Sabbatical Fallow farming

Jack · Sabbatical Fallow farming

Gidday

SABBATICAL FALLOW

DEFINATION.

Sabbatical Originally meant, or referred to the seventh year when the land was given a rest. The word Fallow, had over the years had several diverse meanings, but most commonly means a period when the land lays idle, such as the period between harvest of a crop, and the establishment of the next. In modern New Zealand grassland farming, there is normally no rest period.

Therefore, the only way the land can have a rest, is for it to be shut up for a certain time. There are two systems of farm management that give some of the soil a rest, and they are Deferred-grazing, which means to shut up a portion of the farm for several months and the Sabbatical Fallow system,
which incorporates the ancient idea of resting all the land once every seventh year. As it would not be very practicable to shut an entire farm up on the seventh year, this system was developed where-by a different seventh of the farm is shut up each year to produce the Sabbatical year of rest.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

If you shut up a seventh of your farm mid-winter, when the growth is at its slowest, come Spring, the grass will grow up, seed, fall back down and rot while new grass comes up through it to seed and so on, several times in the year.
By LATE autumn, the final cover of grass will be quite high and carry on into winter, like autumn saved pasture.
You then shut up a different seventh of the farm and brake-feed the fallowed paddock. This gives a large amount of stored feed without the expense of putting hay or silage.

The brake feeding tramples the dead grass down to the soil, also adding to it the dung and urine from the stock, and this is the final stimulation and regeneration of the soil.

Many farmers, during the year, give the fallowing paddock, one or two tramps with a large number of stock, not to get a feed, but to push the tall grass down onto the soil to assist in the decomposing of the dead grasses.

However, care must be taken when brake feeding off the fallowed paddocks, not to cause pugging, as this re-compacts the soil, destroying much of the natural aeration of the soil that has been achieved during the year of rest.

For twelve months, you have had total cover of vegetable matter over the soil, holding in the moisture. The soil micro organisms have had a chance to reproduce unrestricted, utilizing the decaying vegetable matter. Some grass plants die while new ones are constantly replacing them. The roots of the grass that die then rot down leaving the soil more open to oxygen which also stimulates the life of the soil.

In an article in the N. Z. Journal of Agriculture, July 1987 under the Successful Farming series it reported on M.A.F. trials and stated that the control block (conventionally farmed) grew 1,3000 kg of dry matter/ha/year. In the fallowed paddocks, D.M. production produces about 1,000 kg/year more than the control.

Later the article goes on to say, quote:

“For example, taking a 400 ha farm and dividing it into seven gives a fallowed area of 57 ha. Say the farm normally carries 10 su/ha (that is 4,000 su in total), and it normally produces 11,000 kg/DM/ha/year. Subtract the loss to degenerative composting of say, 6.500 kg/DM/ ha and that leaves dry matter available as feed of 4,500 kg/ha. Write off a further 500 kg/ha trampled in by the stock, and we’re left with 4,000 kg/ha, or total for the 57 ha fallowed of 228,000 kg. If each stock unit eats 1 kg/DM/day, it’ll take the 4,000 su 57 days of the winter dormancy period to eat out the fallowed area.” End quote.

The converse to that is if the property grows 11,000 kg/DM/ha/year and only 4,000 kg/DM/ha is actually used, that leaves a total of 7,000 kg or 7 tonnes of dry matter has been composted down into the soil over the year of fallowing. A heap of good compost containing 7 tonnes of dry matter would be one hellava big heap to be spread onto a hectare of land, as good compost can contain up to 80 or 90% of water.

The result of this system is a completely new layer of rich living humus with enough stored energy to last another seven years. This may be too simple for most scientists to understand, but it does work here in New Zealand, even in this day and age even though this system was first about four thousand years ago.

DISADVANTAGES.

*One seventh of the farm out of production every year.
*Therefore a reduction in the stocking rate is needed at the start.
*The visual aspect of untidy looking paddocks most of the year.
*The social aspect that you are different and not farming traditionally.

ADVANTAGES.

*Improved aeration, drainage, water holding capacity and structure of the soil.
*Increased root depth.
*Increased root mass.
*Increased micro organism and worm activity and numbers.
*Natural reseeding.
*Increased soil nitrogen.
*Improved animal health, including all metabolic diseases and facial eczema.
*Need for artificial fertiliser greatly reduced, many farmers have not used any fertilisers for years.
*No need for hay or silage making.
*There has even a noticeable increase in wildlife such as birds.

THE HISTORY OF SABBATICAL FALLOW.

It is first recorded in the Bible about 4000 years ago, in Leviticus, chapter 25. The system continued to be used for centuries in Hebrew people. It was also the main stay of English agriculture, right up till about 80 or 90 years ago. I have met several old farmers who still remember the fallowing. The practice was brought to N.Z., and mainly used in the South Island. However, over the years, fallowing was generally associated with cropping or mixed farming.

The first person I know of, who developed the Sabbatical fallow system of farming to straight all grass hill country farming in N.Z., was Ian Stephenson at Te Akau near Raglan. Ian Stephenson started the Fallowing in the early 1970’s and for many years he farmed with the complete exclusion of any form of fertilisers. I believe he now uses a small amount of straight rock phosphates.

THE ORIGINAL ORGANIC FARMING.

Sabbatical farming is the original organic farming system, being used for 4000 years before any chemicals were used. Whilst on my property on the Kaimai’s I did not use any fertilizer for ten years, and the very poor run down pastures that I started with where still improving beyond recognition. I had a Massey University Student come to the property to gather information for a thesis. She found that in the paddocks that had been Fallowed, the active roots were still found up to and beyond 600mm depth, whereas the depth in most of the un-fallowed paddock was only around 50 to 100 mm. at the very most.

When I first bought that property I farmed very conventionally, and poured on the fertilizer, and filled a 30 foot deep offal hole with stud sheep in three years with facial eczema when our neighbours only had a very minor outbreak. No profit in that. After a few years fallowing my neighbours had a bad outbreak of facial eczema, and when I counted the spores on my place, they were not even high enough to worry about.

I do not say you shouldn’t use any fertilizer if you wish but strongly suggest that for phosphate you use only rock phosphate and not super phosphate. I do believe that the use of super phosphate has caused more problems with animal health and adverse affect to the environment than it has been worth.

Unfortunately, I sold that property in 1993 and have not had a suitably fenced property since but am now in the process of fencing the one I have at the moment so that I may be able to once again start Sabbatical Fallowing.

wayland

Again a good read Jack Wink

Most of us over fifty will remember our history lessens in respect to leaving fields fallow. No farmer did this to my knowledge when I was a lad but, this was just after the last war and food rationing was still being applied to certain commodities. Some system other than fallow farming had to be used by necessity. So perhaps this was the death nell of the old system. Before the enclosures, the Saxon open field system was used for many hundreds of years to good effect. I have seen old plans showing areas of the open fields marked down to fallow. Fallowing carried on after the enclosures but as the land was now owned by individuals and not the community personal wealth came into play. Fallow fields does not sit well with those wanting to make a quick fortune of course. Around this time the four course rotation system came into being and is still being used by some. This of course gave the land a rest from growing the same crop including the grass break each year, which put heart back into the land. I don't see a better method of doing this if we are running a mixed farm, but what is the option for the grass land farmer? Fallowing perhaps. Apart from the potential of increased grass yield does not the system leave itself open to dominance of the indigenous less productive grasses? Would the benefit of clover be at risk if the sward was not kept down?. It would certainly help in the control of parasites but that is another matter me thinks. Well all this I am about to find out as I have got a paddock that has been untouched for many many years and is full of rank herbage. It should grow good crops once I get through it. As a final note Jack. Does NZ have this thing called "Set aside"? Many arable farmers are now operating a form of fallowing in the EU, and are payed not to farm one sixth of their acreage. This led to fields of continuous brown earth which did not help the land or the environment. Farmers don't like scruffy looking fields as you have said. Now they get a larger payment it this land carries vegetation and so fallowing does happen now, albeit for other reasons than fertility. Sorry guys. I have seemed to have prattled on a bit here. Shocked

Cheers.

Jack

Gidday

No we do not have that set aside system which is really tied up with subsidies I believe and we don't have any of them things.

What really went wrong, was before the war some German git of a sientist decided he wanted to know what grass was made of so he could then grow it faster. He put grass in an oven till it was ashes then analized it but didn't take into account what had gone or destroyed in the cooking process. That is how the N.P.K. idea came from so the started force feeding with N.P.K. but the only people it really helped was the chemical companies who started making a mint so naturally they cranked up the old propaganda machine for more.