Dryland crop production and economic returns for crop residue harvest or grazing

Authors: Archer, David; Liebig, Mark; Kronberg, Scott

Submitted to: Agronomy Journal
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 12/9/2019
Publication Date: 3/23/2020
Citation: Archer, D.W., Liebig, M.A., Kronberg, S.L. 2020. Dryland crop production and economic returns for crop residue harvest or grazing. Agronomy Journal. 112:1881-1894. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20100.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20100

Interpretive Summary: While crop residues could provide an additional source of revenue for agricultural producers, there are concerns that harvesting these residues could have negative impacts on productivity and economic returns. A field study was conducted to measure short-term (6-yr) effects of crop residue harvest on crop productivity and economic returns for biomass baling and grazing, and for crop rotation and cover crop options. Crop rotation treatments include spring wheat-dry pea, spring-wheat-dry pea/cover crop mix, and spring wheat-dry pea-corn. Biomass removal treatments included no biomass removal; bale and remove wheat straw; bale and remove residues from each crop; and graze all crop residues. Corn yield was lower when crop residues had been baled, but not with grazing. However, spring wheat yield was lower with grazing in the wheat-pea rotation. Grazing may be more suited to the wheat-pea-corn rotation than the other rotations as grazing became profitable at a lower price in this rotation and grazing in this rotation had both relatively high economic returns and low economic risk. These results are useful to producers by helping to identify production and economic impacts in making baling or grazing decisions.

Technical Abstract: While crop residues could provide an additional source of revenue for agricultural producers, there are concerns that harvesting these residues could have negative impacts on productivity and economic returns. The objective of this analysis was to quantify short-term (6-yr) effects of crop residue harvest on crop productivity and economic returns for different biomass harvest intensities and methods, and for different practices aimed at mitigating negative effects of residue harvest. Crop rotation treatments include spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)-dry pea (Pisum sativum L.), W-P; spring-wheat-dry pea/cover crop mix, W-P/CC; spring wheat-dry pea-corn (Zea mays L.), W-P-C. Biomass removal treatments included no biomass removal; bale and remove wheat straw; bale and remove residues from each crop; and graze all crop residues. Significant corn yield reductions occurred when baling crop residues, but not with grazing. However, significant spring wheat yield reductions occurred with grazing in the W-P rotation. Grazing may be more suited to the W-P-C rotation than the W-P or W-P/CC rotations as the breakeven grazing price was lower in this rotation, and the grazing treatment in this rotation had both relatively high economic returns and low economic risk over the study period.