4 pages., Online via Directory of Open Access Documents (DOAJ)., In interviews, "...a group of 'conservation-minded' Illinois farmers revealed that while they are not necessarily familiar with the Illinois Nutrient Loss Reduction Strategy (NLRS), they are concerned with nutrient loss and are taking steps to address those concerns." However, authors observed that added efforts may be required to encourage adoption of the best management practices recommended by the strategy. The study also identified information sources farmers trust in making such decisions.
An analysis of secondary data from the National Panel Survey in Tanzania revealed physical, socioeconomic, and institutional factors influencing the adoption of soil conservation technologies among small-scale maize farmers. Findings revealed, for example, only 13.9 percent of those had adopted soil conservation technology. This was cited as small, compared with other countries.
Online from publisher. 3 pages., In 2019 cover crop report, SHP dives into cover crop adoption practices. Summary of findings from a survey among 80 farmers in 11 states in the Soil Health Partnership network.
26 pages, Farmers’ perception on soil erosion has not adequately reported in the conditions of Ghana though its causes and effects are time and site-specific. The objective of this study was to assess farmers’ perception on soil erosion and implication for developing soil management strategy in the Eastern and Northern Regions of Ghana. A total of 130 household head farmers were interviewed and complemented with field observation and group. Data was analyzed using descriptive, chi-square test, T-test and binary logistic regression. The results show that there was significant variation in socioeconomic, farm and institutional attributes among the farmers`in the study regions. In the Eastern and Northern Regions, significantly higher proportions of the farmers (95.7% and 86.7%, respectively) perceived soil erosion as serious problem. Significantly higher proportions of the respondents (80%) perceived severe erosion problem at homestead land in the Eastern Region whereas severe erosion in the Northern Region was more noticed at distance farmlands (85.0%). In the two regions, the major causes of severe erosion as perceived by most farmers were over-cultivation, deforestation and heavy rainfall events. In the Eastern and Northern Regions, 58.6% and 75.0% of the farmers perceived, respectively, that soil erosion severity has been increased since the past 10-years. Perceptions of most frequently noted indicators of soil erosion were declined productivity, shallow soil depth, presence of rills, sheet erosion, soil loss from farmland, and change in soil color. Results of the binary logistic regression indicate that there is heterogeneity in the factors accounting for the perception of soil fertility. In developing promising soil management strategy in the study area, attention must be given to key socioeconomic, biophysical, farm and institutional factors.
24 pgs, Increasing interest in farmers’ local soil knowledge (LSK) and soil management practice as a way to promote sustainable agriculture and soil conservation needs a reliable means to connect to it. This study sought to examine if Visual Soil Assessment (VSA) and farmer workshops were suitable means to engage, communicate and preserve farmers’ LSK in two mountainous communes of Central Vietnam. Twenty-four farmers with reasonable or comprehensive LSK from previously studied communes were selected for the efficacy of VSA and farmer workshops for integrating LSK into a well-accepted soil assessment tool (VSA). In field sites chosen by the farmers, VSA was independently executed by both farmers and scientists at the same time. Close congruence of VSA scores between the two groups highlighted that farmers could competently undertake VSA. Farmers’ VSA score was compared with their perception of field’s soil quality. For the majority of farmers’ perception of soil quality was consistent to their VSA score (62.5%), while the remainder perceived their soil quality was lower than their VSA score. For most farmers their assessment of soil quality using VSA valued their LSK, and the two measures were well aligned. Soil colour and presence or vulnerability to erosion were common soil characteristics mentioned by farmers and affected the final VSA score. Farmers’ participation in VSA and workshops strengthen farmers’ confidence in their LSK and provided guidance on the impact of their soil management on soil improvement and conservation.
12 pages, via Online journal, Corn (Zea mays) grown in the southern Piedmont requires 200 to 280 kg nitrogen (N) ha−1 annually and requires up to 0.87 cm of water per day, making groundwater systems susceptible to nitrate (NO3−) leaching. A perennial white clover (Trifolium repens L.) living mulch (LM) system may reduce NO3-N leaching by using legume N to replace mineral N, though little information is available on such a system in the southern Piedmont. Therefore, a HYDRUS-1D model was used to simulate water and NO3-N flux in three cover crop systems. Cereal rye (Secale cereal L.) (CR), crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum L.) (CC), and a white clover LM were fertilized with 280, 168, and 56 kg N ha−1. The HYDRUS-1D model was calibrated and validated with observed water contents and NO3-N data that were collected over two years. Water and NO3-N flux models were created for each treatment and evaluated using coefficient of determination, percentage bias, and index of agreement, and showed good agreement to observed data. Nitrate leaching below 1 m in 2015/2016 was 23.5, 12.7, and 21.4 kg ha−1 for the CC, LM, and CR treatments, respectively, but was less than 1 kg ha−1 for all treatments in 2016/2017 due to prolonged drought. Differences in leached NO3-N among treatments were attributed to variation in mineral N application rate and NO3-N uptake by cover crops. Overall, results suggest that the use of a perennial LM system may reduce NO3-N leaching when compared to annual CC and CR cover crop systems.
9pgs, Soil loss due to crop harvest contributes to land degradation, and knowledge of this challenge can guide the choice of crops for sustainable agriculture. Nigeria is the largest producer of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) and the third largest producer of peanut (Arachis hypogaea Linn) in the world. Due to limited information on soil loss during peanut and cassava harvests worldwide, and cost of nutrient loss, a two-year field experiment was conducted to compare soil loss due to harvesting of peanut and cassava and to estimate cost of nutrient loss due to crop harvest under traditional agriculture. Peanut pod yields of 2.39 and 2.08 t ha–1harvest–1 removed 0.62 and 0.58 t ha–1 harvest–1 during peanut harvest, respectively, for years 1 and 2. Similarly, cassava yields of 22.71 and 21.40 t ha–1 harvest–1 removed 1.11 and 0.91 t ha–1harvest–1 during cassava harvest, respectively, for years 1 and 2. Crop yields strongly correlated with soil loss due to peanut harvest (R2= 0.36; p < 0.001) and soil loss due to cassava harvest (R2 = 0.23; p < 0.01). Significantly higher soil loss due to cassava harvest compared to peanut harvest can be ascribed to higher cassava yield. Also, soil nutrient loss due to crop harvest was significantly (p < 0.001) higher for cassava compared with peanut by 27.6% phosphorus (P) and 73.7% potassium (K) for the first year and 39.2% P and 79.1% K for the second year. Fertilizer equivalent cost of P and K losses due to cassava harvest for the two years was higher than that of peanut by US$29 ha–1. The study indicated that the intensity of nutrient loss by harvesting is largely dependent on the crop type, and harvesting of cassava can deplete soil nutrients faster than that of peanut under traditional agriculture. Sequential planting of cassava (deep rooted crop) followed by peanut (shallow rooted crop) as a crop rotation management practice is recommended to mitigate soil loss due to continuous harvesting of cassava, and harvesting with thorough shaking technique is also suggested to reduce nutrient loss potential of crop harvesting.