Wolf, who has 35 years of experience in the spraying business and uses @nozzleguy as his X (Twitter) handle, spent most of his 40-minute talk on the “cons” of spraying with drones.

He’s concerned about the risk of drift from drones and explained, with supporting data, that it’s difficult to get a consistent swath, or spray, width from a drone.

The focus on “cons” prompted a comment from a person in the audience at CropConnect, a crop industry conference held Feb. 12-13 in Winnipeg.

“The title of this presentation was The Pros and Cons of Drone Spraying, but I didn’t hear the first part,” the audience member said.

The comment provoked a smile from Wolf, who admitted that some farmers are seeing value from spraying crops with drones.

Wolf, who hosts and writes for the world’s No. 1 sprayer website, Sprayers101.com, has spoken with Canadian growers to understand why they like the technology.

“They say no tracks (on the field) and no big bill from my aerial applicator … and I got my fungicide sprayed,” Wolf said.

“There is a logistical reason that these things are popular.”

READ MORE: Don’t hold your breath for a drone sprayer

However, farmers who are happy with drone spraying probably don’t have data on the efficacy of the technology, he said. They don’t really know if it’s better or worse than aerial spraying or using a self-propelled sprayer.

“Let’s go back to the initial question I posed: is this (drone spraying) making things better?” Wolf said.

“That’s really the question.”

Swath width

At CropConnect, Wolf explained that a spraying technologies are evaluated on four criteria: productivity, water volume, spray quality and deposit uniformity.

“Water volume and droplet size are the coverage part of the equation,” he said. “Deposit uniformity is just the overall quality. Are we doing the same thing on the left, middle and right side of the spray swath, for example.”

Wolf and one of his research colleagues, Jason Deveau, have done experiments in Ontario to evaluate the consistent of drones for swath width and the uniformity of the application.

Deveau is an application technology specialist with Ontario Agriculture.

In an ideal world, as the sprayer or drone travels back and forth across a field, the spray width should be consistent.

“If you buy a 120’ sprayer boom, how wide is your swath? 120 feet,” Wolf said.

“If you buy a T50 drone, how wide is your swath? Nobody knows.”

To answer that question, Deveau and Wolf laid a strip of paper across a test field near Simcoe, Ont. and flew a spray drone over the strip.

The tank in the drone contained water with a dye, which becomes visible on the strip of paper.

Deveau used a device called the Swath Gobbler to scan the paper and measure the performance of the drone.

“We can get droplet number and droplet coverage out of it,” said Wolf, who showed the results of those tests in Winnipeg.

They found that swath width and deposit uniformity is highly inconsistent. It can change as the drone flies over the crop and vary greatly, in a few minutes of time.

The swath width depends on drone height, water volume, flying speed, side wind, headwind, downwind and other factors.

One set of data showed that a professional pilot, flying a drone at 3.0 m of height, 30 km per hour and delivering three gallons per acre, produced three different results in a short period of time:

• Repetition 1: swath width of 6.5 m (21 feet)

• Rep 2: 30 min later, 7.0 m (23 feet)

• Rep 3: 30 min later, 5.0 m (16 feet)

“We have variability, even within a short distance,” he said. “Do not just take someone’s word, that you have a 29-foot swath (width). The price of not having a 29-foot swath is striping.”

Striping is duplicating spray on the same strip of crop.

Wolf is also worried about the increased risk of drift, from spraying with a drone. Then, there’s the possibility of accidents with other aircrafts and injuries to humans.

A lack of regulations is another issue.

“Anyone, here, can buy a drone today and fly it this afternoon,” he said. “I think we’re playing with something that is inevitably going to go south.”

Looking forward

Wolf concluded his talk with some optimism on how the technology could evolve.

Right now, most of the spray drones on the market were developed in Asia for application on small farms. Those drones aren’t suited for a 9,000-acre grain farm in Saskatchewan. Canadian producers will need larger drones, specifically designed for broad-acreage crops.

Those drones are starting to enter the market, Wolf said.

“I would say we’re at the very beginning of the drone story for spraying.”

The post The cons, cons, cons and pros of drone spraying appeared first on Grainews.

What do you do? Igor de Albuquerque advises extreme caution.

“If the product in question does not include drone usage on its label, promoting or advising on its use could result in regulatory violations, leading to penalties from the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA),” the forensic agrologist with the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture wrote in an email.

Producers have been using drones, otherwise known as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or remotely piloted aircraft (RPA), for scouting, mapping and managing cattle on pasture. With the advent of drones capable of spraying crop protection products, some growers have tried it regardless of legality.

Only four products have so far received agency approval for application using drones and none are directly related to agriculture. Garlon XRT herbicide controls vegetation in non-crop scenarios and the others are larvicides for mosquito control.

This effectively makes it illegal to spray any ag pesticide by drone and there are fines up to $10,000 from the PMRA for those who do so.

Liability is another risk, said de Albuquerque.

“Agronomists could face liability issues depending on their contract or agreement with the grower, especially if they work for a retailer, which might be viewed as advertising a product in violation of regulations.

“Such situations should be addressed by the appropriate licensing body, such as the Saskatchewan Institute of Agrologists.”

However, this may be a moot point. Unless an agrologist has the necessary training, the easiest thing to tell inquiring producers is that they’re not qualified. Transport Canada sets the requirements for instruction on spraying with drones and among them is years-long experience.

Specific penalties for agrologists who show farmers the ropes of drone application are hard to pin down, even for those as close to the subject as Ross Breckels, a senior scientific evaluator with the PMRA who chairs the department’s internal RPA working group.

“If an agronomist or a non-applicator advises an applicator to spray a pesticide when drones aren’t on the label, I guess it would be hard to penalize them, but maybe they would get their wrist slapped and have the talking to. But I don’t think there’ll be a monetary penalty involved.”

Markus Weber is a central Alberta professional agrologist and drone salesperson. He holds drone spraying clinics to help students get a feel for these aircraft: how to use them, calibrate them and measure the results of application. Students get into the field for spraying instruction, he said, but not with pesticides.

“We actually have them using the tool to create missions, to accurately hit targets, to calibrate, but it’s all with water in the tank. We don’t teach them how to use the pesticides. We teach them how to use the drone spraying tool or drone spreading tool for granular products.”

Weber teaches his students how to physically operate a drone and about the risks and regulations from the PMRA and Transport Canada, which oversees the aircraft-based regulations.

“We have an hour, hour and a half, on all the regulatory aspects of doing this and that includes aviation regulations as much as it includes pesticide regulations,” he said.

“When I teach people how to use a drone for spraying, I teach them how to use it generally for spraying and if they are going to use it for spraying pesticides off-label, they know that what they’re doing is off-label and what the legal status of that is.”

RPA have their share of advocates and skeptics. In an interview earlier this year, Tom Wolf, owner of Agrimetrix Research and Training and a go-to sprayer guru, outlined some of the risks.

Because drones have smaller tanks and lower water volumes than other aircraft, spray droplets tend to be very fine and run the risk of going off-target, creating potential for spray drift, he said.

“The drones, by necessity, will be spraying low water volumes. A ground sprayer will be spraying five to 10 U.S. gallons for herbicides. The drones will likely be spraying two (gallons).

“These drones are somewhat limited in what droplet size you can produce. You will have to produce a smaller droplet in order to get adequate coverage with lower water volumes.

“I don’t see a way around that. You don’t have that coarse or very coarse or even extremely coarse spray categories available to you for low water volume drone spraying.”

Weber does not agree. Even if he did, leading RPA manufacturers such as DJI, XAG and Hylio are already manufacturing droplet-adjusting drones that create less drift-susceptible droplets.

“Historically, most spraying has been done with a flat fan nozzle. And the basic principle is you have high-pressure water going through a small hole and that hole atomizes, it meters, and it creates some kind of a shape: a flat fan, typically.”

Modern spray drones feature three components that enable application: the atomizer; pumps that do the metering; and propellers that create the “fan” or deposition size using downward pressure. Droplet sizes can be adjusted.

“A drone operator is able to change droplet size from as low as 50 or 100 microns — extremely drift-prone droplets but in some cases necessary, say, for an orchard where you’re trying to penetrate a canopy for insect control. In those cases, some really fine droplets are called for,” said Weber.

“And then in situations where you have higher winds and you need to control drift in more of a typical Western Canada field scenario, then the larger droplet size makes sense, and that one tool lets you do all of that.”

Weber said more research is needed on how propellers distribute droplets to create less drift. However, he argues that drift from drones is no worse than what’s created by manned aircraft, which some producers legally hire for spray operations.

“The biggest benefit of drones is that they have downdraft,” he said. “Those propellers are largely pushing air down, but they’re also pushing those droplets down towards the ground and that reduces their dwell time in the air, improves coverage on the plant, improves canopy penetration. So that propeller is actually a big part of why these drones will have such great benefit.”

Four categories must be satisfied before the PMRA makes an on-label decision for a pesticide and its method of application: drift, efficacy, maximum residue limits and operator and bystander exposure.

The PMRA itself doesn’t collect this data, instead counting on chemical companies to submit pesticides for on-label drone use based on their research. Some, including Breckels, have in the past suggested there isn’t a lot of activity on that aspect.

However, Breckels is more optimistic today, thanks to research conducted around the world. Probably the biggest example is the work of the Unmanned Aerial Pesticide Application System Task Force.

It is a consortium of eight ag chemical companies that formed in 2021 to generate drone-spraying data on off-site movement, operator/handler exposure and human dietary exposure for regulatory authorities around the world.

The eight companies include BASF, Bayer CropScience, Corteva AgriScience, FMC, Gowan, NuFarm, Syngenta and Valent.

The results could bring good news for farmers who want to use drones for pesticide application, said Breckels.

“They have been conducting worldwide drift trials in 2023 and some are still ongoing in 2024. They are going to submit their data to the PMRA sometime this fall as well. So we should have some data coming in, which hopefully is useful and will help in getting more drones on the labels once the applications come in.”

Breckels also noted a presentation at the American Chemical Society conference in August that hinted at “encouraging” preliminary results from residue trials.

“They’re hopefully going to provide the PMRA with the data from those results in the coming months.”

The task force has an annual budget of about $4 million per year.

“It’s not an insignificant amount of money that they’re putting into this, so obviously there is a lot of interest from chemical registrants.”

The popularity of spray drones, once common ag pesticides are registered, is another matter, said Breckels. They won’t likely replace ground sprayers or manned aircraft as application methods.

“They’ll work in conjunction with them, so the pesticide companies would still get their revenue from field sprayers and air applicators.”

Weber says the first ag products approved for drones will likely be fungicides and chemicals for various niche uses.

“That’s been proven true with Garlon XRT,” he said.

The post Be wary when asked about spraying with drones appeared first on Grainews.

Ross Breckels, a senior scientific evaluator with Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), said the process of getting common pesticides “on-label” for use by drone is coming along faster than he expected a year ago.

Four requirements must be satisfied before the agency makes an on-label decision for a pesticide and, in this case, its method of application. Those include drift risk, efficacy, maximum residue limits and impacts of operator and bystander exposure. It’s up to chemical companies to submit pesticides for on-label drone use and make a case for their safety, Canadian authorities have said.

Some — including Breckels — previously suggested there hasn’t been a lot of activity in that domain.

He’s more optimistic today, thanks to research being conducted around the world.

Perhaps the biggest example of that work is the Unmanned Aerial Pesticide Application System Task Force. That’s a group of eight agricultural chemical companies generating drone-spraying data on off-site movement, operator/handler exposure and human dietary exposure for regulatory authorities around the world. The task force has an annual multimillion-dollar budget.

Breckels takes the number of zeros in that figure as a sign that major chemical companies are taking the file seriously.

“It’s not an insignificant amount of money that they’re putting into this. So, obviously there is a lot of interest from chemical registrants,” he said.

Companies involved in that initiative include BASF, Bayer CropScience, Corteva Agriscience, FMC, Gowan, NuFarm, Syngenta and Valent.

Results coming out of the task force might mean good news for farmers hoping to use drones for pesticide application, said Breckels.

“They have been conducting worldwide drift trials in 2023 and some are still ongoing in 2024. They are going to submit their data to the PMRA sometime this fall as well.”

Breckels also pointed to a presentation at the American Chemical Society conference in August, which hinted at “encouraging” preliminary results from residue trials.

“They’re hopefully going to provide the PMRA with the data from those results in the coming months.”

To date, only four chemical products have received PMRA approval for drone application — none directly related to agriculture. Garlon XRT herbicide was approved for industrial use this summer, while the others are larvicides for mosquito control.

This effectively makes the spraying of any ag pesticide by drone illegal, with fines of up to $10,000.

Drops and drifts

Drones have their share of advocates and skeptics. In an interview earlier this year, spray expert Tom Wolf cautioned that their smaller tanks and lower water volumes translate to very fine spray droplets which have more risk of going off-target.

Markus Weber, a central Alberta drone salesperson and instructor, does not agree with that assessment. He cited leading spray drone manufacturers such as DJI, XAG and Hylio that are already manufacturing drones capable of adjusting droplet size.

“A drone operator is able to change droplet size from as low as 50 or 100 microns — extremely drift-prone droplets but in some cases necessary, say, for an orchard where you’re trying to penetrate a canopy for insect control. In those cases, some really fine droplets are called for.

“And then, in situations where you have higher winds and you need to control drift in more of a typical Western Canada field scenario, then the larger droplet size makes sense, and that one tool lets you do all of that.”

Weber says the first ag products approved for drones will likely be fungicides and chemicals for various niche uses. “That’s been proven true with Garlon XRT,” he said.

How popular spray drones will be once common ag pesticides are registered is another matter, said Breckels, adding they won’t likely replace ground sprayers or manned aircraft as application methods.

“They’ll work in conjunction with them, so the pesticide companies would still get their revenue from field sprayers and air applicators.”

The post Drone spraying sees some lift toward label approvals appeared first on Grainews.

The advent of drone technology has ushered in a new age in aerial spraying. Today, the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) market is dominated by battery-powered rotary and fixed-wing drones, but there’s a brand-new player emerging that’s unlike any sprayer you’ve seen before.

Developed by Saskatchewan-based Precision AI, the Stratus AirSprayer has a unique “flexwing” design, similar to a paraglider.

The flexwing refers to a canopy or parachute, attached to a motorized spraying apparatus. The parachute not only provides the necessary lift for the gasoline-powered rig to carry heavy payloads but also enables it to travel at the slower speeds required for precision spraying applications.

“You can’t do any precision work if you’re flying at 100 miles an hour. It just isn’t possible,” says Daniel McCann, Precision AI’s founder and CEO.

The Stratus AirSprayer clocks in at just under 40 m.p.h. as it flies over crops four feet or so above the canopy. It can apply precise GPS-guided broadcast sprays in two interchangeable swath widths, one 18 feet (5.5 metres) wide and the other 30 feet (nine metres) wide.

A Generation Two version of the Stratus AirSprayer, which Precision AI plans to release soon, will feature green-on-green spot spraying technology developed with the use of artificial intelligence and advanced computer vision.

“This is actually the first time this has ever been done from an aerial applicator,” McCann says. “It is actually extremely challenging to develop an aerial platform that can carry a lot of liquid but also fly slow enough so it can be applied precisely. That’s not easy to do.

“We ended up hiring one of the top 10 aerospace guys in the United States (Andrew Streett, now Precision AI’s vice-president of engineering) to help solve this problem. He came up with this idea of using a parachute, which was a new concept that nobody really thought about before,” McCann says.

“It makes perfect sense. Even though it looks a little bit weird, it is probably the most efficient solution for big farms. We’re pretty pleased by it.”

McCann acknowledges the Precision AI team was a bit worried at first about how the UAV’s parachute would go over with farmers, given that it’s so different.

But he says that really hasn’t been a concern, once producers are shown how the Stratus AirSprayer works, and they can see how handling the parachute isn’t any harder than folding and unfolding a spray boom.

Bigger payloads

The drone’s distinctive design means it can carry heavier payloads and stay in the air much longer than other drone sprayers — something McCann maintains is a must for the large farm acreages found across Western Canada.

“We have engineered a really unique concept that can scale up to very large farms,” he says. “Spray drones are great if you have 40 acres of onions or something like that. But if you’ve got 10,000 acres of canola, good luck getting a small drone sprayer to cover that.”

The Stratus AirSprayer, which has a maximum payload capacity of payload of 833 pounds (378 kilograms), can carry 100 U.S. gallons (378 litres) of herbicide, fungicide or insecticide solutions — almost 20 times more than smaller ag drones, according to Precision AI.

The gas-powered AirSprayer can fly up to five hours before refueling, while “your typical spray drones, even the big ones, typically max out at about 10 minutes of air time, then you’ve got to swap batteries and refill it,” McCann says.

“A five-hour flight time means you don’t need fuel infrastructure on site. You might need to fill your spray tank, but you won’t need to refill the fuel.”

McCann says bigger payloads and longer flight times means more efficient spraying — there’s less downtime and more acres covered in a day — as well as substantial savings for farmers due to lower operating costs.

Precision AI maintains it costs less than $3 per acre to operate its UAV, a fraction of the cost of traditional drone technology, which it says ranges from $6 to $13 per acre.

McCann says tests have shown aerial spraying can also provide up to four per cent yield boost over ground applications, because there’s less compaction and crop trampling caused by heavy farm equipment.

He adds conventional ground sprayers also burn more fuel than the Stratus AirSprayer, requiring up to 10 times as much to cover the same number of acres. “You need a lot of gas to run your big iron sprayers.”

McCann maintains the Generation Two AirSprayer should save farmers more money, since its spot spraying system uses less chemicals.

Autonomous operation

The Stratus AirSprayer operates autonomously, both in its flying and spraying capacities.

“You basically upload your field boundaries, and it’ll synthesize a flight map and automatically fly over and spray the field for you. The operator on site just needs to babysit the off button, mostly,” McCann says.

The Canadian government hasn’t yet approved using drones like the Stratus AirSprayer for aerial applications of crop protectant products. Precision AI is on a committee to advise Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) on the necessary changes required to allow spraying from UAVs.

“At the end of the day, we’ve got the technology that can be used as an automated aerial sprayer,” McCann says. “It’s built out, and we just need to wait for the regulatory environment to catch up.”

McCann foresees a time when autonomous drones like the Stratus AirSprayer aren’t constrained by visual “line-of-sight” restrictions.

“When that happens, the AirSprayer theoretically could take off just from your farmyard, fly out to spray a field that might be 10 miles away, then fly home,” he says. “Then you don’t even need to have anybody on site, and that’s really where the power of the extended flight times becomes very powerful. But that’s going to take a few years to get to.”

READ MORE: Herbicide approved for industrial use by drone

McCann adds initial regulation will likely require farmers to attain a drone pilot’s licence to run the AirSprayer — or they’ll need to find a licensed aerial applicator to do it.

“This is a limitation today. But again, we see that changing into beyond line-of-sight world where that won’t be necessary. It’s just not there yet today,” he says.

McCann also sees a day when the Stratus AirSprayer runs on electric power rather than gasoline, once drone batteries become more efficient and last longer before recharging.

“Battery technology continues to improve, but it’s just not good enough to cover big farms yet. But the minute that it does, an electrified future is absolutely plausible,” he says.

“The nice thing about the AirSprayer platform versus the other type of drones out there is it can carry a lot more weight because of that parachute. So, it could actually carry larger batteries that require less downtime, less charging time and so on when we get to that particular phase.”

Less spray drift

The Stratus AirSprayer rig weighs 700 lbs. (318 kg) and measures 3.25 metres (10 feet, eight inches) long, 2.1 metres (six feet, nine inches) wide and 2.25 metres (seven feet, five inches) high. The parachute is 541 square feet (50.3-metres) in size.

“The AirSprayer is actually a very big, heavy vehicle with a lot of inertia. It’s not like a little tiny drone that can get blown off course. If you’re carrying 100 gallons, as an example, you’re operating at about a 1,500-lb. takeoff weight and capacity. That inertia actually makes it less susceptible to wind than you think,” McCann says.

“What we’ve seen is that if you can spray, you can fly. There is a certain amount of wind speed where you just wouldn’t spray anyways, just from drift concerns and a variety of other reasons. So, that’s really the threshold we set for ourselves.”

McCann says the AirSprayer’s downward-facing propellers make it less likely to produce spray drift than rotary ag drones like quadcopters, which “push the spray down and then out to the sides. It’s really difficult to control the drift aspects of that when you’re spraying this way.”

The Stratus AirSprayer can take off from a farmer’s field as long as runway room of 350 to 500 feet (107 to 152 metres) is available. Once spraying is completed, the hardware can be loaded onto a flatbed truck or a 12-foot (3.65-metre) trailer, and the parachute folded and packed up into an easy-to-carry travel bag.

McCann says even with its high-tech capabilities, the AirSprayer isn’t difficult to operate and maintain, adding to its appeal to farmers.

“It’s been designed with the way farmers most typically work, which is give them something that’s easily fixable and that is easily transportable and that doesn’t require a whole lot of storage or maintenance. That’s what we built,” he says.

“I come from a farming family, and most of our team does as well. We understand how this type of thing works. You get your early adopters to try it out, and the minute that they see the results from it, they’re going to tell five of their friends, and they’ll be a great reference for us. That’s kind of how we expect to grow this.”

Value proposition

Janay Meisser, director of innovation for ag co-operative United Farmers of Alberta (UFA), had an opportunity to witness the Stratus AirSprayer in action during Precision AI field testing in New Mexico in May. “I think they’ve got something really special,” she says.

Meisser views the AirSprayer as a good value proposition, both in terms of productivity and return on investment. She also sees it as a very practical solution for farmers looking to get the most out of their crops.

“The Precision AI team is really connected to the farming community and are trying to build solutions for farmers with farmers. I think they’re solving problems that matter,” says Meisser.

“There are a lot of things that make the Stratus AirSprayer unique (and) I think they just got down to brass tacks to determine, what does this (machine) really need to do?” she adds.

“I think it will change how the farming community starts to think about managing crops. It’s going to shift some mindsets.”

The post Switching to glide appeared first on Grainews.

But those are two-dimensional applications, and although those can go awry and complicate a grower’s plans, adding a third dimension — in the air — can result in something catastrophic.

That was Dr. Jason Deveau’s overriding message during his Southwest Agricultural Conference presentation in January at the University of Guelph’s Ridgetown Campus. The application technology specialist with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) pulled no punches on the potential use of drones in spray applications.

For starters, spraying pesticides via an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) or drone is illegal — and for very valid reasons, Deveau explains.

The flight and speed dynamics at which planes and helicopters fly cause the spray to “lay out” in a level or horizontal flow, whereas drones are constantly forcing air downward.

Walking attendees through several videos, Deveau briefly explained how sprays behave behind a helicopter or a plane, noting no crop disturbance below.

“The only thing that affects spray deposition behind a plane or a helicopter is gravity, the wind that blows it around and any forward momentum from the vehicle itself,” he says. “Drones, however, always have a downward component no matter how fast they fly. They are always in hover or transitional flight, which means they’re always blowing down.”

The number of rotors, droplet size and distribution — and where the droplet is released relative to the rotor — complicates the application. Fine droplet spray is susceptible to the wind effect of the rotor. If released close to the centre of the drone, droplets react like a tornado, and droplets released at the wing tip will be thrown all over the place, Deveau says.

Part of that dynamic comes from drone design, with rotors spinning at variable rates and relative speeds not fixed to one another.

“The reason a drone can stay so eerily still is because all of those rotors spin at different speeds depending on what the wind is doing,” Deveau says.

“Which means the effect of that wind, that down-wash on a droplet, changes from moment to moment, and it’s not just one of them, it could be four or two or eight (rotors).”

Next on his list of concerns was the plumbing of a drone. Drone size limits its chemical volume carrying capability to a fraction of a ground applicator, resulting in lower volumes at very concentrated rates.

Ask any agrochemical expert, he says, and they’ll say chemical formulations are precise and complicated with the intent of dilution to a specific degree.

“That changes how the product moves and how it dissolves and ultimately, it changes how it reacts when it hits a plant surface,” Deveau adds. “If you hyper-concentrate but put in low volume, what’s going to happen? We don’t know. Sometimes it’s good; sometimes you need a toothbrush.”

If understanding droplet size and the effect of the number of rotors on spray distribution, volumes and concentrations isn’t complex enough, the drone weight — empty or full — also affects spray patterns.

Deveau provided video examples of fields with drone-applied sprays — using dyed water only — and the results were evident when compared to ground or even hand applications (typical in greenhouses).

In one slide, the drone’s spray pattern drifted beyond an established buffer zone; perhaps the altitude was a little high, it wasn’t at optimal flight speed, or spraying at the correct pressure.

Where is it leading?

According to Deveau, the road ahead for drone technology use in chemical spray applications is long and arduous and requires more research to determine how to lower existing risks when using the devices.

Many of the efficiencies and nuances of drone technology are unknown and hard to establish. Thus far, research determined drone spray coverage is roughly five per cent versus conventional systems which are up to 10 per cent.

There are also concerns about operator exposure, drift potential, and the 10 per cent of product remaining in the air. It’s not just Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) involved but Transport Canada, as well, because many operators want to fly heavy drones in populated places, which requires an advanced pilot license, Deveau explains.

“If you’re talking about spreading fertilizer or cover crops, drones are really fantastic,” he says. “If you’re going to sneak out and spray pesticide — and I won’t lie, people are doing it — don’t do it. It’s illegal, and it’s not going to work for you. At least not consistently, and when it goes wrong, it goes wrong.”

The post Don’t hold your breath for a drone sprayer appeared first on Grainews.

It’s an issue that has been around almost as long as pesticides have been used to protect crops against the threat of weeds, disease and insects. But spray drift has come under increasing scrutiny over the past 10 to 15 years, according to a leading spray expert.

“What has changed is people’s sensitivity to it, socially and otherwise,” says Jason Deveau, an application technology specialist with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Deveau is also the co-founder of Sprayers101, a non-profit website, which provides tips and advice on spraying to farmers and applicators.

“In recent years, there have been products released onto the market that are so potent at tremendously low doses we’ve kind of had the curtain pulled back. You can see the damage or impact of off-target movement you simply couldn’t have seen before,” says Deveau.

There are two primary types of pesticide spray drift — particle drift and vapour drift. Particle drift is the movement of pesticide droplets or solid particles outside of the treatment area. Vapour drift is the movement of pesticide vapours outside of the area being treated.

Deveau says there are two main reasons why pesticide drift has become a greater concern for many farmers.

First, due to the growing awareness and sensitivity of the public to the effects of pesticides on the environment, growers understand the importance of mitigating spray drift risks for the benefit of their neighbours and for environmental stewardship. Second, as a result of the increasing costs of pesticides and other inputs, farmers are looking at ways to decrease spray drift risks to maximize the benefits of the inputs they purchase.

“There’s a very good reason for keeping your pesticide on target,” Deveau explains. “It’s not working for you in your neighbour’s field, it’s not working for you in the lake. It works for you when it goes where it’s supposed to go.”

So, what can a farmer or applicator do if they want to minimize drift when they apply pesticide to a field? Deveau and some Prairie producers offered the following tips for Grainews readers.

Apply larger droplets

Deveau says one of the first things you should do is to know your situation and the product you’re using, and to familiarize yourself with any variables you may have to contend with. One rule of thumb to keep in mind is to apply larger droplets if possible, since they are much less likely to drift than smaller droplets.

“Know your product, read your label and pick a nozzle that provides the largest possible droplet that still gives you the biological result you’re looking for,” Deveau says.

Pay attention to weather

Deveau also recommends farmers pay close attention to weather conditions when they are preparing to spray and avail themselves of the latest weather-related technology, including smartphone apps that provide information on everything from relative wind speed to humidity and temperature.

“If you pick good weather conditions, it will improve your odds of reducing drift,” he explains. “If you’re pushing things where it’s too windy or your window for application is short because it won’t stop raining, be very careful because the risks could be much higher that it’s going to blow off course.”

Deveau also advises farmers to be aware of what is happening at adjacent or neighbouring properties, especially when it comes to greenhouses or fields where speciality crops may be grown.

“A lot of products a field cropper might spray could cause a lot of havoc for a speciality crop,” he says. “They should recognize that buying a neighbour’s soybeans if you burn them is far less expensive than buying a neighbour’s grapes.”

Beware of temperature inversions

Although wind can have a large effect on pesticide drift, Deveau cautions farmers not to be fooled into thinking calm conditions mean it’s a good time to spray. He says temperature inversions — a situation in which air near the ground is cooler than the air above it — can contribute to spray drift just as much as strong winds.

Devin Hartzler, who helps run family-owned Triple H Farms near Carstairs, Alta., agrees. He notes temperature inversions start toward evening and can persist until early morning, and they are insidious because they can be difficult to detect.

“You’ll get a temperature inversion and it’s not windy at all and the spray, especially if you’re using a finer water droplet, can hang in the air,” Hartzler says. “Even without wind it can drift, and it can drift farther than if it’s windy out.”

Know your equipment

Deveau stresses the importance of knowing the equipment you will be using to apply pesticide. For example, if you are using a boom sprayer, driving faster tends to necessitate a higher boom so it doesn’t come into contact with the ground. The downside to this is droplets released higher in the air tend to remain in the air for a longer time and are more likely to be picked up by wind.

“Slower spraying means a lower boom, which means less spray is lost,” Deveau says. “If you get the boom a little closer to the ground, you cut down on that time the droplets are in the air.

“Initially, all droplets leaving a nozzle are moving very fast. They could still be moving up to 50 or 60 kilometres per hour when they come out of that nozzle, but they tend to slow down very quickly,” he adds. “You want them to be rocketing into the crop before they slow down and are blown away.”

Of course, spraying with an air blast sprayer is very different than spraying with a horizontal boom. The key with air blast sprayers, according to Deveau, is using only enough air energy to get what you are spraying to the centre of your target.

One of the simplest ways of ensuring that is to perform a test prior to spraying. Tie a ribbon on the opposite and upwind side of a tree and do a couple of sample passes with your sprayer. If the ribbon flutters slightly, that means your travel speed and air energy are in alignment. However, if the ribbon blows straight out that means you are using too much air. No movement of the ribbon means you’re not using enough air or you are driving too fast.

“The nice thing about it is, if you’re willing to take just a few times to do it, you start to build up a reflex response and it becomes second nature,” Deveau says.

Check sprayer regularly

Hartzler says there are several things his family does to try and minimize pesticide drift on their 4,200-acre grain seed farm north of Calgary.

One of the most important, he says, is to check spraying equipment regularly to make sure it’s operating correctly. That includes eyeballing sprayers while they’re in use in order to detect any changes in the way water droplets are coming out of the nozzles.

“It’s in our best interest to make sure everything is running properly because we don’t want to waste money by having it drift onto somebody else’s field or improperly applying it by being at too high or too low of a rate. Both of those (scenarios) are costly and not beneficial to us,” Hartzler explains.

He also recommends the use of drift retardant compounds when appropriate. Retardants can reduce the risk of spray drift and maximize pesticide performance. The only catch is you have to be careful which ones you use since some are not compatible with some types of spray nozzles.

“It doesn’t eliminate (drift), but it definitely helps,” Hartzler says.

Keep records

Spray drift hasn’t been much of a problem for Triple H Farms since Hartzler joined the family-run operation more than a decade ago. Still, he recommends farmers keep detailed records in case such an event occurs.

Hartzler keeps comprehensive digital and print records of everything from wind direction and speed to temperatures when spraying occurs on the farm in case there is ever an issue on a neighbouring farm.

Not only can such records protect a farmer in the event of a suspected drift, he says, but it also shows they take such situations seriously and are making the effort to prevent them from happening.

Keep up on innovations

Rob Stone and his family farm about 9,000 acres of canola, wheat and lentils on Stone Farms near Davidson, Sask.

Stone says it’s important for farmers to educate themselves as much as possible about the latest developments in spray technology and methodology in order to minimize spray drift. That includes checking out websites like Sprayers101 for recommendations and tips and attending trade shows that offer a first-hand look at the latest innovations in spray technology.

Stone also recommends speaking with neighbouring farmers and other colleagues in the ag community to learn about what has worked for them — and what hasn’t — when it comes to spraying.

“We’ve been implementing and paying attention to as much information out there, which continues to accumulate,” he says. “The good thing is the lifelong learning of application continues to get easier.”

Bill Campbell is a fourth-generation farmer who runs a 2,500-acre mixed farm near Minto, Man.

One of the most common pieces of advice he offers fellow farmers about spraying is to follow the instructions provided on a pesticide’s label in order to learn about the product’s strengths and limitations. Campbell also recommends keeping up to date on innovations taking place in the marketplace, so you know the best options available to you.

“I think there’s great potential for some of that innovation to prevent drift that would go onto adjacent fields,” he says.

Communicate with neighbours

Even though farmers may take all the necessary precautions to prevent pesticides from drifting onto neighbouring properties, there is often little they can do to stop inbound drift from occurring on their own properties.

Stone knows that all too well. He had to file an insurance claim a few years ago when pesticide from a neighbouring farm drifted onto his land. His advice to farmers on how to deal with such a scenario is to be proactive and maintain open lines of communication with their neighbours.

“It’s a simple thing to happen. I think a person needs to remember the shoe can be on the other foot pretty easily when addressing (spray drift),” Stone says. “My personal way to approach it is if you can deal with it in a rational way amongst yourselves and get it sorted out, that’s usually the easiest way.”

The post Keep on target appeared first on Grainews.