The New Agriculture Network's on-line newsletter with seasonal advice for field crop and vegetable growers interested in organic agriculture.
Vol. 5, No. 8 August 13, 2008 |
| In this issue |
 Hoop houses for season extension: Are they right for you? Mulch your tomatoes to fight weeds, retain soil moisture and save money Reports from organic growers |
Hoop houses for season extension: Are they right for you?
David S. Conner, Ph.D.
C.S. Mott Group for Sustainable Food Systems
Michigan State University
Adam Montri
Michigan State University Student Organic Farm
Michigan Food and Farming Systems
Collaborative efforts by Michigan State University (MSU) and Michigan Food and Farming Systems (MIFFS) have developed a research and outreach program which tests the contributions of passive solar greenhouses (also known as high tunnels or hoop houses) to farm profitability. This program, funded in part by USDA*, builds upon past efforts of Dr. John Biernbaum of MSU’s Department of Horticulture and his pioneering work at the MSU Student Organic Farm. Subsequent funding has further expanded the scope of this project.
The USDA grant funds were used to provide a hoop house, along with training on how to build and grow in it, to each of three farmers in three regions of the state (nine total farmers) which have become loci of research, training and outreach activities (Figure 1). At the same time, research at farmers markets, a key outlet for these farmers, gauges market demand for the produce.
 |
| Figure 1. Locations of hoop houses (counties) and farmers’ market research (cities). The dotted line is the 45th latitude. |
The hoop houses are the Nor’Easter model, manufactured by Rimol Greenhouse Systems, Inc. While we do not endorse this or any other product, we believe this model is strong enough to withstand the snow loads, winds and other harsh weather conditions in Michigan. Each hoop house was also equipped with an internal frame and row cover for extra winter protection. The photos below are inside and outside views from the Upper Peninsula in March 2007. Each structure cost approximately $10,000; plastic will need to be replaced every three to five years, but the steel frame should last several decades.
 |
 |
| Photo credits: Adam Montri | |
Research
Four main sets of questions drive the research.
- Are hoop houses profitable? How much money can a farmer expect one to generate? How soon do they pay for themselves?
- What is the demand for extended season produce? Will consumers patronize farmers markets early and late in the year? How much will they spend?
- What do farmers experience when adopting this tool? What key lessons do they learn?
- Are their environmental benefits to growing in hoop houses rather than importing produce?
Profitability
All the farmers had the hoop houses ready for planting in early spring 2007 and began to sell produce in April; two farmers planted and harvested limited quantities in fall 2006 (F1 and F4 in Table 1). As shown in Table 1, the farmers had a very wide range of experiences. One farmer had gross sales revenue of about $8,000 and a net income (revenue minus costs) of more than $5,000. Given the approximate $10,000 cost of the hoop house, this implies about a two year payoff. Other farmers did significantly less well, with two losing money. However, each of the two who lost money had extenuating family circumstances that did not permit them to produce to more than a minimal degree nor regularly attend their markets. There is also a wide range in the number of labor hours farmers devoted to the hoop house, from more than 1200 to only 133.
Table 1. Farmer revenue, costs, net income and labor, March 2007 to March 2008.
Farmer |
Total revenue |
Costs |
Net income |
Total labor hours |
F1 |
$4,064 |
$1,613 |
$2,450 |
616 |
F2 |
$5,452 |
$1,819 |
$3,633 |
1276 |
F3 |
$2,239 |
$682 |
$1,556 |
349 |
F4 |
$947 |
$1,492 |
-$545 |
485 |
F5 |
$6,363 |
$1,439 |
$4,924 |
332 |
F6 |
$1,615 |
$1,743 |
-$129 |
133 |
F7 |
$7,968 |
$2,518 |
$5,450 |
691 |
F8 |
$5,123 |
$1,590 |
$3,533 |
201 |
F9 |
$2,493 |
$1,725 |
$769 |
169 |
Market demand
Based on responses from shoppers at the three Michigan farmers markets, consumers will attend markets year round, buy large quantities of produce and are willing to pay a premium for locally grown foods. Among the highlights of the research:
- 68% will attend farmers markets in January or February.
- 92% will attend in November or December.
- Willing to pay premiums of 41% (survey), 31% (auction) for local.
- Will pay these premiums on most items purchased.
- Many consumers say that only these markets carry the types of food they really want.
When we interviewed farmers about their experiences adopting this technology, several key themes emerged. First, farmers spoke of a learning curve: growing indoors is different than outdoors and takes time to adapt to new conditions. Initial data from Year 2 suggests that many farmers will be more profitable than in Year 1. Second, hoop houses can produce very high quality produce, less damaged by wind, pests and diseases. Third, while many crops can grow well, space is limited. Our research is now measuring the revenue per square foot day of crops to guide the wise use of scarce time and space in the hoop house. Finally, being first at market with key crops can create loyal customers. Early tomatoes, for example, attract customers to your booth, many of whom become repeat buyers.
We have noticed a few patterns as well. Similar to the wide range of revenues and labor hours, farmers have shown a range in their ability to record and report data. One group of farmers are readily able to send data reports on time, and the reports are clear, easy to follow and in the right format. Others struggle with this requirement, sending in reports late and requiring follow up reminders, clarifications of the data’s meaning and other efforts to organize the data. Interestingly, the farmers who best handle the data requirements are overwhelmingly the same ones who have used their hoop houses most intensively and earned the most money. We hypothesize that attention to detail, and ability to stay on top of work, are key attributes that are vital to maximizing the potential of this technology.
Outreach and education
The hoop houses and farmers have also been key resources in helping to conduct various outreach activities. The farmers themselves have led numerous tours and been the subject of many popular press stories. Adam and John have conducted 20 workshops statewide, with particular focus on reaching underserved farmers, and have also developed both classroom and on-line courses on season extension. They are also developing planting charts to guide the timing of seeding and transplanting activities to maximize production and profitability. Season extension is a key component in MSU’s Organic Farming Certificate Program.
Is it right for you?
While hoop houses can be a valuable piece of many farms’ management strategies, our research is discovering keys to success that may guide your decision to adopt this technology.
- A relatively flat, well-drained site with full sunlight is a must; consider proximity to water and electricity (and installation of a frost-free hydrant and drip irrigation) to save time and money.
- Everything grows faster in the hoop house, including weeds: be prepared to use more seeds, water and fertility inputs. This also requires the farmer to keep up with weeding and other tasks more urgently than with outdoor production.
- Time and space are limited. Good record keeping and market research, and use of planting guides, will help farmers decide how to use limited resources wisely.
The National Research Initiative of the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service, grant number 2006-55618-16922.
USDA Risk Management Agency, grant number 07IE08310298-C
Michigan State University Extension, the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station and Project GREEN (Generating Research and Extension to meet Economic and Environmental Needs)
 |
 |
Adam Davis1 and Jon Cherniss2
1USDA-ARS Invasive Weed Management Unit, Urbana, IL
2Blue Moon Organic Farm, Urbana, IL.
Mulches are often used in organic vegetable production because of their benefits in conserving soil moisture and suppressing weeds. Some of you reading this may be thinking to yourselves, as we did prior to our study, “Yes, mulches work, but are they cost-effective?” We set out to answer this question for fresh-market tomatoes on a diversified organic vegetable farm in Urbana, Illinois. The study began in summer of 2007, and is being repeated in the summer of 2008. This project was made possible by the combined support of North Central Region SARE project LNC04-251, Blue Moon Farm and the USDA Agricultural Research Service.
What we did
Our experiment took place on Blue Moon Organic Farm in Urbana, Illinois, in 2007. On June 15, we transplanted Viva Italia tomatoes at an in-row spacing of 18 inches between plants in rows on five foot centers. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Prior to mulching, on July 3, weeds were removed with a Lilliston rolling cultivator and additional hand weeding. The mulch treatments (Figure 1) were either bare ground, straw (a three-inch deep layer of rye straw), or grass (a three-inch deep layer of Buffalo grass clippings from field margins). Tomatoes were harvested weekly by hand from Sept. 14 through Oct. 19.
 |
 |
 |
| Figure 1. Mulch treatments consisting of bare ground, straw or grass. | ||
What we saw
Weed biomass was seven times greater (p<0.0001) in the bare soil treatment compared to the mulched treatments (Figure 2). Tomato yield was 27 percent greater (p<0.01) in the mulched treatments compared to the bare soil treatment (Figure 3). Overall, the economic impact of mulching tomatoes was very positive, providing nearly a 10-fold return on the investment in material and labor (Table 1).
 |
 |
| Figure 2. Weed biomass totals. | Figure 3. Tomato yields. |
 |
How did the mulches do their job?
Our mulches suppressed weeds by preventing sunlight from reaching the soil surface, and boosted tomato yields by reducing evaporation of soil moisture and reducing water use by weeds. Mulches suppressed weed seedling emergence and growth by blocking sunlight from the soil surface. Soil moisture was greater in mulched plots than in the bare soil treatment. This may have been due to reductions in evaporation of soil moisture due to the mulch cover, reduced use of soil moisture by weeds, or a combination of both factors. Tomato yields increased with increasing soil moisture. Although the crop was irrigated, apparently there was enough moisture stress to result in yield loss.
What happened, a farmer’s perspective
The farm netted an additional $500 from mulching 300 feet of paste tomatoes. That’s nearly 10 times the cost of mulching. The improved yields appear to be due to increased moisture levels in the mulch treatments. However, this was unexpected because we irrigate our tomatoes. Evidently we don’t irrigate enough. We also suspect that our irrigation management, or lack thereof, during the three-week harvest period further amplified the contribution of the mulch in our dry year. Typically, we stop irrigating tomatoes once harvest begins to avoid splitting and help concentrate tomato flavor. Although we might not have seen the large yield differences in a wet year, this year mulching paid off significantly. In fact, we made enough extra to pay for mulch for the next 10 years even if they are wet years. Better weed control, cleaner fruit, reduced weed seed populations and improved soils from the addition of large amounts of organic matter are just icing on the cake.
Illinois
Northern Illinois, Kane County – David Campbell of Lily Lake Organic Farm
Rain, cool weather and high humidity at times in the past two weeks have made hay harvest very difficult with poor quality hay being baled, due to rain and too many days between hay being cut and harvested.
Soybeans were cultivated for the second and final time last week. Hay harvest is very slowly making some progress. Red clover cover crop in one of my oats fields was clipped yesterday.
I plan to finish clipping red clover cover crop in my other oats field by this weekend. I hope to finish second cutting hay harvest soon. I’ll start hand-cutting weeds out of soybean fields in another week or two. Soybean fields are very clean this year, primarily due to late June planting date.
Question
I was wondering how the emergence of organic corn has been for others.
West Central Illinois, Fulton County—Anne Patterson of Living Earth Farm
It has felt like September the past five days. Cool nights in upper 50s with temperatures not above 80°F during the day. This is really slowing down the maturing of all summer crops, such as eggplant and tomatoes. It has been one week since it rained. I can’t remember the last time we had such a long stretch between rains. It has helped us to begin clearing out weedy beds and prepare for fall and early winter planting. I have had significant crop reduction due to weeds, over-taking things such as second planting of bush beans, one area of sweet potatoes and regular potatoes.
We are in the full swing of summer harvesting. The tomatoes have been very slow coming on, but they are doing fair now. Flavor is not here this year for hot peppers, tomatoes or melons. Just too much rain and cool weather. We were able to get out all garlic and onions in a timely manner, considering the rain we had. We have resorted to a lot of mowing of weeds. We have tilled in buckwheat and prepared beds and planted Asian greens, spinach, radish, mesclun, arugula for late summer early fall harvesting.
We have planted a winter cover crop on beds which need a rest and replenishment. I am using Peaceful Valley’s winter soil builder and also a mix of hairy vetch and winter rye on some beds and fields.
During the next two weeks we will mow areas that became weed patches. Shallow plow and disk these areas a few times in preparation of planting a winter cover crop. We will begin digging sun chokes and harvesting early winter squash, continue harvesting summer crops, and build new raised beds. We will weed bramble area, which like everything else got ahead of me this season in weeds. I need to figure out if I can finish the season to mid-October with minimal outside labor. Part-time employee and part-time intern (that were here for six weeks) work their last day on August 13.
Minnesota
Western Minnesota, Lac qui Parle County—Carmen Fernholz
The biggest news in the past 10 days in central Minnesota was the huge wind storm that went through on July 31. It involved 100 mph sustained winds for more than an hour. Currently the university people and crop insurance personnel are still assessing the damages. The corn crop appears to have been damaged the most, as the crop was in the early pollination stage when the storm hit and no one is certain as to the outcome of the pollination process. Soybeans appear to have survived better, but some fields sustained some harsh leaf damage from the high winds. One thing is for certain, the corn crop has been negatively impacted for a significant area of western Minnesota.
Soybean aphids are heavy in parts of the fields. However, I have a higher than usual population of Asian beetles that are doing a spectacular job of holding the aphids in check. Usually this is not the case. A half-inch of rain last night will go a long way in carrying the crop to maturity as pod setting is quite far along at this stage.
I have finished the winter wheat harvest and the barley harvest and I’m about halfway through the oats harvest with only 15 acres of flax yet to cut and harvest. Third cutting of hay is windrowed and waiting for the weather to dry and the humidity to lessen so it can cure. I am currently planning some fall seeding of both winter barley and winter wheat.
Information about permission to reprint or post our articles. Funding to initiate this network was provided by the American Farmland Trust and EPA Region 5. Web site hosted by the MSU IPM Program. Contact webmaster. |
 |