Participatory Research and Education Network for Sustainable Agriculture in Illinois

The formation of the Illinois Sustainable Agriculture Network 1992 has resulted in extensive dialogue between farmers, University of Illinois researchers, and other agriculture institutions and organizations, strengthening the concepts and ideals inherent to sustainable agriculture system within Illinois. Numerous on-farm research projects were conducted as a direct result of the formation of the Network. Various field days, conferences, educational events were sponsored, and publications produced through the efforts of the Network, providing a unique forum for exchange of knowledge and ideas within the Illinois agriculture industry. Since the Network’s inception, the dialogue between groups on the future of Illinois agriculture has been raised to a higher level. Agriculturist and environmentalist have found common ground. Farmers and university researchers have begun to work together on common goals.

Findings and Accomplishments

The project facilitated many on-farm research projects over the two year period of the grant and therefore netted various “findings,” all of which appear in the yearly published reports (copies included). In 1992 a total of 43 on-farm research projects were completed by participating farmers. Over half (51%) of the projects completed in 1992 dealt with nitrogen. Nitrogen projects tested the rate and form of nitrogen applied and time of application in corn. Sixteen percent of the 1992 projects addressed non-nitrogenous fertilizer questions. Fourteen percent compared different rates of various herbicides in corn and soybeans. Other research topics in 1992 included tillage (12%), cover crops (7%), and various soil additives (5%).

In 1993 farmers researched a greater variety of topics. As in the previous year, farmers researched nitrogen (47%), non-nitrogenous fertilizers (16%), herbicides (4%), cover crops (7%), and tillage (16%). In addition, 1993 farmers conducted systems-based research (4%), investigated various management strategies for pesticides (4%), tested various soil additives (7%), and even did a little livestock research (2%).

Generally, findings indicated no significant corn yield differences due to nitrogen applied at lower-than-recommended rates until rates fell below 50-75% of recommended rates. In 1992-93, herbicide rate studies showed no significant yield effect when herbicides were applied at sometimes half the recommended rate. Reduced herbicide rates increased per acre profitability where yields were unaffected. Other studies showed no corn yield benefit obtained from aeration tillage. There were significant soybean yield increases due to aeration tillage in 1993. Cover crops seemed to make little difference in corn yields, but other factors that may be affected by cover crops, such as soil tilth, were not rigorously measured. Formal accomplishments are described below by objective.

1. Develop economically competitive and sustainable farming systems.

A major accomplishment within this objective was realized by convincing farmers of the value, and training them in the use of, randomized and replicated field experiments as a tool to test various sustainable agriculture practices at site-specific locations. Farmers commonly “experiment” with different ideas and make judgments and decisions based on informal observation. Due to the efforts of the Network, the value of more formalized research methodologies is commonly understood among the farmers involved in the program.

Research topics investigating various sustainable agriculture principles (i.e. reduced inputs, cover crops, alternative tillage, etc.) were pursued by farmers on working farms using farm scale equipment. Farmers were the principle investigators in all the research projects. They were actively involved in every aspect of the research process from experimental design to interpretation of the data results. In 1992, 43 farmers completed on-farm research projects. In 1993, 45 farmers completed research projects. And in 1994, 40 projects were completed.

In order to make a determination of the economic competitiveness of the tested sustainable agriculture practices, farmers recorded field level cost information for each treatment compared. This cost information was then entered into a database and budgets were generated for each treatment. The budgets were then used to compare the treatments economically. A logbook was designed to simplify recording of cost data. The logbook proved to be an important, albeit frustrating tool for participating farmers. Attributing accurate cost figures to various treatments is as much art as it is skill. The logbook format was edited each year in an attempt to further simplify the process for both the farmer and the person inputting the information into the database. Three years worth of on-farm economic and agronomic data has been collected, compiled, analyzed, reported, and distributed.

2. Facilitate the adoption of sustainable technologies and practices by Illinois farmers.

ISAN personnel have observed a growing interest in sustainability issues by farmers and AES researchers and administration. On-farm research and educational activities sponsored by the Network have played a vital role in keeping these issues at the forefront. An increasing number of farmers who don’t consider themselves “sustainable” are asking new questions about nitrogen management and questioning conventionally acceptable means by which nitrogen needs in corn are determined. There is a growing suspicion among farmers that in the future farm chemicals will be increasingly regulated. This may explain why so much sustainable research effort at Illinois has focused on reducing nitrogen and other inputs.

In general, the on-farm research results support adoption of some reduced-input, sustainable farming practices, and revealed areas that need a closer look. Illinois on-farm research has generally shown it is possible to reduce the rates of nitrogen, non-nitrogenous fertilizers, and pesticides and still grow crops profitably. Farmers have been receptive to these results. In some cases, farmers have modified their farming practices based on what they learned through their on-farm research.

Field days and workshop were conducted by the regional farmer organizations to provide an opportunity for farmers and researchers to share ideas and opinions. A publication, Research for Tomorrow (enclosed), was developed each year to provide information about the on-farm research projects and field days.

The first "Sustaining the Farm Family Workshop" was held on February 25-26. The adoption of agricultural practices that are environmentally and economically sound is a foremost concern to Illinois farmers. However, little attention has been directed to how the adoption of these practices effect family members. ISAN and its member organizations hosted this workshop in order to begin this important first step to sustaining farm families. The workshop speakers emphasized the needs of spouses and children as farm families begin to use sustainable farm practices. The workshop included an opportunity for cooperators and their families to get acquainted in a relaxed setting. A special program was designed for the children. ISAN received a grant to conduct this workshop in 1994. We have received another grant to conduct a second workshop in March 1995.

3. Develop the methodology and capacity for scientifically valid on-farm experiments and demonstrations.

At the beginning, university researchers were recruited to teach farmers research methodology, perform statistical analysis, and help the Network develop the capacity for scientifically valid on-farm experiments. Coordination of that working relationship was lax resulting in a less than positive experience for both farmers and researchers. Consequently, a CES Specialist in Agriculture position was created specifically to coordinate the on-farm research program. In July of 1992, the position was filled.
The newly hired coordinator developed an On-Farm Research Guidebook (enclosed). The guidebook provides a basic explanation of some fundamental statistical principles upon which research theory is based, in an attempt to help farmers understand the rationale and value of replicating and randomizing treatments across the field. The guidebook also includes a step-by-step guide through the research process, and an example problem leads the reader through the process from conception of the idea to the analysis of the data and interpretation of the results. Worksheets were developed to help the farmer/researcher with some of the more technical aspects of analysis.

The on-farm research coordinator was also charged with the production of a periodic newsletter targeting the on-farm researcher. So far, six issues of Agro-Ecology Technical Notes: On-Farm Research have been published (enclosed). The newsletter is used as a vehicle to further teach valid research methodology, report on-farm research results, and inform the community of deadlines and dates of special events, i.e., conferences, field days, etc.

The coordinator meets with farmers individually each winter to discuss results of the previous year’s project and plan what will be done the next year. At these planning meetings, goals and objectives are clarified, treatments are described, and plot plans are drawn. From that point, farmers work with their group coordinator to carry out the research plan. During the summer months the UI coordinator maintains contact with the farmer/researchers at field days and other educational events held throughout the state. In September, research logbooks are mailed to the farmer/researchers. Local group coordinators are responsible for helping farmers fill out logbooks by the set deadline. The UI coordinator is then responsible for the economic and agronomic analysis of each project. An annual publication reporting all results of Network participants’ projects is then produced.

The experimental design primarily used for the on-farm research is based on the paired-comparison, strip-plot model used and promoted by the Practical Farmers of Iowa. Treatments are randomized and replicated allowing statistical analysis of the data. Plots are as wide as one or more passes of the farmer’s own equipment, and stretch the full length of the field. Such a scale creates plots large enough to a) have a strong visual impact, and b) allow farmer participation without the requirement of special machinery. Many of the projects compared more than two treatments. In these cases the paired-comparison design was modified into a randomized complete block design testing multiple treatments -- sometimes factorially -- a design commonly used in field trials.

In the two years of the grant, two case studies were established; one is an attempt to maximize production of wildlife on Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) land, the other, a semi-permanent establishment of two cropping systems -- organic and conventional -- in a split field. By our definition, a case study is a long-term experiment without replicated treatments.

Maximization of Wildlife Production on CRP Land

Two parcels of land totaling 33 acres were enrolled in CRP. Wildlife food plots, seeded with sunflowers, corn, milo, and millets and bordered by warm-seasoned grasses, were established on 8.4 acres. The remaining 26.7 acres was planted as follows: 20% in food plots, 80% seeded primarily to cool-season grasses including redtop, timothy, and Korean lespedeza. Hardwood travel lanes were also planted throughout the acreage and a hairy vetch cover crop was used as a nitrogen source for the food plots.

Wildlife species were sighted and counted. Observations were systematically made on species such as rabbits, deer, doves, quail, and various passerines. For more information see Homer Buck and Paul Moore -- Marion County in the 1992 on-farm research report.

Organic vs. Conventional System

This case study was begun in 1993. The farmer intends to continue the project for five years. The research objective is to evaluate the yield differences of two farming systems, organic and conventional, and how these change over time. The organic system utilized cover crops to provide nitrogen and help in weed control. The organic system did not use any chemical inputs. The conventional system saw the use of Bicep and Landoil at the time of corn planting as well as the application of 28% nitrogen sidedressed. The organically grown corn yielded much less than conventionally grown corn, 100 versus 139 bushels per acre respectively.

Organic corn was more expensive to grow -- $108.36 per acre -- than conventional corn costing $102.58 per acre. Even so, because of a price premium, ($3.92/bu for organic vs. $2.74/bu for conventional) organically grown corn yielded higher net returns than the conventionally grown corn, $285.21 versus $277.73 respectively.