Land husbandry: an agro-ecological approach to land use and management Part 2: Consideration of soil conditions

This paper, complementing the first part (Shaxson et al., 2014), sketches the outlines of an ecologically-based approach to better care of soils, within the overarching context of ‘land husbandry’, contributing to more-effective conservation of soil and water. It suggests an up-dated paradigm which concentrates more on renewing and conserving the biologically-moderated spaces in the soil in the root-zone rather than on the solid soil-particles themselves. When read in sequence, the two papers offer contributions to better understanding of both the problems and the possibilities for solving the ongoing uncertainties of how best to repair damaged lands, to maintain and improve those areas already in use, and to safeguard the potentials of those as-yet-unopened areas which surely will be brought into production in the future, by the planning and executing of optimum strategies for assuring sustainability of their uses into the future. These two papers do not set out to challenge existing knowledge, but rather to suggest additions to, and alternative interpretations of, what may already be known. The conclusions suggest some important amplifications to any curriculum for the training and/or up-dating of people involved in those subject-areas which contribute to better land husbandry and more-effective conservation of soil and water, as well as to the buffering of soils’ productive capacities against the possible adverse effects of climate change

Land husbandry a frameworh for soil and water conservation

+hlm.;28c

Effects of subsurface drip irrigation rates and furrow irrigation for cotton grown on a vertisol on off-site movement of sediments, nutrients and pesticides

Abstract – Subsurface drip irrigation can reduce off-farm movements of fertilizers and pollutants and improve the water use efficiency of irrigated agriculture. Here we compared the effects of furrow and subsurface drip at different irrigation rates, based on a percentage of daily crop-evapotranspiration rates (ETc), on run-off and off-site movement of suspended sediment, nutrients and pesticides from cotton crops grownon a vertisol. Our results show that furrow irrigation significantly increased suspended soil loss, of 5.26 t ha−1, compared to that of subsurface drip irrigation at 120% of ETc, of 2.53 t ha−1, whereas no erosion was recorded with deficit subsurface drip irrigation. Off-site movement of nitrogen in furrow, of 18.63 kg ha−1, was five times greater than subsurface drip irrigation at 120% ETc. It was much less with 105% ETc(0.37 kg ha−1) and 90% ETc (0.15 kg ha−1), and absent for 75% and 50% of ETc. Phosphorus loss from furrow, of 778 g ha−1, was greater than for the wetter subsurface drip treatments that gave 23 g ha−1 for 90% ETc and 19 g ha−1 for 120% ETc. No P loss was recorded from drier subsurface drip irrigation rates. Herbicides such as atrazine and diuron were applied in the year prior to the experiment, but considerable amounts were recorded in furrow run-off in both years, but only at 90 and 120% ETc subsurface drip irrigation in the first year. Concentrations of applied herbicide residues in the runoff exceeded the minimum threshold level for 99% species protection and, although the total amount of herbicide movement was higher in furrow, at times the concentration was greater for wetter subsurface drip irrigation run-off. Residues of insecticides, such as endosulphan applied in a previous year and dimethoate applied in the current years, were recorded in runoff from subsurface drip at 120% and furrow irrigation. Their concentrations in each year exceeded minimum threshold level. Subsurface drip irrigation at 75% ETc offered the best trade-off between off-site run-off, erosion and pesticide movement and yield and water use efficiency