Have you seen any good news lately for corn and soybean farmers? As I write this in early May, planting is largely on schedule. 

The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has eliminated about 20% of the global supply of nitrogen (N). Apparent good news is that 80% of U.S. farmers had already purchased their fertilizer for this season. But 70% claim they can’t afford the fertilizer needed for their crops. Can both be true?

Now, I’m not downplaying the financial issues facing no-tillers and strip-tillers. Whether you realize it or not, your neighbors who till the ground at least every other year are spending about $50 an acre more than you.

Recently, Holly Spangler, editor of Prairie Farmer, wrote a good article about the financial chaos for farmers. I responded that cutting costs is the key to survival and prosperity. And she agrees.

Here’s more of what I wrote to Holly, emphasizing that my “intriguing idea” is NOT workable! Have all major crop acres switch to no-till or strip-till roughly over a 3-year period. For most farms there may be a slight drop in yields for the first 1 to 3 years without tillage.

In that transition time, there will be some extra costs, but they could be offset by selling unneeded machinery. A drop in total production across the country would reduce the surplus, causing prices to stabilize or go up. 

After the 3- to 5-year transition, crop yields return, with more consistency (resilience), and farm inputs are about $50 an acre less.

For continuous no-till, we’ve gone from 0 to maybe 20% total acres of corn, soybeans, wheat and cotton since 1960. Doubtful we’ll get to 100% by 2030.

But if you want adoption of no-till to accelerate, here’s another idea that won’t fly. ALL federal support payments for these crops would go only to farmers who adopt continuous no-till and strip-till practices. 

PROTECT THE SOIL. Studies at the Michigan State Univ. Kellogg Biological Station found that from 1989 through 2023, no-till corn yields averaged 17 bushels an acre better and soybean yields were 5 bushels higher than with tilled fields. Randall Reeder

For fun, ask a neighbor who continues to till the ground two or three times a year, if all federal payments were eliminated, would he or she switch to no-till?

Back to crop yields for a moment. The Michigan State Univ. Kellogg Biological Station has a long-term experiment, starting in 1989, comparing no-till to conventional tillage. 

Both corn and soybean yields for no-till were equal or higher for the first 15 years for corn and 8 years for soybeans. No loss in yield! Then the no-till advantage increased consistently. 

From 1989 through 2023, no-till corn yields averaged 17 bushels an acre better and soybean yields were 5 bushels higher. (From MSU Extension fact sheet “Comparing No-Till to Conventional Tillage Over 30 Years” by Christine Charles and 6 others.)

Do you wonder what “society” thinks about the way we farm? Do our friends in town like driving through dust storms (topsoil from bare farm ground)? 

What do they think about paying extra to remove sediment, N and other fertilizers from their drinking water supply? Yes, that’s more topsoil and valuable inputs disappearing from high-priced farmland. 

We must stop saying severe erosion from rainstorms is an “act of God.” And the same for blaming deadly dust storms on 50- to 70-mph winds. How much erosion was occurring on your land 500 years ago when it was mainly managed by God, with only a few people, if any, living on it? 

Hey, maybe we don’t have to lose yield while increasing net income. Improving air and water quality will make our city friends happier. And God, too.