a beneficial management practice and is eligible for taxpayer support. If a farmer completes an environmental farm plan, the province will share the cost of installing control structures for a tile drainage system to a maximum of $50,000.

MORE INFO: DIY tile drainage

Gord Unger, plant manager at Advanced Drainage Systems, urges farmers to carefully consider what’s involved in installing tile drainage if they’re thinking about doing it themselves. He knows farmers who bought their own plows to install tile and have had great results, but he’s aware of other instances where it has gone the other way.

“There are so many things that someone would have to know to install their own tiling system,” he said. “You have to make sure to get everything right. You only get one shot at doing this, because you can’t dig it out and redo it.”

Unger said if slopes aren’t calculated correctly, for example, subsurface tiles may not drain the right way. He also noted it’s important to ensure rolls of drainage tile aren’t stretched too far during installation.

“Once the tile is stretched, that makes it soft and it will collapse,” he said.

Another key consideration around DIY tiling is time. Installation is typically done in spring or fall but that’s when farmers are busy seeding or harvesting.

“When farmers consider this, many realize they don’t have time for that and they’ll hire someone else to do it,” said Unger. “There’s just too much other stuff going on the farm to wait for a time when they can to do it themselves.”

The post Understanding tile drainage appeared first on Grainews.

“We had an extremely warm winter with lower-than-normal precipitation in most areas,” says Trevor Hadwen, agroclimate specialist for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. “We were a little worried going into the spring, for sure. But this has calmed us down.”

While the wet spring created difficulties in seeding in a few fields, most producers across the Prairies have their fields seeded with sufficient topsoil moisture to get the crop off to a decent start.

After years of having to adapt to drought, though, what does this shift to wetter growing conditions look like for dryland Prairie farmers?

Soil management strategies

Ken Panchuk, a provincial soils specialist for Saskatchewan’s ministry of agriculture, says for the most part, big-picture soil management strategies won’t change much for dryland farmers in his province. Strategies such as no-till and regenerative farming are widespread and excellent at managing water in dry or wet conditions.

But in a province like Manitoba, where there is a little less uniformity in soil management strategies, the situation can differ from one farm to another.

“It may depend a little bit on what the soil management strategy has been on those fields,” says Marla Riekman, a soil management specialist for Manitoba Agriculture. “If soils have good structure and haven’t been over-tilled, they may be soaking up and using some of this water a little better, because they may have an easier time infiltrating that water deeper into the soil profile.”

But producers who have structural issues, where water doesn’t move down into the soil profile as easily, may find themselves struggling with problems such as soil compaction this year.

“Now that we have a bit of moisture, the soil particles can slide over each other a little bit easier. This is where soils can be at a higher risk of things like compaction associated with field activity,” she says. “We tend to see more ponding in those compacted areas of the field.”

Obviously, avoiding field activity is impossible, but Riekman says farmers finding themselves in that position should start thinking about basic concepts for mitigating compaction.

“We want to make sure that we’re thinking about things like properly ballasted tractors, making sure our tractor tires are at their rated pressures, and making sure that we’re limiting some of the weight of the equipment where we can,” she says. And if these conditions carry into the fall, farmers should try to reduce the amount of random traffic crossing the fields with equipment such as grain carts.

Managing salinity

Riekman stresses that salinity issues don’t go away during wetter periods; they just hide.

During dry years, salinity tends to get worse because there is more evaporation than precipitation, which results in insufficient water moving down to wash the salts down into the root zone. Because of this, the water moves upward (through processes like capillary rise), bringing salts toward the surface, where they often show up visibly with that bathtub ring effect.

“Now that we’ve moved into some wetter periods, we start to see the salinity become diluted at the surface, or hidden,” Riekman says. “So we may have a temporary reprieve.”

But even in a wet cycle like this, if the rains continue and the water table rises close to the surface, the salts will rise with the water table and begin to show up again.

“Salinity is always cycling; it comes along with wet and dry periods,” Riekman says.

Paradoxically, Riekman says years like this, when the problem seemingly goes away, are often the best time to start managing salinity.

“If you have areas where you want to establish a salt-tolerant forage during those dry years, it can be very difficult; the soil is just too dry at the surface. When you have a bit of moisture, you may have better luck,” she says.

Weed control strategies

Weed control is another undertaking that changes under wetter conditions.

“Right now, producers are focused on watching the flushes of weeds coming,” Panchuk says. “When you have frequent showers, that’s a recipe for getting the next flush of weeds established.”

The big question producers and extension specialists like Panchuk will have to address is which weeds are developing and at what density, so they can determine the correct control products to use.

“Because weeds are competing for moisture and nutrients, you don’t want to let the weeds get too far advanced,” Panchuk says. “If this generous raining pattern that we have becomes a drier bias, then producers will need every drop of moisture that was conserved earlier in the growing season to bring the crop to maturity.”

The timing is also critical.

“We’ve got the longest days of the growing season upon us right now, so take every opportunity to get as much growth occurring as possible to get canopy cover,” Panchuk advises. “Once the canopy covers the field, then the crop would have a competitive edge over any new germinating weeds.”

Think about insurance

As we head into a wetter summer with high temperatures expected, farmers may also want to make sure hail insurance is updated. While this moisture is definitely a good-news story for farmers, there’s a literal black cloud attached to it: an increased risk of severe storms.

“One of the key components of getting storm events is moisture,” Hadwen says. “If we have moisture available on the surface and we get some heat, that will breed thunderstorm activity.”

The number of hail events has been relatively low during the dry years, but that appears set to change this year, he says.

“We will likely get larger and more storm events than we have had in recent years.”

Not out of the woods yet

While the moisture the Prairies have received this spring has recharged the water table, Hadwen said it’s a bit too early to declare the drought over — although that day appears close in Manitoba.

“We’re not quite out of the woods in some parts of the Prairie region,” Hadwen warns. “The rain is going to solve the immediate moisture needs, but it still takes a long time for the pastures to fully recover, and it also takes a long time for water supplies and groundwater to fully recover.”

Manitoba is a little bit different from the rest of the Prairies at this point, he adds.

“Manitoba has received the most moisture. The province received about 200 millimetres of precipitation in the central region, all the way from Winnipeg over to Brandon.”

This is typical for Manitoba, he says, because the province tends to have a wetter climate, but in recent years, southern Manitoba has been in a significant drought in terms of moisture deficit levels.

There is little concern for Manitoba in terms of moisture deficits, Hadwen says; in fact, the province has pretty much recovered. The only area of concern is the province’s northwest, which has received a little less precipitation than the rest of Manitoba.

“Last year, we had some very dry conditions compared to what we would normally get,” Hadwen says, adding that timely rains, as well as conditions cooler than the rest of the Prairies, helped.

“But this year, that 200 millimetres for that central southern portion of the province is excellent for soil moisture, though probably a little too much for some areas,” he says. “That is starting to percolate and really recharge those subsoils.”

In Saskatchewan, Hadwen says, precipitation ranged from just over 100 mm around the Regina area to a maximum of about 150 mm in the area west of Saskatoon.

But nevertheless, the drought prognosis is almost as good for Saskatchewan as it is for Manitoba, with only a small pocket in the agricultural area in the northwest with any significant drought risk.

“In that western region of the province — Kindersley, Leader, and even all the way up to the North Battleford area — it has been a little bit drier,” Hadwen says. “They’re recovering, but just not at the rate that we need. They were certainly in a much larger deficit going into the year. So we still have some concerns. But again, we’re seeing tremendous improvement.”

Most of Alberta received rainfall in the 100- to 125-mm range, and as a result, the province is a little bit worse off in terms of drought. One area that seems to be missing most of the rainfall so far is Alberta’s Peace region, but Hadwen says that region doesn’t normally get the bulk of its rain until late June or early July.

“That central region of the province has a little bit of what we call that D2, or severe drought category, and a little bit of D1, which is moderate,” Hadwen says. “But the reality is that those areas were the D3s or D4s last month, so we’ve seen improvement throughout the Prairie region.”

Unlike Manitoba, the subsoil is not fully recharged in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

“We have the moisture in that top root zone that will really get us through that spring period, but we really need moisture to percolate down and recharge levels further down,” Hadwen says. “We’re going to need continued rain this season. We don’t have those deeper moisture levels to really rely on.”

Precipitation models aren’t telling forecasters much for the coming months, he says, but there is some reason for optimism from the meteorologist maxim, “Rain begets rain and drought begets drought.”

“It’s a cyclical thing,” Hadwen says. “You need that moisture that we’ve received to break the drought. Now that we’ve got the moisture in the system, we will continue to get some big rainfall events until that moisture dries out.”

Hadwen also points to a significant moisture deficit in the three- to five-year period.

“We have fixed the moisture deficit for most regions in the one-year timeframe. But over the three-year timeframe, we’re still seeing pretty big deficits,” he says. “So we’re still not fully out of the drought.”

The post Moving from dry to wet appeared first on Grainews.

The government has provided funding to help producers cut methane and nitrous oxide emissions from primary agriculture, while constantly beating the drumbeat of emissions, emissions, emissions.

What has sometimes been missed in this focus on emission reduction are the improvements made on Canadian farms over the last 35 years.

“We are producing the lowest emission metric tonnes of crop commodities in the world,” Kristjan Hebert, a farmer from Moosomin, Sask., told the Canadian Crops Convention in Winnipeg in March.

“So, if you’re focused on global emissions and you’re buying commodities, you should buy them from Canada.”

It’s frustrating for Hebert and many others that the federal government doesn’t promote that good news about Canadian agriculture on the world stage.

However, Statistics Canada recently published a Census of Environment data portal this winter. The census is loaded with facts and figures about farming and the positive changes made in agriculture since the 1980s.

It requires a lot of digging to find the data, but Statistics Canada and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada do have some complimentary things to say about farming and how it has become more sustainable.

In Central Canada, soil organic carbon declined over the same period, partly because of a shift from perennial to annual crops.

“Soil organic matter has been increasing on agricultural lands in Canada. In 2016 Canadian agricultural soils removed 11.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,” an AAFC website on soil organic matter reports.

The website contains a Soil Carbon Change Index, which shows that soil carbon conditions have gone from “moderate” in the 1980s to “good” in the 2000s.

“The index illustrates a strong upward trend through to 2006 from an index value of 48 in 1981, to a higher value of 78 in 2006,” AAFC says.

“This national scale improvement came about primarily as a result of widespread adoption of reduced (conservation) tillage and no-till, a decrease in the use of summerfallow and an increase in the use of perennial forage crops in the Prairies.”

The website notes that there’s a significant difference between Central Canada and the Prairies for soil carbon. Soil conditions in the East have declined over the last 30 to 40 years.

“While the national trend for soil organic carbon is positive, this has been slightly offset by localized decreases in soil carbon in parts of eastern Ontario and southern Quebec,” AAFC says, mostly because of a land use shift from pastures to annual crops and more tillage.

AAFC also has some upbeat information about soil erosion and salinization.

Thanks to the adoption of reduced tillage and the near elimination of summerfallow, the risk of soil erosion has “declined greatly” since the 1980s, AAFC says.

The changes in soil management have also cut the probability of soil salinity and the yield losses associated with salinization.

“From 1981 to 2016, (the changes) have lessened the risk of salinization and indicate a trend towards improved soil health and agri-environmental sustainability,” an AAFC document says.

The tone of the AAFC documents on soil erosion, salinity and soil organic carbon suggests that government and the public should acknowledge the positive changes within agriculture.

Setbacks

The documents, however, also make note of recent trends that could make farming less sustainable.

The soil health benefits from reduced tillage and eliminating summerfallow have levelled off since the late 2000s. Soil erosion risk is increasing in Manitoba and other parts of the Prairies as tillage returns to some farms.

And in the last 15 years, more farmers have plowed up pastureland to plant canola, wheat and other crops.

“Conversion of native grassland or long-term perennial hay-land to cropland causes soil organic carbon loss,” AAFC says.

“The long-term merits of breaking this often-marginal land for crops needs to be considered carefully.”

The post Prairie soils’ organic carbon climbing appeared first on Grainews.

Jeff Schoenau, a soil science professor with the University of Saskatchewan, is among those fielding questions, although he says the amount of visible salinity in his province is “normal” for April.

“I think probably folks are more interested in salinity and addressing it in farm fields because the value of farmland has gone up, including rental rates, and so people want to more than ever improve the productivity of every acre that they’ve got.”

Marla Riekman, soil specialist with Manitoba Agriculture, has also heard inquiries and has repeatedly been called to speak about it.

“We’ve definitely had a fair bit of concern around it and a lot of questions around how to manage it, how to live with it and what we might be able to do to manage it,” she says.

Soil salinity is not about the salt, but rather about variability in the water table. Dissolved salts are brought up and then left higher in the soil profile as water levels rise and fall. Evaporation during dry periods leaves visible salt on the surface, and there is not enough rain to leach it back underground.

There’s no quick fix — but management is key.

READ MORE: Les Henry: The soil salinity story

Crop choice is one often-noted tactic. Seeding saline areas to salt-tolerant forages rather than high-profit, sensitive crops like soybeans is a popular choice. But high salinity is kind of like a mouse infestation: by the time you see it, you’re already fighting an uphill battle.

If the situation is bad enough to leave visible salt deposits on the surface, even a salt-tolerant forage will have a hard time getting established.

“We need to be thinking about trying to get the forage established in a year where the salts aren’t as bad, when you have a bit more moisture to seed into and get that little seedling germinated and growing,” Riekman says.

Choosing seed

A choice of salt-tolerant forage depends on the salinity level. For highly saline areas, Riekman recommended strongly tolerant crops such as alkaline grasses, Russian wild rye and AC Saltlander, a green wheatgrass marketed specifically for saline areas.

For lower-level saline soils, there are other options. Soil testing is recommended before making decisions.

“If you are looking at targeting or changing your management in a specific area, getting a soil test done in that area can give you an idea of how saline it is, and then you can start to match the salt tolerance level of the forage with the salt that exists in that patch or that area.”

Test comprehension

Soil tests produce a number based on electrical conductivity in a soil solution. The higher the number, the more salt.

There are two types of soil tests. Most producers use a commercially available, inexpensive and relatively quick one-to-one soil test. Paste soil tests are the other option. This method uses the same amount of soil in the solution as the one-to-one test, but just enough water to create a paste-like consistency.

Primarily a lab tool, that test is comparatively expensive and needs more time and space, making it unpopular for commercial application. It does have one advantage, Riekman notes: it indicates how much salt is in the soil around the root.

Results from a saturated paste test are approximately two times higher than one-to-one results, Riekman warns. Producers can therefore translate commercial test results into what a saturated paste test would offer.

“You take your one-to-one soil test number that you get from your commercial testing lab and multiply that by two in order to compare it to those research numbers,” Riekman says.

Knowing the difference is also key for choosing a salt-tolerant forage. AC Saltlander, for instance, is tolerant up to about 16 deciSiemens per metre (deciSiemen is a unit of electrical conductivity), but that number is drawn from paste test results. Producers would have to divide that by two to properly compare it to whatever number they received from their commercial soil test.

“When you are trying to target or determine what kind of salt-tolerant forage to plant in an area, it is good to do that rough calculation,” Riekman says.

Establishing salt-tolerant forages can take years — but patience can pay off, Schoenau says, pointing to his team’s research on salt-tolerant green wheatgrass in both saline and non-saline plots.

“Initially, the grass was a little bit slow to establish compared to where it was seeded in a non-saline area,” he says.

“But over a five-year period, the yields got better and better over the years until finally, in the last couple of years, the yield of that green wheatgrass actually was exceeding the yield we were seeing in the non-saline plots.”

The post Shop smart when selecting seed for salt tolerance appeared first on Grainews.

Vegetable seeds — with some exceptions such as potatoes, beans and peas — are not grown in Canada. Some of our seed comes from the United States but the bulk of it originates in Europe. Consequently, when you buy vegetable seed from different catalogues, the seeds, such as a variety of carrot, could have come from the same seed farm in the south of France. The same carrot seed lot could end up in 10 different seed catalogues. Another factor is the number of seeds in each package. Some companies are generous; others, not so.

Farm gardens as well as colony gardens should undergo periodic soil tests, just like your cropland. Soil testing has shown me more than a few gardens have high levels of salt, low fertility or high nitrogen levels. Saline soil meant it was time to set up a new vegetable garden. In moving to a new garden site, you will also leave behind many soil-borne diseases, particularly with those vegetables such as potatoes, tomatoes and cucumbers.

Herbicide residue

A significant and recurring problem I saw very many times over the years was herbicide injury to garden crops. The prime culprit in this instance was picloram.

Picloram is an herbicide used on roadside vegetation in all three provinces and perhaps more so in Alberta. This herbicide gives municipalities a low-cost method of controlling vegetation such as large perennial weeds and tree and shrub seedlings. The picloram does an excellent and inexpensive job and is of little consequence to good provincial highway maintenance. The problem is that farmers will take hay cut from major highway embankments. The hay is perfectly edible and safe for livestock, but unfortunately the resulting manure retains the picloram herbicide. If this manure is spread on vegetable garden land it can be devastating. It only takes a few parts per million or less to wipe out sensitive potato, bean or pea crops. Other crops such as carrots, beets, onions and cucumbers can also be significantly damaged. This manure-carrying residue may now take several years to disperse in garden soil, so it may be prudent to seek a new garden site right away.

Picloram can also find its way into farm gardens when pasture or hayland is treated with a combination herbicide that contains picloram. If a compost is made of this cattle manure, using it on a vegetable garden would be disastrous. So the word, on farm gardens in particular, is to avoid any use of cattle manure unless you are absolutely certain it is picloram-free. Poultry manure or alfalfa pellets are an alternative if you must go organic.

When we use peat moss mixes to start garden crops, or perhaps to grow them for a while in the greenhouse, do not take it for granted that this crop starter soil mix is squeaky clean. On a few occasions I have found corn herbicides in the peat mix that have been very toxic to seedling establishment. I must admit, though, this problem is not very common.

Salinity

I had mentioned in earlier articles that garden soils can become saline from irrigation with saline ground water and previous use of cattle manure high in salt. Remember, when you are raising garden seedlings in particular, you must use rainwater or melted snow or pond water of low or very low salinity. Often a few good waterings of saline ground water on pot-grown tomato plants can kill or severely damage them. The use of ground water, for example, on potted houseplants is a sure way to kill them off in a few months and make you believe you have a black thumb.

Another point is that if you have a greenhouse, never use it for storing herbicide — or for that matter, never store herbicide in your house. Volatile herbicides, particularly when spilled, can wipe out a greenhouse or house plant population, especially if herbicide spillage occurs.

Orchard sites

If you intend to set up a fruit orchard for your personal or commercial use, it should be situated on a well drained area, preferably facing north, west or east, and should be separate from the vegetable garden. Remember, the B.C. fruit growers — apple trees are now planted five to eight feet apart, north-facing, and treated as bushes. Who wants a 20-foot apple tree?

What I’m trying to say is that your fruit tree orchard needs very different conditions from your vegetable garden. For convenience, though, your strawberries and raspberries should be rotated every two to three years in your vegetable garden. Please check out my article on fruit growing in a previous issue.

Frequently-grown farm fruit crops such as raspberries and strawberries are normally at their best when grown inside or alongside the garden vegetable crops. This is due to the fact that for best results, both raspberry and strawberry planting areas or rows should be renewed every second or third year. In an ideal garden situation, you would plant out new rows of both strawberries and raspberries. Not doing so leads to sluggish growth and poor berry yields in both these crops in their third and fourth years. Just like their companion vegetable crops, they should then be rotated — perhaps not annually, but certainly by the third year.

The post More on Prairie vegetables and fruits appeared first on Grainews.

Aaron Hargreaves, who co-owns Harwest Farms south of Brandon, said he and his four partners have struggled with soil salinity on their farm since they established it in 2013. They’ve taken a number of measures to address the issue, but none have proven as effective as tile drainage.

“It’s the best tool in the toolbox that we have found,” Hargreaves said during a discussion of the impact tile drainage can have on soil salinity.

“Results can vary. Compaction, soil type and rainfall can all have an impact. But nothing else works the same as tile.”

Hargreaves and his partners started experimenting with tile drainage soon after starting their 17,000-acre farm, after they heard U.S. producers talk about its effectiveness and the improvements in corn and soybean yields as well as salinity.

He acknowledged it was a bit of gamble in those early days. No other producers in their immediate area were using it and the partners had no experience with its use or installation. They quickly learned it wasn’t feasible to install it themselves and eventually hired a contractor.

“We definitely had some learning processes when we started this. But we have a saying on our farm: if we don’t have enough money to do it right the first time, we’ll always have enough to do it again,” he said, laughing.

Hargreaves said tile drainage has had a positive impact on many problem fields. Yields have increased dramatically in many of those fields and the reduced saline has allowed the partners to plant crops that would have fared poorly in the past.

He noted pinto bean yield is much better in one of those fields.

“Pinto beans are extremely sensitive to salinity, but they are growing well in that area of the farm now. We couldn’t even grow canola in the field four or five years ago.”

How it works

In basic terms, tile drainage reduces excess water in the crop rooting zone by lowering the water table. This allows a plant to put roots deeper into the soil to better access nutrients. Tile drainage only removes water that is above a field’s capacity.

A tile drainage system has three components: lateral lines of perforated pipe that collect excess water from a field; mains or headers that deliver that water below ground; and a gravity- or mechanically-operated outlet that pumps the water into a ditch or other collection area.

Hargreaves said producers considering tile drainage should be aware of the cost. Basic installation typically ranges between $1,000 and $2,000 per acre. There can be additional costs, such as a lift station, which is used to move subsurface water from a lower to higher elevation when natural gravity flow isn’t sufficient to handle the job.

Lift stations are expensive, Hargreaves said, and most require an electrical source to operate.

“They increase the cost of the project a lot and sometimes that makes it not worth doing. If you’re just trying to do a 10-acre low area, it costs $40,000 or $50,000 to put in a lift station, plus the tile. Your costs start to go pretty darn high.”

Some farmers use solar-powered lift stations for their tile drainage systems. Hargreaves and his partners installed a solar-powered lift station on their farm for the first time last year, but he said the jury is still out on its effectiveness, since it will only operate for as long as the sun is shining.

Producers should also be aware lift stations need to be regularly monitored and serviced. The good news is several companies now produce electronic monitors that can send alerts to a mobile device indicating whether the pump is working.

Type of system

There are two types of tiling systems: pattern and selective.

Pattern tiling refers to cases where every acre of a field is tiled. Selective tiling involves only certain areas of a field.

Hargreaves said each has its pros and cons. Pattern tiling allows a field to be seeded earlier, leads to more uniform crop maturity, and machinery is less likely to get stuck on hilltops.

The downside is that it can be expensive to install. The cost of selective tiling can be more expensive per acre due to higher installation costs, but the overall cost per field is generally lower and it can provide a faster return on investment.

“Most years, (selective tiling) is adequate in fields with good natural drainage,” he added.

Hargreaves said he and his partners found that in cases where selective tiling was installed, narrower spacing of the perforated pipe is more effective. In most cases they have spaced the pipes 25 feet apart rather than the standard 50 feet.

He suggested it can sometimes be better to err on the side of caution when installing tile drainage. Even though a saline problem area may be quite narrow, he recommended that tiling be extended well past the outer edge.

“We found it definitely works better, way better, if you go well beyond where you see crop loss to make it work as best you can.”

An unexpected benefit of tiling has been the “huge” impact on weed control, especially kochia, he said.

“Roundup-resistant kochia is prevalent in our area. In a tiled area in our field we are reducing the amount of kochia in that field by 75 to 90 per cent easy. It’s a hugely effective tool in the management of kochia.”

Is it right for you?

How do you determine whether tile drainage makes economic sense for your operation?

David Whetter, a soil scientist and president of AgriEarth Consulting, said during an Ag Days seminar that farmers will need to do their homework before making a decision.

“It’s a big investment and producers know their land the best. My advice is to make sure that you’re part of the design process in terms of that kind of gut feel. Does the design make sense? Are the right areas being drained? Seek advice where there’s any uncertainty just to make sure you can optimize your investment.”

READ MORE: When is tile drainage a good fit?

Whetter said one of the most important factors to consider is drainage coefficient — that is, the number that describes the maximum rate of water removal for which a tile is designed.

For example, a drainage coefficient of a quarter-inch of excess water in a day is the typical design standard. That means, in the case of a one-inch excess rainfall event, it will take four days on average to remove that excess water from a field. The higher the drainage coefficient, the higher the cost of the drainage system.

Another design consideration is depth of tile or pipe. A minimum depth of 2.5 feet is typically required to maintain pipe integrity. In Manitoba, the typical depth of installation is between three and four feet.

It’s also important to consider any restrictive layers in the soil, Whetter said. This can include areas where sand is located on top of clay, or where there is significant compaction that can make installation more difficult and affect tile performance.

In parts of the Prairies, farmers sometimes have to contend with excess water and drought in the same growing season. That’s why getting the water table at just the right height is so important with a tile system, he added.

“The golden rule is to drain just enough water for crop growth but not a drop more.”

‘Field-specific solution’

Also complicating decision-making are the Prairies’ variable soil landscapes.

“The takeaway here is the snowflake analogy. Every field is unique, and it really requires a field-specific solution, particularly when we get into these variable landscapes,” Whetter said.

Tile drainage has often been linked to increased productivity. Studies from Iowa, Ohio and Ontario have shown increases in yield for corn and soybeans grown in fields with subsurface drainage of between four and 45 per cent.

A recent study run in Minnesota showed yield increases of 10 to 30 bushels per acre for corn and four to 15 bushels per acre for soybeans.

However, Whetter said, it’s difficult to quantify the impact it can have on yields in the Prairies because there is little regionally-specific data.

“A sad story is that we don’t have a lot of good local data, at least not that’s out in that public realm. We have to lean on other regions to look at data, and even then, there’s not a lot of data out there. Manitoba or Prairie region results are really needed here.”

READ MORE: A dry year is a good time to talk drainage

That’s partly why Whetter and a colleague helped develop the Souris Plains Soil and Water Management research site. It’s a 320-acre field-scale research demonstration site, with just over half hooked to tile drainage systems.

It monitors tile flow, water quality, water table depth and soil moisture above and below tile in a variety of different landscape zones. Preliminary results from the site, which was launched in 2020, showed a “pretty clear” indication in soil salinity reduction after just one year of tile drainage, although Whetter stressed that further study is required.

Preaching patience

Hargreaves offered one final piece of advice to producers: be patient.

“It can take time (to have an impact). In an area like Nesbitt (about 30 km south of Brandon) we’ll see results lots of times in one or two years to fix the spots where the salinity isn’t too strong. Where it’s really bad, it’s still going to take a long time.”

The post Make it drain: Is tile right for your fields? appeared first on Grainews.

For soil salinity, our results have been communicated broadly for decades and practices have changed, but, in this piece, I will let you know how it all happened!

In your face: The late 1970s and soil salinity

The early 1970s were very wet including the huge snow dump in the winter of 1973-74. That would have raised water tables and was the “setup” for a big increase in soil salinity.

As the dry years of the late 1970s and early ’80s arrived, white salts were “in your face” just by driving down the highway.

Some thought soil salinity was increasing by 10 per cent each year and we would soon have no land to farm. The government of the day was developing a program to have more research done on actual farm fields and wanted to set up committees to oversee each project.

I was never a fan of committees, so it took a while to negotiate but we were eventually supplied enough funds to buy equipment, hire staff and get started.

We assembled the “salt patrol” with very good staff who made it all possible. In alphabetical order they are Paul Bullock, Terry Hogg, Larry Luba and Graham Phipps. After our project, they all went on to successful careers in agronomy or hydrogeology.

The first decision was what kind of drill to buy. I had worked with folks in the Outlook irrigation area who had a Sterling drill that could take foot samples to 20 feet in jig time. But, what if the answer was at 21 feet?

We decided on a Mobile drill mounted on a one-ton truck with augers that were five inches in diameter and five-foot lengths, and enough of them to drill to 45 feet.

Our first year of operation was 1982. At that time, Sask Ag still had 42 rural extension agents (agricultural representatives or ag reps) who worked with local farmers to solve local problems.

We had their full co-operation in suggesting sites and farmers to approach about investigating salinity on their farms. The local knowledge was very valuable and appreciated.

Field lab

For our field investigations, the idea of sending soil samples off to a lab was out of the question. An on-site lab was essential, and Hogg made it all happen in spades. We started out using whatever space was available on the farm we were at.

We soon graduated to a large lab trailer. As soon as the first hole was sampled, Hogg was busy doing the lab data we needed. The trailer also served as a place for maps, etc., and meetings with farmers.

Our first ‘on-farm’ investigation

Step one for any investigation was to do “the homework.” We checked soil and topographic maps, air photos and especially the old municipal assessment maps, which clearly mapped the soil salinity on each quarter section at the time the assessment was made.

The first site was near Saskatoon at Prudhomme on rolling land with calcareous (limy) eroded knolls. Those knolls were being interpreted as saline. However, there was some salinity on a flat quarter.

Our first item of business on the farm was to meet with the farmer and have him or her explain the problem to us and we provided information from our “homework.”

At the Prudhomme site, the farmer thought perhaps the problem could be coming from nearby salty Buffer Lake. A quick look at the topographic map showed Buffer Lake to be at an elevation of 1650 feet above sea level while the farm soil salinity was at 1825 feet. Next question please!

The first fieldwork was to use an EM38 to establish the geography of the problem. The EM38 was essential to any fieldwork, not just salinity.

Over the course of our soil salinity work, I walked many miles with me on one side and a farmer on the other watching the needle move and listening to my interpretation of what the EM38 was telling us.

At the Prudhomme site, we used the Mobile drill to trace gravel from a nearby abandoned gravel pit to a road ditch that led to the problem.

When I read our first report, it makes me realize how little we really knew at that time. The learning continued with each new site. After about three years we really did understand the problem and could communicate that to farmers and extension folks.

Site No. 2: Big learning

Our second site was in the deep southwest, northwest of Shaunavon on the Bruce Poppy farm. Several holes were drilled to 20 feet — some were salty, some not, with no apparent reason.

We then selected an area in the grass that was obviously very salty and “let it all hang out.” We used all of the auger lengths we had and ended up with a 43-foot hole. It was glacial till and grey in colour with a bit of seepage in places but no hint of what was causing the problem.

We were confused and clearly needed help. At that stage, I hired geologist Earl Christiansen as a private consultant. Christiansen said, “You have the wrong equipment and are doing it all wrong.”

Soil science may be top down, but geology is a bottom-up affair. You should be using a driller with hydraulic rotary equipment and drill to a defined base of exploration, which in this case was the Shaunavon aquifer.

I had no idea what a hydraulic rotary drill was or how to hire one. Christiansen hired Campbell Brothers drilling from Swift Current and proceeded to drill at our site. Lo and behold, the Shaunavon aquifer came in at 53 feet with the head just below the soil surface. Problem solved. We now knew why the salinity was there and could recommend next steps with confidence.

The next step was to leave the grass in place and carry on farming the rest of the land. That was done and the grass and our piezometers are still there.

This big breakthrough gave us confidence to get serious about geology and I spent much time in the library digging out geology and groundwater studies from early years.

While with the Saskatchewan Research Council, Christiansen and Bill Meneley did a lot of good work but by that time they had gone private. We hired them as private consultants to teach us the geology and groundwater.

Private consultants

Hiring private consultants was not welcomed by all of my colleagues. Why not use public geologists was the argument. My retort was, “Because when I ask Earl and Bill a question, I get an answer.”

We carried on with the rest of that field season and in late fall I was active with public speaking opportunities to spread the word.

The Deputy Minister of Saskatchewan Agriculture was at one of those events. He contacted me to come to Regina to meet with the government caucus to let them know what we were up to — maybe they could spring for more money to advance the work?

So, there I was in a small meeting room in the legislature building waiting for the day’s session to end. When it ended, the MLAs came tumbling into the small room and pizza was available for all. I had 10 minutes to spill my guts, so I did just that.

When I finished, the only question was, “If we give you more money can you do it faster?” The upshot was the Minister of Agriculture came to the office of the University of Saskatchewan president and handed me a cheque for $100,000. That was a big boost for the next year.

Once we knew the actual cause of most of the soil salinity, we were able to cover much ground and started to do the geology and aquifers of entire areas.

The ‘dog and pony’ shows

We held many town hall meetings to explain the soil salinity problem for an entire area. We wallpapered the hall with the geologic cross-sections that Christiansen constructed and used tables for air photos and topographic maps.

We requested farmers bring a water sample from their wells and many did. A lab was set up in the kitchen or bar to analyze the samples for total salt, hardness and nitrate. We even had an early Mac computer and printer so farmers could take home a printed copy of their water analysis.

I would lecture for about an hour with a question period after that. By that time, the lab manager (Terry Hogg) would shout out the soil electrical conductivity and hardness from some of the samples.

From that data, I could tell the crowd where that sample came from — the geology and geography of the aquifer, for example.

The ag rep from Wynyard had farmers come to his office years later wondering how we managed to do that. It was fun.

The best example was from a meeting at Duval on the east side of Last Mountain Lake. One sample had very low salt content. My comment was, “That sample did not come out of the ground in this area unless it is from a shallow well very high up on Last Mountain.”

Turned out the sample was brought in by a town employee from Watrous where the town supply is from a surface aquifer with low salt content.

More money, please

By that time, we had a big head of steam and needed serious money to carry on and cover more areas. NSERC (National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada) established a strategic grant to provide $1 million, which was serious coin in those days.

To qualify, the project must be making significant gains on a problem that affected a current societal issue. The grant would allow the project to ramp up and quickly provide practical answers for that problem. Our soil salinity project fit like a glove, and I thought was sure to be funded.

I spent many hours preparing the application to make sure it explained what we would do and how it mattered. To my great surprise and anger, we were turned down — not because of the project or the application but because I did not publish enough in peer-reviewed journals. I know that to be true because a member of the evaluating committee told me so.

I did publish one major paper in the Canadian Journal of Soil Science that PAgs or CCAs can check out in Volume 65, pages 749-768, 1985, by Henry, Bullock, Hogg and Luba.

The paper covered 16 sites from all over Saskatchewan and included fold-out pages to accommodate geologic cross-sections. It could have easily been split up into about 10 papers, but I did not subscribe to the notion of “publish or perish.” I was more interested in getting the ideas to the farm gate where they could be put to use to enhance profits on farms.

ERDA to the rescue

At the same time, the feds had a funding program under ERDA (Economic and Rural Development Act), which provided us with $1 million, and we were good to go.

The award of that $1 million had wide press coverage, so most farmers knew about it. Not long after the announcement, I was driving down a back road near Assiniboia and I noticed a farmer get out of his tractor and start to walk. I stopped and asked if I could give him a lift. He accepted and asked what I was doing in the area. When I told him we were working on soil salinity he said, “I hear that the government just gave $1 million to some university professor to study the problem.”

When I told him that was me, he was flabbergasted. He expected the university professor would be sitting in his comfortable office while workers went to the field to do the work. I am sure there was some coffee shop talk after that brief ride.

The final hurrah

Our final hurrah was to set up a leaching only experiment to prove to ourselves and others that we understood the soil salinity problem. It had been known for decades that the only solution was tile drainage plus leaching.

In our climate, the leaching part of it involved irrigation with good quality water and some suitable place to dump the salts leached from the soil.

At the university’s Goodale Farm near Saskatoon, we developed a flowing well from a glacial aquifer with a depth of 130 feet and head of 10 feet above the soil surface.

We used a drip irrigation system to apply a known quantity of the aquifer water to replicated small plots. A city type water meter was used to accurately measure the amount of water applied. Phipps set it all up, so it functioned perfectly.

Readers with Henry’s Handbook of Soil and Water can check out pages 94-95 to see the whole story. Others can check out this link for a complete report of yield data, etc., https://harvest.usask.ca/bitstream/handle/10388/11415/J.L.%20Henry%2c%201989.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

To make a long story short, it worked like a charm. In super dry 1988, the dryland yield was zero barley but the plots irrigated with the salty groundwater (total minerals of about 3,000 parts per million) yielded 50 bushels per acre.

In a better year we grew 100-plus bushels per acre of barley with irrigation but no fertilizer. The soil was loaded with nutrients.

I took the College of Agriculture research dean out for a look and he was very impressed. He urged me to gear it up to a larger field scale. My response was, “No. I am shutting the whole project down.” We were finding the same thing over and over again. It was no longer a knowledge problem.

The water table at the site was a few feet below ground and we were adding 700 pounds of salt with each inch of irrigation. The only way the project would succeed long term was to install tile drainage and have somewhere to dump the salty water. We were already at the local low spot so that was not an option.

It would have been possible to carry on for several years and funding would have come easy. However, I thought the taxpaying public deserved better treatment than that.

And so, the big project was wound down. A complete final report was written with an accounting of how all of the $2 million was spent over approximately 10 years. There was $100,000 left in the kitty when we shut down and that went back to the provincial government, which had given us $100,000 when we were struggling for money.

And so, my friends, that is how it all happened. It was great fun to put some light on a problem that was not well understood. The best part of the gig was that we had complete freedom to do it our way — no committee needed!

The post Les Henry: The soil salinity story appeared first on Grainews.

The last time I remember such concern about soil salinity was during the late 1970s and early ’80s. We started the research program in 1982 at the University of Saskatchewan, where we would go out to actual farms to drill holes until we knew what was happening.

In this piece, we will talk about what we learned at that time and how we have come full circle in the cycle. I bought my Dundurn farm in 1993 and have witnessed one complete soil salinity cycle “down on the farm.”

What is soil salinity?

Soil salinity is actually a water problem, not a soil problem. Saline soils are very fertile (i.e. lots of plant nutrients). Salty soils often occur as small patches within a normal, annual crop field. With big equipment, it is much easier to go through those patches than around. If you have variable rate fertilizer capability, the first prescription is to completely cut the fertilizer application from the salty ground.

If there is no variable rate capability, then fertilizer is poured in each year but little, if any, of the nutrients are hauled off the field. The result is a continuous build-up of nutrients.

The fundamental problem with salty soil is the excess salt increases the osmotic pressure of the soil solution such that a plant root cannot take up nutrients. For the most part, it is not a toxicity problem but an osmotic problem.

What makes soil salty in the first place

Our precious sun is responsible. The process driving soil salinization is evaporation greater than precipitation when the water table is close to the soil surface. That means there is more water leaving the soil surface than is entering by precipitation.

A water table means all soil pores are full of water. The water table is the water level in a shallow dug or bored well in an unconfined surficial aquifer.

Now it is time to do some thinking. Think, think, think. If evaporation exceeds precipitation, how in the world does the water table remain close to the surface? For that to happen, there must be water continually replenishing the water table even in times of drought. If there is no water coming up from below, the water table drops and a well will go dry.

In most cases, that water is delivered to the soil surface from an aquifer with sufficient pressure to deliver water to, or above, the soil surface. If it is above the soil surface that is a flowing well.

The upward movement of water continues 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year, and in some cases, has been going on for thousands of years. To understand the process, we must think in terms of great depth over a long period of time.

The water in the aquifer need not be salty. It is the concentration by evaporation that leads to the soil salinity at the surface. The saline soils west of Radisson, Sask., are caused by discharge from the Fielding Aquifer, with salt content not much greater than the South Saskatchewan River.

How to fix salty soil, drainage plus leaching

The fix for salty soils has been known since at least 1935. We must install tile drains and then make sure there is enough water to flush the salts down and away. Drainage and leaching are the only real fix.

The “enough water” part in most of Saskatchewan and southern Alberta means irrigation. The Canada-Saskatchewan Irrigation Development Centre at Outlook, Sask., installed tile drainage on a small, problem field with a linear sprinkler setup. They monitored the soil and water leaving the site in great detail.

Barley would barely grow on that field in 1986 when the project started. They poured gobs of water on in the fall each year after the barley crop was off. By 1990 salt-sensitive pulse crops were growing on land that had been white crusts, kochia and Russian thistle in 1986. Readers with Henry’s Handbook can check out page 97 for details.

Thanks to a long-time experiment conducted by Agvise Laboratories in North Dakota, we now have a pretty decent answer for farmers in Manitoba with rainfall in the 18- to 20-inch range each year.

To be successful, the soils must be on the sandy side and, even then, the desalinization takes place mostly in the surface soil. During dry years, the salts sneak up again, but if enough wet years come along, salts will flush down. The North Dakota experiment carried on for 17 years and that was the experience. Thanks, again, to John Lee of Agvise Labs for sharing that data with me over the past 10 years or so.

The other fly in the ointment is there must be some acceptable place to dump the salty water. Much easier said than done.

Leaching alone

In the 1980s, we did a leaching-only experiment at the U of S Goodale Research Farm. Pages 94 and 95 of Henry’s Handbook provide a completely illustrated story of that project.

We actually used the water from the flowing well of the aquifer that was causing the problem in the first place. It worked swimmingly for the first few years. When I took bureaucrats out to see what we were doing, they were amazed and suggested we immediately upscale the garden patch experiment to a field scale.

The water table was very near the soil surface and we were adding 700 pounds per acre of salt for every inch of irrigation water. As long as we were pouring on the water we grew some great crops. But I shut the whole thing down. How many times have you heard someone say, “Give me more money and in a few years we will have the solution to your problem,” but it does not happen.

It did not take long to realize that in the long term this experiment would fail unless we installed tile drainage and had someplace to dump the salty water. The installation of the tile drainage would be a simple matter; however, we were already at the low point in the landscape and with no reasonable place to dump the water. The extra water needed to do the leaching would bring the water table to the soil surface and the salts would have no place to go.

Turning bad news into good news

The fundamental problem is the osmotic pressure caused by the salts, which prevents the plant from taking up water. Plants vary greatly in their abilities to suck up some water, even with the high-salt concentration.

Coping with most serious soil salinity problems means the production of salt-tolerant forage crops, mostly grasses. The kicker in the past has been most salt-tolerant grasses were not great as a cattle feed. We now have AC Saltlander green wheatgrass, which is very salt tolerant and also a good cattle feed. Thanks to Harold Steppuhn and the Swift Current Research and Development Centre for this great advance. It is a game changer for sure.

For salty patches on the Dundurn farm, I am in the process of establishing a stand of AC Saltlander. By this fall, I may have something to report. In the meantime, I have learned patience and a good mower are important requirements in establishing a grass stand.

With a good, salt-tolerant grass stand, the salty acres can produce some income and you stop pouring expensive inputs down a rathole. Many losing acres can produce a bit of profit. Many farmers are already doing it with good success.

Cycles, cycles, cycles

As the decades fly by (now eight for me), there is more appreciation of Mother Nature’s cycles. What goes around comes around is the common saying. I bought my Dundurn farm just south of Saskatoon in 1993 and have now experienced first-hand one cycle. The land is hilly glacial till with sloughs and stones. Patches of soil salinity are common in that general area.

The mid-1990s were the start of zero till. Neighbours who had farmed there for decades concluded that with the conversion to zero till and the abolishment of summerfallow, soil salinity mostly went away. For the most part, it did. However, we cannot take all the credit. Mother Nature intervened big time.

On a salty patch near the road, I dug a nine-foot hole in 2005 to see where the water table was. To my surprise, that nine-foot hole was dry. Hmmmmmm. The book says salty soils have high water tables. What’s up, Doc?

The net cumulative dry years allowed the water table to drop big time. On May 3, 2005, we seeded peas and could plant right through that area, no problem. Seedbed moisture was excellent as was subsoil moisture. From May 1 to July 3 we had 8.4 inches of rain. Nice gentle rains, well spaced out and with significant amounts. Ideal rains to wash down the salts and with the water table down, it was no problem. That salty patch produced a fair crop of peas. Herbicides worked well so the crop was clean.

The field yield that year was 57 bushels per acre of peas — net sold bushels. The salty patch did not yield 57 bu./ac., but it was acceptable. I often joked that I could show that peas were fairly salt tolerant, if I picked the right data.

Check out the graph on page 18, which shows a continuous record of water levels in a shallow observation well (i.e. the water table) from 1967 to 2020. During the 30-year time period from 1975-2005, the water table trended downward with a couple of spikes at about 10-year intervals. I interpret that data to show a net cumulative drought from 1975 to 2005.

At my Dundurn farm from 1995 to 2005, we spent a lot of time staring at the sky looking for rain. Then came 2005 with a big snow job, 2010 with 20 inches of rain and 2013 was another big snow year. “Irrigation” crops without the pivot were common. Starting in 2015, we have had some dry years but good crops because of soil moisture and high water tables from previous wet years. Water table data suggests the party may soon be over.

The punch line: The cycles continue

Wet years in the early 1970s raised water tables and when the dry cycle started the white crusts of soil salinity were “in your face.” Even white, eroded knolls were being diagnosed as saline. The white colour was just lime from the subsoil exposed by erosion.

“Soil salinity is taking over the farm and we must do something about it” was the consensus. In 1982, we started the salt patrol at U of S to go out on individual farms and determine what the real cause was. At many sites, we were able to use old air photos to show that soil salinity had been present and “in your face” before. During the wet cycle, the salts are dissolved and not visible. As soon as it starts to dry up, they turn white and are in your face for all to see.

So, here we are in 2021, right back where we were in the early 1980s.

The post Les Henry: On salty ground appeared first on Grainews.