Wheat yield graph since 1910

[GDR]

This one chart should probably answer all your questions:
[ATTACH]7382[/ATTACH]

Could there really only be 400 active farmers in SK? I'm not sure that's possible? I bet we have that many by definition just in my county.

[Sheepwheat]

Could there really only be 400 active farmers in SK? I'm not sure that's possible? I bet we have that many by definition just in my county.

You gotta look at the graph right.

[Guest]

Aside from the obvious argument that there are other factors beside climate change which have influenced yields including fertilizers, micronutrients, new higher yielding varieties, fungicides, better weed control products, reduced tillage (Mallee, how many Australians are still using 1910 or even pre 1950,s varieties, farming methods, and zero inputs other than manure?) the chart Mallee posted may actually indicated climate change is having an effect on production. Note the much higher yield variability over the past few decades. I would argue farmers do not change their farming programs by such a dramatic amount each year and that weather is the biggest factor on a year to year basis. So the question then becomes has weather become more variable which is a prediction of climate change advocates. Are there more droughts, more flooding, more hail, more unusual frost events? If so, would not this result in a greater variability year to year in yields; just as the graph shows? Climate change does not mean just lower yields.

its like saying ;
the covid rates have gone up under a lockdown because people didn't listen
you can spin anything anyway you want
truth of the matter is , yields have gone up , its that simple

[Sheepwheat]

What shocks me most is the fact that with all the 70 bushel wheat, there must be piles of sub 30 to get the average down to 45 bpa? Or?

[GDR]

You gotta look at the graph right.

lol, ya who do you think you guys are confusing me with numbers when it's still dark out! My bad.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

1961 was also a bad year at below 10 bu an an acre.

It doesn't matter how much you spend on a crop if its hot and dry all summer.

Several spots on the southern prairies have seen record or near record dryness in 2020 and if it continues into 2021 without the subsoil reserves we had in spring of 2020, the results will likely be disappointing.

Wait, weren't you the one lecturing us about short term trends such as this as being a phenomenon called weather? And about not using small areas to represent the entire globe? But now apparently "several spots" in one small region, in one year is indicative of climate?

[Sheepwheat]

Since climate alarmism started, I would argue we have had far more consistent weather on the prairies as a whole, excepting pockets here and there. I would argue a more stable rainfall lately has also contributed, along with the higher inputs that guys are able to use along with it. IMO, it is way more about fertility use and rain, vs. variety “upgrades”.

Guys in moist areas on deep black soil have been growing 80 plus barley since time immemorial. When the land here was fresh, high om, and newly broken, it was exceedingly naturally productive. 100 to 140 bushel oats happened with ease.

So depending on the area, yields haven’t changed nearly so much as the graph would state as the overall pattern.

[dmlfarmer]

Wait, weren't you the one lecturing us about short term trends such as this as being a phenomenon called weather? And about not using small areas to represent the entire globe? But now apparently "several spots" in one small region, in one year is indicative of climate?

Weather is what happens every year. Climate is long term 30 plus years. Have never changed my position on this. I am pointing out that the chart definitely shows greater yearly variability over the last few decades in annual production levels than had happened previously. So if weather is more variable year to year resulting in greater yield variability, which is what climate change advocates have always predicted you would expect a yield chart to reflect greater yield variability year to year now that what was happening 2 or 3 GENERATIONS ago which is exactly what Mallee chart for Australia shows./

Second, I am not pinpointing small areas, others like sheepwheat are. Mallee presented a chart for Australia, not a small area. Is this representative of the world? I do not have the data to confirm so will not make a generalization like Sheepwheat did for the prairies. But in my opinion, I am guessing based on world prices we are seeing more variability in yields year to year production.

[Sheepwheat]

Weather is what happens every year. Climate is long term 30 plus years. Have never changed my position on this. I am pointing out that the chart definitely shows greater yearly variability over the last few decades in annual production levels than had happened previously. So if weather is more variable year to year resulting in greater yield variability, which is what climate change advocates have always predicted you would expect a yield chart to reflect greater yield variability year to year now that what was happening 2 or 3 GENERATIONS ago which is exactly what Mallee chart for Australia shows./

Because of farming practices, and higher trending yields, of course yields are going to have a higher variance, because the max yields are higher. Not climate change caused at all!

For example, back when the best wheat yield possible based on soil fertility was 40 bpa, if you had a dry year, and it went 20, the variance is 20. But now, if you’re shooting for 80, and end up with a dryer year, and you get 55, the variance is 25. It is farming practice related, dml, not climate change related.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Weather is what happens every year. Climate is long term 30 plus years. Have never changed my position on this. I am pointing out that the chart definitely shows greater yearly variability over the last few decades in annual production levels than had happened previously. So if weather is more variable year to year resulting in greater yield variability, which is what climate change advocates have always predicted you would expect a yield chart to reflect greater yield variability year to year now that what was happening 2 or 3 GENERATIONS ago which is exactly what Mallee chart for Australia shows./

Second, I am not pinpointing small areas, others like sheepwheat are. Mallee presented a chart for Australia, not a small area. Is this representative of the world? I do not have the data to confirm so will not make a generalization like Sheepwheat did for the prairies. But in my opinion, I am guessing based on world prices we are seeing more variability in yields year to year production.

Try plotting those graphs in log scale instead, so the magnitude of the spikes is constant as a percentage, and I think you will find the variability is getting lower, not higher. A 15 bushel per acre swing from 60 bushels, is a much smaller swing than 10 bushel swing back when 30 bushels was average, by percentage. Even without doing so, it looks like the swings are no bigger in Sask.
edit, I see Sheepwheat said the same thing above while I was typing.

[dmlfarmer]

Try plotting those graphs in log scale instead, so the magnitude of the spikes is constant as a percentage, and I think you will find the variability is getting lower, not higher. A 15 bushel per acre swing from 60 bushels, is a much smaller swing than 10 bushel swing back when 30 bushels was average, by percentage. Even without doing so, it looks like the swings are no bigger in Sask.
edit, I see Sheepwheat said the same thing above while I was typing.

Perfect political SPIN AF5. Changing the graph to showing percentage change rather than actual production is a great way to spin the data! I sure importing nations are happy to justify keeping world prices low by saying farmers should not be paid more when production is short because percentage wise production is not down that much so we should not have to pay more even though production is short. Bucket must love such thinking and arguments!

[farming101]

Perfect political SPIN AF5. Changing the graph to showing percentage change rather than actual production is a great way to spin the data! I sure importing nations are happy to justify keeping world prices low by saying farmers should not be paid more when production is short because percentage wise production is not down that much so we should not have to pay more even though production is short. Bucket must love such thinking and arguments!

The chart does not show production in the area under consideration. It is showing yield per acre for wheat and barley for the area.

[Sheepwheat]

The chart does not show production in the area under consideration. It is showing yield per acre for wheat and barley for the area.

If you don’t farm, things like that are easy enough to overlook.

[shtferbrains]

Western Producer had an article on an Ag Canada study that expected production to increase by up to 30% in western canada due to climate change.
Seemed quite logical the way I read it.