The
Root of the Problem Dr. John Zarb Article from Organic Farming (Cover Story) Winter 2004 Issue 84 Return to Publications Page | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | |
||||
|
||||
On the other
hand, at very high levels of
weed infestation, pasture topping, mowing, and cultivations may be more appropriate weed control measures - at least initially. Some jobs can be daunting: the removal of small docks from overgrazed pasture is just one example of extremely tedious - but not impossible - work. Weed control strategy
Effective RIP
weeding also depends on
motivated workers who can operate well together and who can recognise weeds at their various stages of growth. Appropriate weed control techniques need to be integrated into a weed control strategy that is suitable for the particular farm or the particular field. This requires an intimate understanding of the land, of its weeds, and how other activities on the farm, such as grazing and cultivating, influence plant populations. Advice, education, planning, and experimentation are important steps towards achieving this understanding. Predicting work rates and costs
Two of the most
frequently asked questions
from potential hand tool users are "how long will it take?" and "how much will it cost?" This is a bit like the proverbial "how long is a piece of string?" The work rate
will depend on things like
weed density, field size, terrain, surrounding vegetation, soil, operator experience, and weather - to name but a few. However, with the aid of a Lazy Dog work rate predictor, knowing your weed density will enable you to obtain a good estimate of the cost and duration of a particular job. Simply count
the number of weeds
in a few 5m x 5m squares to obtain an average density, then refer to the work rate predictor chart. These charts have been compiled from experience. They list the expected times and costs of weed removal at given weed densities, and allow jobs to be planned and costed. The rate predictors for spear thistle and dock are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Case studies
In a Defra-sponsored
trial between 27 April
and 14 May 2004, some 10,183 docks were removed from 3ha of pasture (used for spring grazing and hay) in 102 man-hours, at a cost of £260/ha (or £100/ac). Much value can be placed on this work: • Hay could
be cut without risk of
spreading weed seed • Any need for
subsequent pasture topping
was removed • There is no
risk of spreading dock seed in
manure from grazing stock • There is no
risk of exacerbating weed
problems from arable cultivations • Docks removed
from the field provided
around four tonnes of green material for windrow composting with straw |
bedding (the
plants were shredded before
windrowing) • Follow-up
work cost £20/ha and removed
another 1,200 small plants - next year's crop of weeds. In another example,
early-season removal
of spear thistle while the plant was at the rosette stage enabled us to lift 400 rosettes an hour per person. A total of 8,000 plants were removed that day, along with occasional ragwort rosettes, in a single pass. A detailed report will be available based on this and related work in 2004/2005. Back to the land
Sadly we live
in a world in which we are
made to believe that jobs in new out-of-town shopping centres operating a till or placing objects on shelves are highly desirable and sought-after, whereas jobs on farms doing manual work are seen as retrogressive. Have we forgotten that the human body was originally designed for physical activity and is capable of performing wondrously efficient work? |
Firstly, the
teams need to be motivated
by the belief that handwork is worthwhile and efficient - if you believe in what you are doing, you will do it well. Work leaders should therefore be able to motivate and interact with colleagues. Operators also
need to understand the
ergonomic advantages of the tools, which will require some training and practice in their use. Finally, a systematic approach is required for removing and collecting plants |
||
Creative thinking
|
||||
The question
of labour costs is important.
But surely there are opportunities here to subsidise labour for environmentally responsible weed control? Why pay a subsidy for set-aside but not for handwork for weed control? Equally, some of the major landlords - both private and public utility - could consider working with tenants to subsidise the cost of weed control. Bear in mind that it costs water companies around £120 million a year to remove pesticides from our drinking water whilst, at the same time, water board tenants in major catchment areas routinely spray docks and thistles. I rest my case. RIP handwork in practice
Many weed problems
could be drastically
reduced by tackling them early, during winter and spring. In organic systems wee< control must be regarded as an ongoing, long-term process - not a last-minute job just before combining. Docks, spear
thistle and ragwort
The four main
weeds we deal with are
docks, spear thistle, ragwort, and creeping thistle. As far as weeding is concerned, the first three are treated in much the same way: the whole plant can be removed - roc and all - with the Lazy Dog fork. Removing the plant before seeding reduces the re- appearance of that weed the following year Although these three weeds are all capable of re-growing from root remaining in the soil, dock is most liable to do this since it i the most difficult root to remove intact. But it is worth persevering to remove roots that break during weeding, even if this means occasionally getting down on your knees to ( pull up a piece of root by hand. Spear thistle
can be left lying in the field
However, ragwort should obviously be removed for burning or burial, while dock can be hot-composted in windrows with manure and bedding to prevent re-growth. Creeping
thistle
On the other
hand, creeping thistle behave
differently. As it grows from rhizomes (below-ground creeping stems) simply cutting the plant above ground level will encourage tillering and the sprouting of further stems from the rhizome. These will be shorter than the original stem but will still flower and seed. Being shorter than the |
||||
![]() |
||||
It is still
possible for a person to scythe an
acre-and-a-half of corn a day or to load a five tonne trailer of potatoes by hand. Far from being
in any way backward,
RIP weeding provides opportunities for a return to traditional social agricultural work. This is the sort of work that used to be a cohesive force in rural communities. It was work that brought people in touch with each other and with the land on which they worked. You notice things when you are working in the field that you do not when you are on the tractor - the soil, the scents, the wildlife, the worms. And RAF jets on low flying exercises. Teamwork
Unless you are
particularly fond of your
own company, the most effective way of using the RIP technique is in a team. In order to optimise the efficiency of weeding teams, the following points should be noted. |
||||
|
||||
Return
to Publications Page | Page 1
| Page 2 | Page
3 | Page 4 |
|
||||
|
||||
.
|
||||