--

End of Year 1 Review

Now that we have the first year of our two-year SARE/SDSU Integrated Weed Management (IWM) project under our belt, we can reflect on what we learned, what worked, what didn’t, and what we plan to do next year. While we learned many things, we would like to summarize for you the three key lessons we realized. Using those examples, we would also like to outline some of the main objectives for next year’s project activity.

(If you want more information on the points made here, you can read the individual blogs that covered the information in more detail.)
​
The all-encompassing thought that clearly stood out at the end of this year was the fact that, after many years of working our farm—raising crops, grazing livestock, and working to control unwanted weeds—we really thought we knew the basic principles of IWM. That may have been somewhat true. But we now realize that we didn’t truly comprehend the total IWM package, that is, how the five individual principles work together and, more importantly, how they need to be used together.

First Lesson

One of the crucial first-steps in implementing IWM into any operation is doing an assessment of the weed problem. In our mid-May blog (“The FAQs of IWM”), we explained how the assessment process is accomplished. At the end of our first year of research, we realized that this first step is far more crucial than just checking the box to say it is done. The act of assessing is an ongoing process. We’re doing that but, in reality, we could be doing more, with regard to really studying the problem, reading about what other growers have experienced, and fully studying others’ research.

When it comes to controlling chicory, as with any plant, it has certain physiological characteristics. Certain things make it grow or fail to thrive. This year, we found spraying the plant too early or too late can have the same result, as in a poor result. We also found that using goats and cattle to graze the plant too young may yield poor results. The taste of the young leaves may be too bitter to attract the livestock. It may be difficult to encourage them to eat the weed instead of the tender, early-growth grasses or more tasty plants. Waiting until the chicory plant bolts (develops a stem) may actually provide a better chance of controlling it.

One thing that agricultural producers (and other plant-growing professionals) know when using herbicides is to read the chemical’s label information, that multi-page document typically glued to the herbicide container that has no shortage of small print, text and charts. It isn’t light reading, but it’s important material. We learned that when we found one chemical in our herbicide trial that didn’t have any effect on the chicory. As noted in our mid-September blog (“Recording Results”), we found it important to not only study the safety precautions and application rates but to look at the chemical makeup as well. This was a simple lesson to remind us that herbicides are plant specific. One must take the time to fully read the instructions.

Second Lesson

Each of the five IWM practices (mechanical, chemical, cultural, biological, and preventative) has its benefits and short comings. Our experience from this past year’s research intentionally focused on each distinct IWM element in an attempt to gain a deeper understanding of each of those elements and to find what does and doesn’t work. That goal was a success; we now understand more fully the pros and cons of each IWM element. The successes and failures are highlighted in our previous blog posts from this year. We will use those lessons to move forward into next year, particularly as we expand our efforts to a more comprehensive research process.
​
Along with the objectives of the goal mentioned above, we tried to find weed management options for both conventional and organic producers. We found that conventional methods, those practices that incorporate chemical options into their programs, had more tools that could be used. We knew that. We also knew there would be more challenges for an organic grower, particularly if they didn’t want to use chemicals and wanted to avoid tillage, a basic means to control weeds in many organic operations. At the end of this year, it was even clearer to us that organic operations face some serious challenges. We have some ideas for next year; more on this later.

Third Lesson

Our third lesson was we found there are objectives and goals that go beyond just controlling an unwanted weed. The overall health of an agricultural operation involves more than removing a noxious plant. Things such as soil health, ground cover, field production, profitability, and the producer’s quality of life also need consideration. In our end-September blog (“The Question of Sustainability”), we addressed these concepts. It likely will benefit us to review that information from time to time, as it’ll help keep us focused on why we are doing what we are doing.  

Moving Forward into
​Next Year

​The project may be wrapping up for 2019 but it is far from being complete. Next year will not be the conclusion of the project either. Controlling unwanted weeds is a never-ending task. But we have a great amount of data and newly-gained experience to study, assess, and utilize to develop a plan for the 2020 research. With all honesty, we haven’t fully developed next year’s project goals and objectives. But we can certainly give you a taste of what we are contemplating.

Herbicide Trials

​We have intentionally been rather limited on documenting the herbicide trial results for good reason. The use of chemicals is not just a one-year proposition. As we have already learned, many of the chemicals we used in the plots provided some quick results. But as anyone who has used weed killers knows, the real results come when it can be determined whether there was any long-lasting effect. The main question we are looking to answer is whether or not the chicory plant will rebound next year. We’re particularly interested in seeing if new seeds still sprout and if we’ll have to start the spraying process all over again next year. Plus, we want to determine if certain chemicals do have effective long-term results; if they do, we’ll likely be able to use less chemical going forward, meaning less chemicals will actually have to be put into the soil. Lastly, we want to determine if there is a chemical option available to remove the chicory from a hay field but not cause severe harm to the desirable forage such as the alfalfa. These are some of the key points we will be studying in our 2020 research. 

Multifaceted IWM Program

Now that we know how the five IWM techniques work individually and have a better idea of the strength and weaknesses of each, we can meld them together to approach weed control from a comprehensive, multi-practice approach. In 2019, we focused on using one technique on each particular test plot or area. In 2020, we will use multiple IWM methods on test plots to control weeds from many angles at once, somewhat like a one-two-three punch approach. For example, a trial we are considering is to incorporate grazing (biological means) within a plot to weaken the weeds and then apply a low-dose herbicide (chemical means) to eliminate them, followed by seeding a plant species that can be a companion to the plant community already in place (cultural approach). This final step will thereby take a mono-culture environment and turn it into a more biodiverse one that is healthier and will be more resistant to a future chicory infestation.

Another plan is to define a buffer area on the outer perimeter of our property in which chemical measures can be utilized to control chicory without the concern of collaterally removing other broadleaf forage such as alfalfa. Our hope is if we can contain the chicory to a narrower band of pasture and hay ground that has more grasses and fewer legumes, we’ll be able to make chemical applications more feasible. Plus, we’ll be able to contain the spread of chicory to those areas and keep it from moving further onto our farm (a preventative measure). In effect, we hope to eventually get the interior of our farm chicory-free and thus reduce the use of herbicides overall. In 2019, we nearly accomplished that goal, but we need to take additional measures to minimize the encroachment of chicory from areas outside of our control onto our property. If the herbicide trials provide us with a chemical alternative that eliminates the chicory but doesn’t severely affect legumes—there are a couple of herbicides that actually looked promising in 2019 but it’s too early for concrete results—we will have even more options for the buffer areas.
​
These trials may also move us closer to developing alternatives for organic producers, which is still on our list of objectives. 

Innovative Practices

Now that we have a better idea of the “bigger picture,” we want to dig deeper into researching alternative methods as well.

For example, the soil testing we did in 2019 showed us that we are definitely on the right track to having very healthy soils—high levels of organic matter, great soil structure, awesome infiltration rates, and so forth. But there is one field that gives us reason for concern. This particular hayfield (located on the outer edge of our farm) has had a high population of chicory as well as a less-than-desirable, mono-culture grass community. We have on several occasions intentionally failed to harvest this field, as we did not want to risk spreading the chicory to other areas. We have subjected the field to chemical applications but the grass population is such that the ground cover is poor and the chicory (as well as thistles) always seem to get re-established. The field has a high underground water table, limiting the type of plants that can survive long-term. We know from previous experience that tilling the ground to remove undesirable plant species will only propagate an explosion of weeds. No-till practices to incorporate another plant type may be an obvious option, but the soil structure is concerning. This provides us with a situation to try some innovation.

Our plan next year is to, as mentioned above, use a multifaceted IWM approach. We have already selected a grass variety that has a better chance of surviving a wetter environment, but we didn’t want to plant it this fall because of the presence of chicory. Therefore, our plan for this field for next year is to start out by applying an appropriate type of herbicide to eliminate any chicory or thistles. We will then increase the organic matter in the soil by applying aged manure we have available from our livestock. We will then spread the new grass seed onto the field.
​
Rather than tilling this planting into the ground and causing a new “crop” of weeds, we will try another approach. We have been reading about using livestock to graze a field during which time the action of them walking acts in a similar fashion to a “no-till” drill. The thing with grass and legume seeds is that they only need to have soil contact, not deep planting. Our thought is after the manure and seed are spread on the field, the cattle and goats can graze the field and work the manure and seed into the ground. Will it work? We’ll find out.

Conclusion

​It has been an exciting year and we’re looking forward to next year. Stayed tuned with the activities on our farm on our webpage. There are some things in the works beyond this SARE/SDSU project (hint: more conservation efforts involving many different aspects of wildlife habitat, water quality, forest management, and the list goes on). Join us on Facebook and our website for all the latest.