Establishing Cereals in the Context of Managing the Common Vole
1. Presentation
Characterization of the technique
Description of the technique:
This fact sheet is intended for farmers operating in grassland-dominated systems (STH greater than 80%).
The technique consists of reintroducing two years of cereals into a permanent meadows system by working the soil:
- soil tillage destroys the galleries and burrows of voles and moles, which slows down the establishment and spread of these small mammals,
- soil tillage facilitates the detection of mole signs (molehills) and vole signs (mounds), which allows better targeting of preventive control,
- soil tillage followed by crop establishment offers a stronger slowing effect than that followed by meadow re-establishment; this slowing effect is further enhanced when the establishment of crops is repeated for at least 2 consecutive years.
Soil tillage (ploughing to a depth of about 15 cm taking into account soil characteristics) is one of the tools for integrated pest management available to farmers but its use is strictly regulated within the framework of maintaining permanent meadows, one of the three greening criteria imposed by the CAP.
Since the management method relies on ploughing, this technique is therefore not compatible with simplified or direct seeding techniques.
Example of implementation:
This technique was tested as part of the work of the association "Charquemont vole control" which brings together about a dozen farmers affected by multi-annual outbreaks of the European water vole. These farms are located between 800 and 1,000 meters altitude with shallow soil.
This experiment is the result of collaboration between various organizations: Interdepartmental Chamber of Agriculture (25-90), FREDON Franche-Comté, Federation of Hunters of Doubs, FDSEA, ONCFS and financially supported by the Agrifaune program.
Details on the technique:
Technical itinerary:
- seedbed preparation (ploughing) on meadow plots, without herbicide use after September 15 (regrowth harvest period)
- rotary harrow alone after a few days, depending on weather conditions
- cereal sowing with a combination (harrow + seeder) between September 25 and October 5. Sowing rate between 190 and 200 kg/ha.
- no intervention (chemical or mechanical) until harvest except sometimes an application of organic or mineral fertilization (max 60 units)
- cereal harvest early August
- cereal sowing in the second year with ploughing and combined sowing around September 15. Establishing barley in the second year allows advancing the harvest date for earlier meadow establishment.
- same itinerary as the first year
- cereal harvest early August
- meadow sowing 35 to 37 kg/ha in the third year after two stubble cultivations with disc tools, rolling then re-rolling after sowing. No ploughing before reseeding the meadow because the seedbed would be too fine and the seeds would be buried too deep.
The technique has been tested for different pure or mixed species: Triticale, organic triticale, Rye-Vetch, Barley, hybrid barley and organic mixed cereal.
For more details see page 2 of the brochure
Implementation period On established crop
Barley is established in the second year to allow an earlier harvest to establish the meadow early in the third year.
Spatial scale of implementation Territory
Soil tillage by superficial or deep tools (ploughing) can be applied at several scales. At the plot scale, it allows the removal of old galleries, facilitates the detection of new burrows. At a larger scale and combined with crop rotation and spatial organization of the crop area, it helps reduce the STH/SAU ratio and thus slows down rodent development (GIRAUDOUX et al., 1997; FICHET-CALVET et al., 2000; MORILHAT et al., 2007).
Application of the technique to...
All crops: Easily generalizable
Technique that can be implemented in upland grassland areas affected by multi-annual fluctuations of European water voles (Jura Mountains, Massif Central ...)
For shallow soils, pay attention to ploughing depth.
All soil types: Easily generalizable
Attention to shallow soils
All climatic contexts: Easily generalizable
Regulation
Negative influence
Within the framework of the green payment (2015-2020), one of the three criteria is to collectively ensure the maintenance of permanent meadow areas in the region. Compliance with this obligation is checked annually by comparing the annual ratio measuring the share of permanent meadow areas in the total farm area with the reference ratio. These ratios are calculated by considering the areas subject to the green payment, i.e., areas declared by farmers, excluding areas under organic farming.
In general, the reference ratio is calculated from 2012 data, updated with areas under organic farming in 2017. Compared to this reference ratio, if the annual ratio:
- deteriorates by more than 2.5%, a prior authorization regime for conversion* of permanent meadow is implemented: from then on, if a farmer wishes to convert a permanent meadow, they must obtain administrative authorization
- deteriorates by more than 5%, a conversion ban and reconversion obligation regime is implemented: no conversion of permanent meadow is allowed for the current campaign;
- and farmers who have converted permanent meadows during the last two campaigns must re-establish part of them.
It is recalled that any ploughing of permanent meadows, except sensitive meadows, remains authorized and is not subject to authorization as long as the annual degradation of the regional ratio does not reach 2.5% compared to the reference ratio.
2. Services provided by the technique
3. Effects on the sustainability of the cropping system
"Environmental" criteria
Effect on air quality: Decreasing
pesticide emissions: DECREASE
GHG emissions: INCREASE
particulate emissions: INCREASE
Effect on water quality: Increasing
N.P.: UNKNOWN
pesticides: DECREASE
turbidity: UNKNOWN
Effect on fossil resource consumption: Increasing
fossil energy consumption: INCREASE
phosphorus consumption: UNKNOWN
Other: No effect (neutral)
Plots established with cereals diversify the landscape and create quiet islands for small fauna.
"Agronomic" criteria
Productivity: Increasing
Avoid production deficit due to vole outbreaks
Benefit on the quality and quantity of forage of established meadows
Cereal yields meet farmers' expectations especially for straw harvest (choice of triticale or rye for their straw production capacity)
The grain produced provides an additional resource for farm feed.
See page 4 of the brochure
Production quality: Increasing
Re-establishment of meadows allows reintroduction of legumes (red clover and alfalfa) which makes the forage more palatable and increases second cut yield.
Soil fertility: Increasing
Soil tillage allows the new meadow to better exploit the first 15 centimeters of soil compared to natural meadow.
Water stress: No knowledge on impact
Functional Biodiversity: Increasing
Plots established with cereals diversify the landscape and create quiet islands for small fauna.
See pages 5 and 6 of the brochure
"Economic" criteria
Operating costs: Increasing
Mechanization costs: Increasing
Margin: Increasing
The profit margin compensates for the forage not harvested in place of the cereal.
See page 7 of the brochure
"Social" criteria
Working time: Increasing
Peak period: Increasing
Effect on farmer health: Increasing
Farmers involved in this experiment are more confident mastering a technique that allows them to avoid vole outbreaks.
Observation time: Increasing
4. Organisms favored or disadvantaged
Favored Bioagressors
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| mole | LOW | pest, predator or parasite |
Disadvantaged bioagressors
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| European water vole (Arvicola terrestris) | MEDIUM | pest, predator or parasite |
Favored Auxiliaries
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|
Disadvantaged Auxiliaries
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|
Favored climatic and physiological accidents
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Details |
|---|
Disadvantaged climatic and physiological accidents
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Details |
|---|
5. For more information
6. Keywords
Bioagressor control method: Physical control
Mode of action: Mitigation
Type of strategy regarding pesticide use: Redesign
Annexes
S'applique aux cultures suivantes
Favorise les bioagresseurs suivants
Défavorise les bioagresseurs suivants
