|
|
Discussion Forum
Started by mike.mcdowall at 31 Oct 2011 5:29 PM. Topic has 4 replies.
  
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
 31 Oct 2011, 5:29 PM
|
mike.mcdowall
Joined on 03 Mar 2010
E.Lothian
Posts 29
|
|
|
To me it looks like winter stubbles are not much use now.
OK, skylark do well with them. They feed mainly on small seeds like annual meadow grass, that keeps seeding through the winter, providing them with a reliable food source.
Other granivorous species face a different picture.
I have been leaving a spring barley stubble to plough late (about the turn of the year) ever since I started farming here in 1986. These used to attract good numbers of finches and buntings. About 1998 I counted 600 birds in a 15ha stubble (and 400 fieldfare in the hedges). They stayed from mid-November to mid-December then dispersed leaving 50+ skylark. Examination showed that the spilt seed had gone, consumed, which prompted me to start artificial feeding on a track which I do every winter now.
My late ploughed stubbles never host many finches and buntings these days, and a recent meeting for malting barley growers suggested a probable reason why. I had always considered stubbles of winter varieties of wheat or barley useless as sources of grain for birds, as these varieties germinate quickly in the autumn, so virtually no seed is available. Spring barley used to be different. It went dormant, and the seed stayed available well into winter. I walked across my stubble this week, and there isn't a grain to be found, just young plants. It's a sickening waste, as there has been a reasonable amount of spillage off the combine this year, but there is no food for the birds.
At the meeting of malting barley growers hosted by a division of Simpsons Malt, we were discussing the problems we have with many modern varieties germinating in the ear if weather is wet and harvest is held up. Apparently plant breeders have bred dormancy out of modern varieties. The maltsters said this is not at their request - they know how to break dormancy. To us as growers, lack of dormancy has been a costly problem at times in recent years. Simon Oxley (now HGCA recommended list manager) promised to take the message to breeders that lack of dormancy is against the interests of growers, and of no benefit to maltsters. Now I think it also hurts the birds.
Mike.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
01 Nov 2011, 11:17 AM
|
Ian Gould
Joined on 20 Dec 2005
Huntingdon
Posts 68
|
|
|
|
Mike
I have worked in the seed trade for more than 20 years now, but I started life working for the old Plant Breeding Institute in Trumpington. I was involved with breeding barley and producing the multiplication crops that were then sold onto seed merchants.
I seem to remember that one of the reasons that dormancy was seen as a problem was that drilling had been tried earlier and earlier with the spring varieties. They tended to have good malting quality and they gave better yields when drilled earlier, I know farmers that routinely plant "Spring" varieties in December and January, to gain 0.5 - 1.0 t/ha yield advantage over a March drilling.
I have no doubt that this lack of dormancy has a significant impact on the seed remaining intact through the winter and would agree that it is far more likely to germinate than the older varieties were. The maltsters do indeed have the facility to deal with dormancy, but you are not going to persuade the early drillers to go back to varieties that cost them money through lower yields. The point about dormancy being a beneft in wet harvests is well made, but if farmers look back at how often this happens compared to the yield benefit that early drilling allows it could be a simple choice.
There is a discussion to be had here because it is another example of where "progress" has had a cost in Environmental Goods. My belief is that delivering environmental benefit cannot be delivered in the long term as a result of inefficiency or poor practise. If farmers are growing a crop for combining then they should be able to do that as effectively as possible. This works for the environmental areas too and farmers should be given both the tools and, if we really value these areas / goods, they should also be given the appropriate compensation.
I know that buffer feeding (the practise of regularly spreading grains out through the winter to feed farmland birds) is being looked at by Natural England and I have no doubt at all that it works. You only have to look at feed rides for pheasants or look at feed hoopers to see how many small birds use them when times get hard. Stubbles would be an ideal place to do this, but I cannot see how the EU paymasters would be able to write a workable prescription for a subsidy. It would be almost impossible to prove how much food an individual farmer had put out during a season. I would ask that interested farmers just try spreading a few bucketfuls of tail corn/rape along a track or into a stubble and see for themselves the numbers of birds that will use what amounts to a few £'s worth of sub-standard product, it can be a real eye opener.
Best wishes
Ian Gould
www.oakbankgc.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
05 Nov 2011, 5:26 PM
|
mike.mcdowall
Joined on 03 Mar 2010
E.Lothian
Posts 29
|
|
|
|
<BLOCKQUOTE><table width="85%"><tr><td class="txt4"><img src="/forums/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif"> <strong>Ian Gould wrote:</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="quoteTable"><table width="100%"><tr><td width="100%" valign="top" class="txt4">I seem to remember that one of the reasons that dormancy was seen as a problem was that drilling had been tried earlier and earlier with the spring varieties. They tended to have good malting quality and they gave better yields when drilled earlier, I know farmers that routinely plant "Spring" varieties in December and January, to gain 0.5 - 1.0 t/ha yield advantage over a March drilling.
I have no doubt that this lack of dormancy has a significant impact on the seed remaining intact through the winter and would agree that it is far more likely to germinate than the older varieties were. The maltsters do indeed have the facility to deal with dormancy, but you are not going to persuade the early drillers to go back to varieties that cost them money through lower yields. The point about dormancy being a beneft in wet harvests is well made, but if farmers look back at how often this happens compared to the yield benefit that early drilling allows it could be a simple choice.</td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
OK, but I see a north/south split here which could be used to solve the dormancy hurting us at harvest time, and incidentally improve the value of our winter stubbles at the same time.
Up here we have have had a run of wet summers - most years since about 1995 (initially supposedly triggered by an El Nino event). This is in stark contrast to the period from about 1970 up to that time when we had very dry summers. In the run of weather we are in just now, wet harvests and pre-germination problems are not an occasional feature, they are a serious risk. This year we had over 200mm of rain in August - but were lucky and didn't have pre-germination. Another year we might not be so lucky.
I do think the breeders can help us with this. There are two main malting markets these days, brewing and distilling. Requirements are not the same, and tend to use different varieties. Up here we produce distilling barley for whisky - the very best of course ;-) Those pushing for top yield are down south where winters are more open, and for whisky to be "Scotch" they don't want that, So those growers are more likely to be growing for brewiing with varieties more suited to producing rather higher nitrogens.
We could ask breeders to produce malting varieties with good dormancy for distilling, and without dormancy for brewing. the Scotch whisky market is already important enough that they do focus on our needs.
Incidentally I agree with you about being able to manage our arable areas for profit. I try to make the best use of all my resources - good arable production where it will work, good habitats where most appropriate.
<BLOCKQUOTE><table width="85%"><tr><td class="txt4"><img src="/forums/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif"> <strong>Ian Gould wrote:</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="quoteTable"><table width="100%"><tr><td width="100%" valign="top" class="txt4">There is a discussion to be had here because it is another example of where "progress" has had a cost in Environmental Goods. My belief is that delivering environmental benefit cannot be delivered in the long term as a result of inefficiency or poor practise. If farmers are growing a crop for combining then they should be able to do that as effectively as possible. This works for the environmental areas too and farmers should be given both the tools and, if we really value these areas / goods, they should also be given the appropriate compensation.
I know that buffer feeding (the practise of regularly spreading grains out through the winter to feed farmland birds) is being looked at by Natural England and I have no doubt at all that it works. You only have to look at feed rides for pheasants or look at feed hoopers to see how many small birds use them when times get hard. Stubbles would be an ideal place to do this, but I cannot see how the EU paymasters would be able to write a workable prescription for a subsidy. It would be almost impossible to prove how much food an individual farmer had put out during a season. I would ask that interested farmers just try spreading a few bucketfuls of tail corn/rape along a track or into a stubble and see for themselves the numbers of birds that will use what amounts to a few £'s worth of sub-standard product, it can be a real eye opener.
Best wishes
Ian Gould
www.oakbankgc.co.uk</td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wasn't asking for support for buffer feeding. You won't catch me giving it up ! I use about 2 tonnes oper winter across two farms.
Mike.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
06 Nov 2011, 6:30 PM
|
Martin Smith
Joined on 21 Mar 2008
Posts 6
|
|
|
|
Mike,
I read your post with interest as a lot of my spring sown land is down as over wintered stubble this year. Most follows winter wheat, but some is after spring barley and the difference in appearance is quite stark. The spring barley stubble shows plenty of regrowth now acting as good pheasant cover and probably not much else, last years plot was in ear by late November with no seed setting. In contrast the wheat stubbles have shown less growth, probably a better job with the combine, but currently hold more birds - pipits, skylark, linnets and buntings. Plenty of weeds, such as fat hen, have grown and I am sure this has to be of benefit. I contrast the overwintered stubble with my wild bird mix and feel both compliment each other, the latter providing plenty of food, but acting as a magnet for raptor activity, with the plot regularly drawing in Sparrowhawk, Kestrel, Merlin and Harriers. Corn Buntings certainly seem to use both and I would suggest chances of avoiding predation are probably less within a large are of stubble. I am also using pheasant feeders positioned across the farm and these are used by smaller flocks of birds, which may reduce predation?
Lastly, being in the dry south east germination within the ear has rarely been a problem and sowing date governed by ELS and over wintered stubble, although this year given a total lack of rain in the spring it might well have been a case of the earlier the better for my 2 generation 3.5t/Ha crop!
Plenty of observations, but few answers and every year always seems to be different.
Martin
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
07 Nov 2011, 7:43 AM
|
mike.mcdowall
Joined on 03 Mar 2010
E.Lothian
Posts 29
|
|
|
|
Very useful thanks Martin,
Recently I have had ~15ha of stubbles, all spring barley because historically they always germinated less. The times they are a-changing, and of course I have been slow to keep up. I shall now try to split a similar area of stubble about 50/50 spring barley & winter wheat. Diversity brings greater robustness.
Won't stop me pressing for dormancy in distilling barleys :-)
Cheers, Mike.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
|