Conclusions
Overall, this was a successful Phase 2 – Pilot Project. During the course of the 2+ year project, 9 agents (and 1 consultant) worked closely with 18 unique cotton farmers to demonstrate advanced irrigation scheduling tools – soil moisture sensing systems and the SmartIrrigation App – in 34 cotton fields (18 in 2019, 16 in 2020) across 9 counties within the UF and LFO regions.
Conversations with participating agents and farmers seemed to indicate they preferred a soil moisture sensor system collecting data from a field versus the SmartIrrigation App which uses weather data from a station some distance away and rainfall data from a rain gauge in-field (which often had performance issues).
Results from accompanying research on cotton irrigation scheduling at UGA’s Stripling Irrigation Research Park indicated the use of a soil moisture sensing system could lead to higher yields and greater irrigation water use efficiency. Use of the SmartIrrigation App did not produce the highest yields in the research but resulted in greater water use efficiency versus using the UGA “checkbook” method.
Agents & Farmers
A “top-down” approach where the project PI’s dictated all the parameters of the project did not work well with agents. A more organic, “bottom-up” approach may have worked better as the agents would have had more buy-in with the project.
Turn-over within the agent group over the two years of the project was also a critical issue. We lost 2 but added 1 from ‘19 to ‘20.
The perceived complexity of the scheduling tools and reduced or loss of interest among agents (and farmers) were detrimental to the project’s success.
Agents were very busy and could not devote the time required to make the project work as planned. Surveys, farmer yields and irrigation info, etc. were difficult to obtain. The project team communicated the need for data gathering to participating county agents on numerous occasions in both 2019 and 2020 crop seasons. Agents were able to obtain only a limited amount of data from the fields involved in the project.
Yield monitors (on cotton pickers) were not as widely available on farmer harvesters as we had expected when the grant proposal was developed. So getting yields from the farmer fields proved to be a challenge.
COVID-19 played a MAJOR role in how the project proceeded in 2020.
Farmers are VERY busy and could not devote the time required to make the project work as planned. Some agents chose to work with large growers. Unfortunately, these growers are very busy, very spread out, etc. This presented a challenge to get them to try/adopt/get comfortable with new technologies like SMSS and SI App. But often these are the farmers that can afford to try new technologies and become early adopters and influencers.
Farmers did not attend postseason workshops despite personal invitations from their county’s UGA Extension agents. As described above, these farmers are quite busy and could not set aside the time to attend.
Social Science Conclusions
Following interviews and surveys with farmers in southern Georgia (all non-participants in this project), as part of a MARS Confectionery funded project, the social science team concluded the following:
• There is a significant financial return on the investment in soil moisture sensors, however, barriers to adoption still exist.
• There is a need to continue to document reproducibility in results across crops, production methods, and external pressures.
• Education and Extension outreach efforts need to continue to illustrate profitability and water use efficiency while also bridging the learning curve to adopting advanced methods.
One of the social science team members observed:
“While we can enter into a conversation about irrigation scheduling…as it relates to areas of water conservation, increased yield, money saved, and ultimately, technology adoption, we have to keep in mind that their decision making processes may not necessarily place the practices of irrigation and irrigation scheduling at the forefront (in the same way our project is). Rather, while it is still important, it may serve as a periphery component to their overall growing season and livelihood. This becomes important for the purposes of strengthening engagement and overall program and research design when working with key constituents such as farmers who depend on research outputs and dissemination of knowledge.”
From surveys of farmers and UGA Extension agents participating in the project (Tables 3 and 4), it appears that the farmers did increase their knowledge level of various aspects of irrigation and irrigation scheduling as related to the project by participating in the project and working with their local extension agent. Agents, on the other hand, indicated by their responses that they still have much to learn about the various topics this project involves.
Anecdotal feedback from agents and survey results indicate the project had an impact on the views and knowledge level of both agents and farmers of using tools to enhance efficiency of irrigation applications and led to an increase of interest in and/or awareness of advanced, innovative irrigation scheduling tools such as SMSS and the SI App. These results gave research and extension specialists valuable insights into farmer knowledge, opinions and adoption barriers.
SMSS & App
The Trellis soil moisture sensing systems and rain gauge gear, while more affordable, was riddled with performance issues.
Low cost SMSS (like Trellis) allowed more growers to be equipped with gear during the project versus using more expensive hardware systems. But, using low cost gear proved to present challenges as we had many issues that more expensive gear might have reduced or eliminated – reliability, connectivity, accuracy, performance, etc.
The App had some functional/programming issues during the project but were addressed quickly. Interruptions of linkage to Trellis soil moisture data proved more detrimental and affected the performance of the App in several instances.
Final Thoughts
This Phase 2 – Pilot Project certainly had some issues during its 2+ year life, the project did have an impact as led to an increase of interest in and/or awareness of advanced, innovative irrigation scheduling tools such as soil moisture sensing systems and SmartIrrigation Apps. It gave research and extension specialists valuable insights into farmer knowledge, opinions and adoption barriers. It also confirmed the old adage – “you get what you pay for” – as related to low-cost SMSS gear and associated performance issues.
While this project cannot claim all the credit, soil moisture sensor vendors operating in Georgia have reported a substantial uptick in system sales following the start of the Phase 1 – Pilot Project and carrying over into this Phase 2 project with one vendor experiencing a 536% increase in sales and another seeing a 370% increase. Similarly, other UGA Extension specialists and administrators have observed a notable increase in interest in soil moisture sensors and scheduling Apps as well as an increase in people wanting to debate the merits of various sensors and Apps. In addition, over 700 downloads of the SmartIrrigation Cotton App took place and 800 fields were ‘registered’ during this project.
All of this activity in advanced irrigation scheduling tools will inevitably lead to increases in water use efficiency on Georgia farms. And increases in water use efficiency are in line with the LFO’s DM1 and DM4 as well as the UF’s DM4 and DM5 demand management practices found in their respective Regional Water Plans – leading to “more crop per drop”.