Has anyone else tried direct drilling wheat on wheat? We are on medium - heavy ground and tried it last year with a Deere 750A. Yields were almost as as good as conventional tillage on the fields we tried it on. Should I scratch the surface or am I better just drilling right back into wheat stubble? Any suggestions?

My brother and myself experimented with direct drilling back in the 70,s using the Bettinson and MF drills which were no comparison to the John Deere which we have used later, it is brilliant. What beat us in the seventies( we carried on the experiment for six years on about 10 acres) were blackgrass and grass weeds and compaction. You could beat compaction with a Bomford subsoiler, we still have it but don,t use it. Compaction and wheelings can reduce your yield and you need maximum yiield today. In the 70,s we used gromoxome (Paraquat) for weed control which did not translocate so weed control eventually beat us. Nowadays you would of course use roundup or glyphosphate which is much better. That was what attracted us so much to GM, it performs brilliantly. Exactly why the Americans and Canadians have gone a bundle on GM. Good luck with your experiment, on really heavy land the equation is fairly balanced on direct drilling, you save a hell of of a lot of energy and sprays, but to survive now you need absolute maximum yield. Good Luck, Jack Caley

My brother and myself experimented with direct drilling back in the 70,s using the Bettinson and MF drills which were no comparison to the John Deere which we have used later, it is brilliant. What beat us in the seventies( we carried on the experiment for six years on about 10 acres) were blackgrass and grass weeds and compaction. You could beat compaction with a Bomford subsoiler, we still have it but don,t use it. Compaction and wheelings can reduce your yield and you need maximum yiield today. In the 70,s we used gromoxome (Paraquat) for weed control which did not translocate so weed control eventually beat us. Nowadays you would of course use roundup or glyphosphate which is much better. That was what attracted us so much to GM, it performs brilliantly. Exactly why the Americans and Canadians have gone a bundle on GM. Good luck with your experiment, on really heavy land the equation is fairly balanced on direct drilling, you save a hell of of a lot of energy and sprays, but to survive now you need absolute maximum yield. Good Luck, Jack Caley

Phil Still experimenting myself but wheat after wheat direct drilled looks fine, but it is a long time before that combine starts rolling again. Same with the barley looks alright. What we have noticed is that the weeds seem to be found in patches now rather than spread or spreading over the field. But use plenty of round up and keep an eye on compaction. Direct drilling after the subsoiler and press had been across the field first looks weird but is alright now.

Used a 750A last autumn. Wellimpressed with its ability to drill though trash. Slugs no worse than ploughing etc. saved a fortune in labour and power. wheat into rape stubble looks excellent as does barley into wheat stubble. drilled some land that had been flatlifted. looks the best now. definitely try this again.

I have toyed with the idea of something similar to what you are talking about but different to what Jack suggested. Basically you are suggesting direct drilling and Jack has said yes but you need maximum yield. Well how about a completely controlled approach in the form of: 1: spray the stubble off after last crop 2: direct drill new crop 3: one fert application 4: one disease spray 5: harvest Along with this low input low output system you run a controlled wheelings system to avoid compaction. The compaction you do get ie tramlines you live with and expect no yield there. So for putting very little into the crop you only get 2.5 tonnes per acre out (wheat) which you sell for feed not a premium. Its cost you less but you have earnt less. However the best thing about it is that you can basically run this system for 2-3 days per month over 1000 acres with very little machinery. You still get the area payment, the land is still in a rotation (admittedly its not ideal) but it would allow you to take another job. The more you think about it the more it becomes appealing. Its very similar to the Canadian way of doing things. Any thoughts?

Mason, i would include a grassweed/blw herbicide in the autumn, our crops would be swamped in blackgrass otherwise.The ARC in Hampshire did some work on this minimum pass technique a couple of years ago.I think you need to shed alot of fixed cost to make this system work, maybe you should sell everything and get a good contractor for those occasional passes.Wheres MC?Its good lateral thinking though, whos doing it this way?

I dont know of anybody in the UK doing it other than some trial work. But I have many friends in southern canada where the climate is very similar to ours using this approach sucessfully. Yes you do need to shed fixed costs but I could use this approach over 1200 acres with one tractor, direct drill and a sprayer. The combining would be contracted out. I am sure the fields would become a bit messy with a few weeds dotted around but I am lucky that grassweeds have never been servere problem here. Initial research has suggested that from stubble to harvest would cost £16/acre and then a contract combine and carting team on top of that. So total fixed costs field wise would be around the £40/acre mark. Some people spend that on getting the next crop in the ground let alone have a spraying and fertilising programme and then harvest the crop. Food for thought I think!