Last week’s Teagasc National Crops Forum looked at variety performance, market realities and machinery matters.
Opening the forum, Teagasc’s director of research, Frank O’Mara, acknowledged the importance of the tillage sector for grain, straw, forage, protein and other crops. It is a good user of production technology and is producing some of the highest yields in the world.
Profitability and low prices
But low prices are hammering profitability
The overall area has fallen by about 14% in the past few years, with spring barley taking the main hit with a 70,000ha decrease as land goes back into grass.
Frank indicated that there is still room for improvement and the BETTER farm programme is focusing on maximising yield from every square metre. He described the Knowledge Transfer (KT) programme as being positive in this regard, with around 550 tillage growers in such groups.
Variety round-up
Seamus Kearney from the Department of Agriculture gave a comprehensive summary of the performance of winter cereal and rape varieties in 2017 with many associated variety observations.
Winter wheat
As was the case at field level, differences between the recommended varieties tended to be small. But Torp did ‘‘stand a little taller’’, with a yield of 104 in 2017.
Seamus indicated that Torp and Bennington (good on septoria and standing but weak on mildew) may enter the list this year. But he warned of the folly of relying on one-year results, stating that varieties had often shown problems one year after doing well.
Promising varieties have often proven to be too weak, too prone to septoria or other diseases, susceptible to ear blight or have other problems. Varieties doing well in Britain have often also been found wanting in our official trials.
Varieties that dropped from 2017 trials
Some named varieties dropped from trials in 2017 included Monterey (yield and septoria), KWS Siskin (lodging, septoria and fusarium), KWS Crispin (septoria), LG Sundance (lodging, sprouting and KPH), Shabras (sprouting), LG Mowtown, LG Lismore, Marston (yield and fusarium) and RGT Pembroke.
Seamus said that we are seeing varieties with improving resistance to septoria.
Torp and Rockefeller are examples and new varieties such as KWS W320, SJL123 and Cellule are also good, with Bennington, Garrus and Lili rated as medium.
He said that the better new wheat varieties tend to be later maturing but Cellule is a definite exception.
Other varieties
Costello is one of a few varieties which show good sprouting resistance — most of our recommended varieties are rated as medium to poor. Garrus, Avatar, Costello and Rockefeller are regarded best against ear blight, with Bennington and JB Diego rated medium.
Untreated plot yields, where septoria was the major disease, ranged from the mid-60s for Avatar, Lumos and Diego while Torp and Bennington are up over 90% of the treated controls. Where yellow rust was the main problem, Reflection and Garrus yielded in the mid-30s relative to the treated controls.
With early drilling, Rockefeller and Lili performed proportionally better and Garrus did well in this slot also.
Winter barley
On winter barley, Seamus said that KWS Kosmos, Funky and KWS Astaire are recommended list contenders but Kosmos may be the only one to make it. It is likely that Kosmos will replace Leibniz as a conventional six-row. Variety performance in 2017 was broadly in line with recommended list ratings.
Winter oats
There are three oats varieties up for recommendation – Keely, Avanti and Montrose. Keely had a lower yield (98) in 2017 and it is prone to brackling. Avanti yielded well but its specific weight is 1.5 points under Barra and Montrose is even lower.
Two promising varieties are Delfin and WPG Isabel.
The former yielded 111 in 2017 but it is a yellow oat and not wanted in the market. Isabel had more modest yield in 2017 (101) but its specific weight is 1.4 points higher than Barra and it also has higher kernal content.
Oilseed rape
For winter rape growers, Seamus said that varieties such as Aquila and Dariot look promising in terms of yield and are candidates for recommendation. He also noted that there are a number of DeKalbe/Monsanto varieties in trial and these may bring other useful characteristics.
Machinery matters
Machinery is the single biggest-cost item in grain production and such decisions have the potential to significantly affect cost and profitability. Shay Phelan of Teagasc told us that the data in the e-profit monitor shows total variable costs varying from top to bottom by €105/ac.
Survey
Much of this cost variation is likely to relate to machinery costs and this prompted a survey of costs on 139 farms of variable size from 18ac to 2,500ac, covering 37,500ac. Shay reported that the average investment in machinery on these farms was €1,100/ac. The average cash cost (costs that were paid for in 2016 including repairs, diesel, HP repayments and machinery hire but not depreciation) found was €117/ac.
The average total tillage costs were estimated at €134/ac but they ranged from €50 to €250/ac.
The survey results
The survey indicated that farm size did not have a major effect on machinery cost per acre. However, farms that were significantly fragmented had up on €25/ac higher machinery cost arising from travel. All of these costs exclude labour and time consequences.
Shay recalled some analysis by Dermot Forristal, which showed travel cost of up to €60/ac to a site where there was no yard with a small block of land.
The choices growers make have a big effect on costs
Shay compared a tractor and trailer unit valued at €120,000 carrying 20t of grain with a lower-cost unit valued at €50,000 carrying 15t. He indicated that the difference in cost of a high-value machinery unit and a low-value unit could result in a potential €60/t cost difference per acre for spring barley.
Sustainable systems need a level of machine replacement
In looking at different machinery scenarios, he warned against the cheapest option, which is often associated with not having machines that carry repayments.
Sustainable systems need a level of machine replacement and Shay emphasised that this should be planned rather than driven by impulse or tax considerations. In one of his scenarios, the grower was a contractor with some crops but the receipts from the contracting did not meet the costs involved.
CUMA
Stephane Diard farms in northwest France and he uses a CUMA to supply some of this machinery needs. CUMA roughly translates to a ‘‘co-operative for the supply of mechanisation to agriculture’’. This is a formal structure that has been in existence since after World War II and they are organised at local, regional and national level.
Any group of four or more farmers can come together to share the purchase of a piece of machinery or equipment. Individuals can buy into an arrangement for a greater or lesser share of the investment, depending on requirement.
The participating farmers must put up 20% of the capital cost and the remaining 80% is acquired on loan from the CUMA.
The general operating rules and obligations are agreed in advance by all participants.
The agreement covers arrangements for access, maintenance, etc, and this helps avoid future arguments. Stephane said that they communicate weekly or twice-weekly to organise access at busy times.
Saving on machine cost
He estimated that CUMA involvement can save 5% to 15% on machine costs.
And it also adds a social aspect because participants often share labour and other machines to get work done.
The participants decide initially whether to invest in excess machine capacity to help timeliness or to opt for a measured machine capacity and live with possible friction points at busy times.
Not surprisingly, one of the first questions from the floor asked who would have first call on a shared combine at harvest?
Other issues discussed
Other issues relating to shared machinery then came into discussion. Stephane responded by saying that all of these issues are discussed and decided before a machine is purchased and that such disputes should not occur.
Teagasc is examining the option of instigating something similar here in Ireland.
Rules relating to co-operatives already exist. Allowing access to grant options for shared access in TAMS could help make it more attractive. This could be used to drive technology access and shared mechanisation capacity.
The concept has merit but it requires a level of discipline from many quarters and will be a challenge initially.
2017 variety performance would suggest changes to all winter cereal recommended lists.Cost monitors suggest up to €105/ac difference in total variable cost for spring barley, which is probably heavily influenced by machinery cost of farm. Having a lower-valued machinery outfits could significantly reduce total machinery costs and also cost per tonne. Read more
Deadline for sowing winter rape approaching
No guarantee of improved prices for tillage farmers in 2018
Last week’s Teagasc National Crops Forum looked at variety performance, market realities and machinery matters.
Opening the forum, Teagasc’s director of research, Frank O’Mara, acknowledged the importance of the tillage sector for grain, straw, forage, protein and other crops. It is a good user of production technology and is producing some of the highest yields in the world.
Profitability and low prices
But low prices are hammering profitability
The overall area has fallen by about 14% in the past few years, with spring barley taking the main hit with a 70,000ha decrease as land goes back into grass.
Frank indicated that there is still room for improvement and the BETTER farm programme is focusing on maximising yield from every square metre. He described the Knowledge Transfer (KT) programme as being positive in this regard, with around 550 tillage growers in such groups.
Variety round-up
Seamus Kearney from the Department of Agriculture gave a comprehensive summary of the performance of winter cereal and rape varieties in 2017 with many associated variety observations.
Winter wheat
As was the case at field level, differences between the recommended varieties tended to be small. But Torp did ‘‘stand a little taller’’, with a yield of 104 in 2017.
Seamus indicated that Torp and Bennington (good on septoria and standing but weak on mildew) may enter the list this year. But he warned of the folly of relying on one-year results, stating that varieties had often shown problems one year after doing well.
Promising varieties have often proven to be too weak, too prone to septoria or other diseases, susceptible to ear blight or have other problems. Varieties doing well in Britain have often also been found wanting in our official trials.
Varieties that dropped from 2017 trials
Some named varieties dropped from trials in 2017 included Monterey (yield and septoria), KWS Siskin (lodging, septoria and fusarium), KWS Crispin (septoria), LG Sundance (lodging, sprouting and KPH), Shabras (sprouting), LG Mowtown, LG Lismore, Marston (yield and fusarium) and RGT Pembroke.
Seamus said that we are seeing varieties with improving resistance to septoria.
Torp and Rockefeller are examples and new varieties such as KWS W320, SJL123 and Cellule are also good, with Bennington, Garrus and Lili rated as medium.
He said that the better new wheat varieties tend to be later maturing but Cellule is a definite exception.
Other varieties
Costello is one of a few varieties which show good sprouting resistance — most of our recommended varieties are rated as medium to poor. Garrus, Avatar, Costello and Rockefeller are regarded best against ear blight, with Bennington and JB Diego rated medium.
Untreated plot yields, where septoria was the major disease, ranged from the mid-60s for Avatar, Lumos and Diego while Torp and Bennington are up over 90% of the treated controls. Where yellow rust was the main problem, Reflection and Garrus yielded in the mid-30s relative to the treated controls.
With early drilling, Rockefeller and Lili performed proportionally better and Garrus did well in this slot also.
Winter barley
On winter barley, Seamus said that KWS Kosmos, Funky and KWS Astaire are recommended list contenders but Kosmos may be the only one to make it. It is likely that Kosmos will replace Leibniz as a conventional six-row. Variety performance in 2017 was broadly in line with recommended list ratings.
Winter oats
There are three oats varieties up for recommendation – Keely, Avanti and Montrose. Keely had a lower yield (98) in 2017 and it is prone to brackling. Avanti yielded well but its specific weight is 1.5 points under Barra and Montrose is even lower.
Two promising varieties are Delfin and WPG Isabel.
The former yielded 111 in 2017 but it is a yellow oat and not wanted in the market. Isabel had more modest yield in 2017 (101) but its specific weight is 1.4 points higher than Barra and it also has higher kernal content.
Oilseed rape
For winter rape growers, Seamus said that varieties such as Aquila and Dariot look promising in terms of yield and are candidates for recommendation. He also noted that there are a number of DeKalbe/Monsanto varieties in trial and these may bring other useful characteristics.
Machinery matters
Machinery is the single biggest-cost item in grain production and such decisions have the potential to significantly affect cost and profitability. Shay Phelan of Teagasc told us that the data in the e-profit monitor shows total variable costs varying from top to bottom by €105/ac.
Survey
Much of this cost variation is likely to relate to machinery costs and this prompted a survey of costs on 139 farms of variable size from 18ac to 2,500ac, covering 37,500ac. Shay reported that the average investment in machinery on these farms was €1,100/ac. The average cash cost (costs that were paid for in 2016 including repairs, diesel, HP repayments and machinery hire but not depreciation) found was €117/ac.
The average total tillage costs were estimated at €134/ac but they ranged from €50 to €250/ac.
The survey results
The survey indicated that farm size did not have a major effect on machinery cost per acre. However, farms that were significantly fragmented had up on €25/ac higher machinery cost arising from travel. All of these costs exclude labour and time consequences.
Shay recalled some analysis by Dermot Forristal, which showed travel cost of up to €60/ac to a site where there was no yard with a small block of land.
The choices growers make have a big effect on costs
Shay compared a tractor and trailer unit valued at €120,000 carrying 20t of grain with a lower-cost unit valued at €50,000 carrying 15t. He indicated that the difference in cost of a high-value machinery unit and a low-value unit could result in a potential €60/t cost difference per acre for spring barley.
Sustainable systems need a level of machine replacement
In looking at different machinery scenarios, he warned against the cheapest option, which is often associated with not having machines that carry repayments.
Sustainable systems need a level of machine replacement and Shay emphasised that this should be planned rather than driven by impulse or tax considerations. In one of his scenarios, the grower was a contractor with some crops but the receipts from the contracting did not meet the costs involved.
CUMA
Stephane Diard farms in northwest France and he uses a CUMA to supply some of this machinery needs. CUMA roughly translates to a ‘‘co-operative for the supply of mechanisation to agriculture’’. This is a formal structure that has been in existence since after World War II and they are organised at local, regional and national level.
Any group of four or more farmers can come together to share the purchase of a piece of machinery or equipment. Individuals can buy into an arrangement for a greater or lesser share of the investment, depending on requirement.
The participating farmers must put up 20% of the capital cost and the remaining 80% is acquired on loan from the CUMA.
The general operating rules and obligations are agreed in advance by all participants.
The agreement covers arrangements for access, maintenance, etc, and this helps avoid future arguments. Stephane said that they communicate weekly or twice-weekly to organise access at busy times.
Saving on machine cost
He estimated that CUMA involvement can save 5% to 15% on machine costs.
And it also adds a social aspect because participants often share labour and other machines to get work done.
The participants decide initially whether to invest in excess machine capacity to help timeliness or to opt for a measured machine capacity and live with possible friction points at busy times.
Not surprisingly, one of the first questions from the floor asked who would have first call on a shared combine at harvest?
Other issues discussed
Other issues relating to shared machinery then came into discussion. Stephane responded by saying that all of these issues are discussed and decided before a machine is purchased and that such disputes should not occur.
Teagasc is examining the option of instigating something similar here in Ireland.
Rules relating to co-operatives already exist. Allowing access to grant options for shared access in TAMS could help make it more attractive. This could be used to drive technology access and shared mechanisation capacity.
The concept has merit but it requires a level of discipline from many quarters and will be a challenge initially.
2017 variety performance would suggest changes to all winter cereal recommended lists.Cost monitors suggest up to €105/ac difference in total variable cost for spring barley, which is probably heavily influenced by machinery cost of farm. Having a lower-valued machinery outfits could significantly reduce total machinery costs and also cost per tonne. Read more
Deadline for sowing winter rape approaching
No guarantee of improved prices for tillage farmers in 2018
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: