| Abstract | The New Farming Initiative Group (NFIG) consists of six members and has approximately 600ha of sugarcane farming land in the Herbert region. Comparison of soil health of the two farming systems is the primary objective. This project will increase the uptake of several best management practices which are considered to reduce the loss of sediment, chemicals and nutrients from cane lands as well as significantly improve soil fertility due to a healthier soil in terms of its physical, chemical and biological components. The primary aim of the New Farming Initiative Group includes: • Comparison of soil health of the two farming systems. These soil tests have not previously been undertaken in the Herbert and will provide a benchmark of current soil health. The test includes physical, biological and chemical components: • Demonstrate the economics of two farming systems (regional standard and 1.9m dual row/break crop fallow) • Development of group skills through shared knowledge, utilizing the expertise of consultants, building organisation skills and through first hand participation. The trial site consists of three replications, two treatments and one variety. The trial was marked out with GPS to include 9 rows of pre-formed mounds at 1.9m and 11 rows of conventional at 1.55m spacing. The key outcome of this project was the similar average gross margins for the conventional and new farming system treatments. Potentially higher future input costs will favour the new farming system economically, with greater average gross margins expected compared to a conventional farming system. The new farming system produced an average 0.5 unit CCS less sugar than conventional farming. The cause of this statistically significant difference is unclear and warrants further investigation. Essentially, no significant difference was observed in soil health parameters (biological, physical and chemical) between treatments over the 14 month testing interval. Of interest, the new farming system displayed positive trends of increasing pH, increasing organic carbon and higher cation exchange capacity. The project had a relatively short testing interval and longer term soil testing would likely create more meaningful soil health results. Continued soil heath testing and economic analysis is needed to achieve the full benefit from this project. It would be inappropriate to draw any firm conclusions on the comparison of these two farming systems from this study of only two years. |
