2004 On-Farm Research ProjectsBack to Why We Picked Them |
||||||||||
OS04-018 Recirculating Production Pond Inflows to Increase Production and Reduce Effluents on Small-Scale Fish FarmsWhile there are vast water resources in the Piedmont region of Alabama, only a small percentage of these water resources are being used by farmers to grow fish. Most fish farms that are outside of the major production areas such as those in East Alabama are relatively small and require diversification and/or maximum use of their on-farm resources in order to remain viable. Most of these small farms primary fish crop is catfish. The current low prices for catfish and difficult economic position of large catfish farms have flooded the market with low priced catfish and make it more difficult for these small producers to survive. These farms with limited acreages and budgets have difficulty competing with larger corporate/industrial farms with deep pockets and are struggling to survive. Some fish farmers have access to spring water and flowing streams that could be used to intensify production and help them remain competitive. However, most farmers with spring water input have traditional water storage ponds (deeper than 10 feet) and much of this spring water is underutilized or just flows over the spillway. Several farmers, in an effort to further utilize this flowing water have built earthen raceways below their water storage ponds where they grow catfish and other species. This flowing water, along with aeration has allowed them to intensify their operations and help them remain competitive. Several have shown interest in recirculating this water back through the pond systems to "filter" it for reuse and to reduce or eliminate the water effluents from the farm and possibly integrate some secondary non-fish crops in the process. With guidance from University personnel and funding assistance from SARE the cooperating farmer can explore the economics of recirculating water through his pond systems and integrate secondary non-fish crops. This water recirculation will enhance and protect environmental quality, make the most of on-farm resources and reduce potentially nutrient enriched effluents. The metabolic by-products of fish culture need not be wasted if they can be channeled into secondary crops that have economic value or benefit the primary production system in some manner. Plants are an ideal secondary crop in integrated fish/plant systems because they grow rapidly in response to the high levels of nutrients that are generated form the microbial breakdown of fish wastes. By placing floating rafts of aquaponic plants in the most downstream pond and allowing any solids to settle, the recycled water should be quite suitable for fish culture by the time it passes through the large header pond above the raceways. Eventually the incoming water will fill all of the ponds to capacity. At this time an appropriate amount of nutrient enriched water from the system will be used to irrigate fruit and vegetable crops near the ponds. It is anticipated that this nutrient rich water will reduce the amount of fertilization required on the plant crops and serve as a steady source of water for irrigation. The in-flowing spring water will be divided into two approximately equal streams and run through two separate pond systems. Each incoming spring water stream will be directed to a large header pond (2-3 acres) and then distributed from the header pond into the raceway system. When the water reaches the bottom pond in this system, with the aquaponic plants, it will be allowed to settle and then be pumped back or gravity returned to the header pond to be recycled. David J. Cline Why did we pick it?
OS04-019 Production Costs and Techniques for Blueberry Establishment in Eastern Kentuck yThe reduction in tobacco quotas has begun to eliminate the ability of many Eastern Kentucky farmers to generate substantial returns from smaller, marginal field sizes. Crops that might replace tobacco as sources of income would have to be those able to be produced on arable ground and significant ($2,000-$4,000) returns per acre to land, labor, and management. Blueberries have been identified as a viable small fruit production option in Eastern Kentucky after lengthy research trials at the Quicksand Research Station during the past ten years. Few producers have adopted blueberries, primarily because of 1) unfamiliarity with the crop; 2) unsuitable soil conditions for production; 3) access to markets; and 4) costs of establishing the crop. This project will seek to compare costs using different methods and techniques for establishing blueberries on an Eastern Kentucky farm (the Roland McIntosh farm) in Powell County. Sustainable/organic methods will be emphasized as economically viable alternatives for conventional techniques. Use of raised beds and subsoiling to increase soil drainage, three different mulch types, and pest control methods will be evaluated side-by-side. Attention will expressly be given to an economic evaluation of weed control by the three mulches from using by-products from the region's wood products industry. The primary purpose of the project is to generate actual cost estimates for blueberry establishment in Eastern Kentucky by closely monitoring labor and cost inputs associated with actual establishment techniques and materials. Financial estimates may then be generated to more accurately estimate differences among production variables. Estimating production costs for new and specialty crops through producer observation is emerging in the Southeast as one of the most useful methods to accurately obtain true measures of profitability. Combining financial estimates with various production techniques allows producers and researchers to not only compare the production effects of different establishment techniques, but also identify costs and benefits for variations in establishment methods and materials. Furthermore, while current blueberry profitability estimates for Kentucky indicate that significant profits may be generated on a per-acre level, this project will generate on-farm establishment costs for blueberry stands of less than one-half acre. These land amounts are often the most feasible options for producers in Eastern Kentucky who are limited in amounts of arable land and available harvest labor. Matthew Ernst Why did we pick it?
OS04-020 Increasing Farm Sustainability through the Use of Cover Crops for Weed Suppression in Non-Transgenic Conventional Cotton Transgenic cotton including the Round-Up (RR) varieties first appeared in 1997 and now occupies approximately 90% of the cotton planted in Georgia and the other southern states. Within Georgia alone reduced tillage systems are used on approximately 600,000 acres. There is concern that continued reliance on RR cotton will create weed species with resistance to glyphosate (actual Round-Up chemical). Resistant weed species may require potentially more toxic herbicides to be used or growers will have to revert back to using plowing methods as a means of weed control. Either method of weed control will be detrimental in making these southern farms sustainable systems. Therefore the farmer needs an alternative method of weed control other than transgenic cotton varieties that relies on or encourages over use of glyphosate. Increasing sustainability of farm operations will require that natural means of weed suppression be incorporated into the farming operation. One alternative is the proper use of cover crops. Cover crops not only supply nutrients (e.g. legumes fix nitrogen and cereal crops recycle nutrients), but also break pest cycles, provide needed soil organic matter, increase available water, and help suppress weeds. Proper use of cover crops may not totally eliminate the use of chemicals, but any reductions will lower the overhead and maintenance cost incurred by the farmer. Prior to transgenic varieties, the difficulty of handling high residue restricted farmers from using cover crops to control weeds and build soil ecosystems. However, improvements in planting equipment now allows the farmer to successfully incorporate high residue cover crops into their farming operation. Additionally, many farmers believe that conventional cotton produces better quality lint over that of transgenic varieties. This on-farm research project will study the potential of increasing farm sustainability by using conventional cotton varieties with cover crops as the main weed suppressant to lower herbicide use, increase soil organic matter, increase water capacity and improve the soil ecosystem. Gary L. Hawkins Why did we pick it?
OS04-021 Comparison of Stockpiled Bermudagrass + Annual Ryegrass and Traditional Hay-Only Winter Feeding PracticesMany Texas beef producers currently experience difficulty in realizing a profit from their beef production systems. Texas Cow-Calf Standardized Performance Analysis (SPA) indicates that feed costs account for 40% of production costs for the cow calf producer. Sustainability of cow-calf operations in Texas often depends on the ability to minimize feed input costs. The use of pasturing beef cows on stockpiled bermudagrass has not been well investigated, but this novel system approach has the potential to significantly reduce Texas cow-calf producer winter feeding costs. Additional benefits include improving the persistence of bermudagrass stands and early spring growth by allowing greater carbohydrate storage in the root system of pastures that are allowed to accumulate growth prior to the onset of dormancy. Reduced use of herbicide to control late winter, early spring weeds due to ryegrass competition may offer additional potential savings, while reducing the amount of herbicide used in pasture systems. The trial will be conducted on producer farms in Anderson County (Palestine, Texas) and Panola County (Carthage, Texas). Each site will include two treatment groups containing 20-25 head of cows per group. Treatment groups will be: a) Cows that receive traditional hay and supplementation as required for the winter feeding period, and b) Cows that graze stockpiled bermudagrass during fall and early winter, annual ryegrass from February through May, and are fed hay only when necessary. Body condition scores will be assessed on beef cows bred for January-March calving at the initiation of the trial in December (hay feeding typically begins) and subsequently every 28 days until the end of the trial, which will be marked by the availability of bermudagrass pasture for spring grazing. Calves will be weighed at weaning. Cow will be pregnancy tested at weaning. All input costs for each treatment group will be determined and analyzed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of each system. Animal body condition scores, pregnancy rates, and calf weights will be analyzed for differences to determine any detrimental effects of either system. The Beef Cattle Specialist, Forage Specialist, and Ag Economist from the TAMU Center-Overton will coordinate the trial and will work closely with county extension agriculture agents and selected producers in each of the two counties. Larry Redmon Why did we pick it?
OS04-022 A Low Cost Trapping System for Control of the Small Hive Beetle Aethina Tumida Murray, A Pest of Honey Bee ColoniesThe small hive beetle, a nitidulid beetle, was first discovered destroying honey bee colonies in Florida in 1998. The Apiary Division of the Florida Department of Plant Industry and the Florida Farm Bureau estimate that since its introduction into the US, the beetle has contributed to the collapse of thousands of hives, damaged countless stored combs, and destroyed several pounds of unprocessed honey. Basic biology of this pest is rather scanty, but adult beetles have been found to live up to 12 months, with each female laying about 3000 eggs in the host colony. Emerged larvae are most damaging to the honey bee colony, feeding on honey, pollen and brood. They defecate in the honey causing it to ferment and rendering it unfit for human consumption. Badly infested hives with frothy, fermented honey are eventually abandoned by the bees. To date, there are no effective control measures for the beetle. At the USDA, ARS-CMAVE in Gainesville, we have developed a cheap, environmentally-friendly and an effective trapping system for the small hive beetle. This trapping system consists of an in-hive trap baited with a highly attractive lure that can be used to monitor and mass trap adult beetles Estimated to cost about $20, the baited trap can be fitted and removed from the hive without disturbing bees. We propose to evaluate on a large scale this low cost trapping system for both monitoring and mass trapping of the SHB at different sites and locations in Florida and Delaware. Peter Teal Why did we pick it?
|
| Home | About Us | Calendar | Grants | Proposals | Projects | Publications | Forms | PDP | Contacts |
The content and opinions expressed on this Web page do not necessarily reflect the views of,
nor are they endorsed by, the University of Georgia or the University System of Georgia.
To contact the Webmaster, e-mail info@southernsare.org
© 2008 The University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
All Rights Reserved.