Tillage and traffic effects on runoff

Traffic and tillage effects on runoff and crop performance on a heavy clay soil were investigated over a period of 4 years. Tillage treatments and the cropping program were representative of broadacre grain production practice in northern Australia, and a split-plot design used to isolate traffic effects. Treatments subject to zero, minimum, and stubble mulch tillage each comprised pairs of 90-m 2 plots, from which runoff was recorded. A 3-m-wide controlled traffic system allowed one of each pair to be maintained as a non-wheeled plot, while the total surface area of the other received a single annual wheeling treatment from a working 100-kW tractor. Rainfall/runoff hydrographs demonstrate that wheeling produced a large and consistent increase in runoff, whereas tillage produced a smaller increase. Treatment effects were greater on dry soil, but were still maintained in large and intense rainfall events on wet soil. Mean annual runoff from wheeled plots was 63 mm (44%) greater than that from controlled traffic plots, whereas runoff from stubble mulch tillage plots was 38 mm (24%) greater than that from zero tillage plots. Traffic and tillage effects appeared to be cumulative, so the mean annual runoff from wheeled stubble mulch tilled plots, representing conventional cropping practice, was more than 100 mm greater than that from controlled traffic zero tilled plots, representing best practice. This increased infiltration was reflected in an increased yield of 16% compared with wheeled stubble mulch. Minimum tilled plots demonstrated a characteristic midway between that of zero and stubble mulch tillage. The results confirm that unnecessary energy dissipation in the soil during the traction process that normally accompanies tillage has a major negative effect on infiltration and crop productivity. Controlled traffic farming systems appear to be the only practicable solution to this problem. Keywords: controlled traffic, conservation tillage, rainfall/runoff hydrograph, wheeling, clay soil. Australian Journal of Soil Research 39(2) 249 - 257 Full text doi:10.1071/SR00019 © CSIRO 2001