News 
 State News 
 Opinion 
 Comment 
 Why isn't everybody doing Controlled Traffic Farming? 

Why isn't everybody doing Controlled Traffic Farming?

16 Oct, 2009 03:00 AM
DELEGATES at the annual conference of the Australian Controlled Traffic Farming Association (ACTFA) in Canberra were all asking the question: “Why isn’t everybody doing Controlled Traffic Farming (CTF)?”

But nobody had the answers.

Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows 88 per cent of crop farmers in Australia use no CTF practices.

ACTFA believes CTF adoption has the capacity to double productivity and that 50pc adoption across the farming sector is achievable within 10 years with targeted funding.

It’s a confusing story – many growers and researchers recognise the proven benefits and massive changes to farm productivity, sustainability and resilience to climate variability that CTF brings.

CTF is a farming system approach that optimises the management of natural and purchased resources as the fundamental first step – get these basics right first.

The three basic components are controlled traffic (permanent wheel tracks and matching machinery widths), zero or reduced tillage and residue retention, and farm planning to manage runoff and farm efficiencies.

These components cannot be disputed as best practice – they are just commonsense – but combining them within the farming system is rare.

On-farm performance has shown high and increasing benefits to productivity, water use efficiency, soil and landscape improvement, and farmer capabilities and lifestyles.

It is also easy, effective and efficient to build on the CTF basics with

no-tillage, precision agriculture and new GPS-based technologies.

Most growers recognise CTF offers multiple benefits and are keen to do it, but for many reasons seem to think it is all too hard – machinery, layout, contour banks, soils, environments, industry, and over-arching all of these, the cost.

There are now many proven on-farm examples of successful adoption in response to all technical and resources issues.

These are no longer constraints.

But, for it to happen, growers have to make the decisions to change.

It’s a farming system change, a relatively complex series of interactive decisions during a period of time, which require clear planning and consistent, appropriate advice.

Growers talk to many advisers about this.

There is only one group of five private consultants in Australia actively working to assist growers with CTF adoption across all industries.

Many growers have attempted to change to CTF but have not been advised how to “do it right”, such as the imperative that standardising machinery on permanent wheel tracks should start with the harvester.

Most direct support personnel have little understanding or experience of on-farm CTF adoption, particularly as a fully integrated system.

Any comments of uncertainty, any “sitting on the fence”, from advisers will be a major constraint on growers changing to CTF.

CTF setup requires advisory skills during the initial stages that are probably best left to the CTF specialists, but achieving the production, economic and sustainability benefits depends on the full range of advisers supporting the on-farm change.

This team approach is a major opportunity, as we expect farm profits would generally double.

Some support services, for example, in machinery, machine guidance and data management, are readily available.

Growers are increasingly concerned with a lack of research support for their CTF systems.

They are doing their own research while paying levies for programs that are irrelevant.

And institutional support of CTF is a conundrum.

CTF and the recent developments with spatial technologies have all been supported by industry research and development corporations, and State and federal governments.

But ongoing development and on-farm adoption have not been widely supported.

Leadership is needed, particularly from the Federal Government, which is well-positioned and has the most to gain.

ACTFA has asked for Federal Government funding to develop a leadership team and specified funding to be allocated for CTF adoption support, training for service industry personnel, and research and development for established systems and new applications, such as in the vegetable and fodder industries.

ACTFA suggests if only five to 10pc of relevant institutional budgets were allocated, adoption on at least 50pc of farms could be achieved in 10 years.

With the doubling of productivity, that would bring benefits to the national economy, the vitality of rural industries, and the vibrancy of rural communities.

Don Yule is a director with CTF Solutions in Brisbane. Email don@ctfsolutions.com.au or contact (07) 3871 0359.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
To outlay any capital on cropping at current prices and drought conditions is hard to justify. The small margins that can be gained under favourable conditions in most dryland operations will take some time to pay off the initial costs.
Posted by rod, 17/10/2009 1:32:19 PM, on The Land
Why isn't everybody doing Controlled Traffic Farming? Does this really need answering? It's easy if you ask me...the problem is the cost involved in getting to a practical CTF environment...If you are aiming for 12m controlled traffic you need a 12m airseeder, 24m spray rig, 12m harvesting front and then you have to put all these on the same wheel patterns. This equals big dollars and in case some of you have forgotten, farming hasn't been very good in the last 8 years or so. I see that it's the best thing to do and as such we have finally bought a 12m airseeder and are looking to replace our harvester to a 12m front...but this costs a lot of money...You must be bordering on ignorant if you can't see why farmers aren't rushing to adopt this farming method.
Posted by Pete, 18/10/2009 11:19:09 AM, on The Land
This is just one of a multitude of ways across all farming sectors that farmers can improve yield. The issue as always is return on investment. Profit = money to reinvest in new equipment and technology. Loss = stagnation of equipment and technology. Society has two choices: cheap food or successful farmers with money to constantly update technology and equipment and keep in front of the demand curve.
Posted by Qlander, 19/10/2009 8:16:08 AM, on The Land
I have just got home from harvesting barley. This is our second year of having our header set up to be on the tramlines after 5 seasons of all other machinery on 3 metre centres. Nearly 12 hours behind the wheel and the header follows the tramlines perfectly. No misses and with GPS auto steer I can concentrate on getting the most out of the header. The savings on time, diesel and labour are huge. When it rains during harvest I know that our soils will not be compacted by our heavy header. This system will make you money. As for the cost of setting up that is a myth. Zero till, controlled traffic and no stock on cropping ground has enabled us to grow crops when other farmers in the district doing the same old thing have failed!
Posted by Young CTF farmer, 20/10/2009 8:56:44 PM, on The Land

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Controlled Traffic Farming performance has shown high and increasing benefits to productivity, water use efficiency, soil and landscape improvement, and farmer capabilities and lifestyles.
Controlled Traffic Farming performance has shown high and increasing benefits to productivity, water use efficiency, soil and landscape improvement, and farmer capabilities and lifestyles.

Most popular articles

Advertisement



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...