Dryland crop production and economic returns for crop residue harvest or grazing

Abstract

AbstractWhile crop residues could provide an additional source of revenue for agricultural producers, there are concerns that harvesting these residues could have negative effects on productivity and economic returns. Although crop residue harvest effects have been studied in wetter areas, including the U.S. Corn Belt and Southeast, there have been few studies in more arid areas. The objective of this analysis was to quantify intermediate‐term (6‐yr) effects of crop residue harvest on crop productivity and economic returns for different biomass harvest intensities and methods, and for different practices aimed at mitigating negative effects of residue harvest in the U.S. Northern Great Plains. Crop rotation treatments included spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)–dry pea (Pisum sativum L.), W–P; spring wheat–dry pea/cover crop mix, W–P/CC; and spring wheat–dry pea–corn (Zea mays L.), W–P–C. Biomass removal treatments included no biomass removal, bale and remove wheat straw, bale and remove residues from each crop, and graze all crop residues. Significant corn yield reductions occurred when baling crop residues, but not with grazing. However, significant spring wheat yield reductions occurred with grazing in the W–P rotation. Grazing may be more suited to the W–P–C rotation than the W–P or W–P/CC rotations as the breakeven grazing price was lower in this rotation, and the grazing treatment in this rotation had both relatively high economic returns and low economic risk over the study period.