top of page
Search

Ray Archuleta on Bare Soil, Fungicides, and Rethinking Soil Health

  • Writer: Buz Kloot, Ph.D.
    Buz Kloot, Ph.D.
  • Sep 2
  • 5 min read

Updated: Sep 3

spiral of regeneration
Iconic Ray Archuleta Image captured ca. 2013 before a Slake Test Demonstration.

Introduction


In 2010, I met Ray Archuleta on the farm of the late Ray Steyer. That day changed the course of my life. I was still working as an aquatic scientist, but one afternoon with Ray shifted my entire research and outreach emphasis to soils and soil health.

Ray introduced me to the four soil health principles that, at the time, seemed almost radical:


1. Limit disturbance

2. Keep the soil covered

3. Maintain a living root year-round

4. Foster diversity


Livestock integration and context weren’t yet part of the conversation, but even then, Ray was clear: if farmers were going to stay in business, they would have to reduce inputs. In 2010, that was a crazy idea. Fifteen years later, it feels more like common sense.


This blog is longer than most, and I’ll apologize for that up front. But disturbance and our dependence on agricultural chemicals are deeply connected, and to understand how soil health moves forward, we need to look at those connections together.


Disturbance as More Than Just Tillage


Ray and I had another long conversation just last week where we drilled down into the idea of disturbance. It was a good reminder to me that disturbance isn’t just tillage. Tillage is dramatic — you can see and feel it — but soil disturbance is much broader, reaching into fallow, pesticides, and other chronic pressures that often slip under the radar.


Ray encouraged me to think about disturbance on a spectrum, from acute to chronic. Acute disturbances are shocks — a tillage pass, an insecticide spray — while chronic disturbances are the slow, grinding pressures of repeated disturbances that wear soil down over time.


Here’s one way to think about it:

  • Chronic disturbance (long-term pressure): fallow, tillage, pesticides (insecticides, fungicides, herbicides in varying degrees depending on context)

  • Acute disturbance (short-term shock): tillage, insecticides, fallow, fungicides, herbicides

The shock for me was how damaging chronic fallow can be for soil. Bare ground — or even ground covered with residue but without a living root for eight months of the year — turned out to be among the most harmful chronic disturbances. We see the legacy of this in conditions like fallow syndrome.


Of course, these rankings aren’t absolute — tillage fallow vs. chemical fallow may differ, the frequency and duration of fallow matter, and pesticide impacts vary by type and by crop. Insecticides tend to have the most direct effects, while fungicides and herbicides differ in frequency and breadth of use. The bigger point, though, is that soil health is shaped not just by one disturbance (like tillage), but by the accumulation of many, and rotation diversity goes a long way in reducing the need for them.


This is where diverse cropping systems matter. Including small grains in South Dakota rotations or planting cover crops ensures there’s something living in the soil. And when cover crops are in play, they can open the door to livestock integration, layering another principle of soil health onto the system.


The Herbicide Debate — and the Fungicide Blind Spot


No-tillers are often criticized for relying on herbicides. It’s true: herbicide use can be a crutch when it replaces diversity and rotation. But focusing only on herbicides creates a blind spot.


In conventional tillage systems, fungicides are often the silent cost. Bare soil leaves plants vulnerable to rain splash and soil-borne pathogens, which can prompt farmers to apply fungicides. By contrast, surface residue in no-till systems acts as a buffer against splash and supports microbial communities, making the system more resilient.


South Dakota farmer Van Mansheim recalled the simple advice of his mentor, Rick Bieber:


“Go walk out in your field and look down at your feet. If you see soil, you’d better spray fungicide. If you see residue, you don’t need to.”


That wisdom captures the point: residue isn’t just cover, it’s protection. Research suggests that when fungicides are used, they can be more disruptive to soil biology than herbicides—a reminder that the real issue is disturbance in all its forms, not just the ones we can see.


These principles are not just ecological; they are also economic. Back in 2010, Ray emphasized that if farmers were to stay in business, they would need to reduce inputs. What seemed like a radical claim at the time has since been borne out in recent studies.


Very recent research (since 2022) from USDA-ERS, the Soil Health Institute, and NACD shows that producers adopting soil health practices consistently report stronger profitability and greater stability. Ray was prescient in his 2010 observations — and more than a decade later, the science is catching up to what he was already teaching.


Lower fertilizer and herbicide costs, coupled with more resilient soils, translate into real financial gains. In cotton systems on the Texas High Plains, for example, farmers increased net income by more than $150 per acre after adopting soil health management.


And when fertilizer spiked to $1,000 per ton, Ray recalled how farmers began searching for alternatives. Those who embraced no-till, diversity, cover crops, and grazing reported fertilizer reductions of up to 90% and herbicide reductions of 75%.


Profitability, as Ray often says, isn’t about the equipment — it’s about understanding how the soil functions.


Where We Stand Now


What seemed radical in 2010 is being lived out across South Dakota today. Farmers are discovering that reducing disturbance, promoting diversity, and keeping soils covered with living roots not only leads to healthier land but also to healthier balance sheets.


Ray once told me, “Nature doesn’t disrupt itself.” That’s the lesson we’re still learning. Farming and ranching with Mother Nature isn’t quick or easy, but it is patient work — the kind that builds soils, reduces dependence on chemicals, and keeps families on the land for another generation.


References


Tillage & Soil Health


  • Kibblewhite, M. G., Ritz, Karl, and Swift, M. J. “Soil Health in Agricultural Systems.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 363, no. 1492, 2008, pp. 685–701. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2178

  • United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Soil Health: The Importance of Soil Health in Conservation Tillage. USDA-NRCS, 2024, www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/Soil%20health.pdf


Pesticide (Herbicide, Fungicide, Insecticide) Effects


  • Beaumelle, Léa, et al. “Pesticide Effects on Soil Fauna Communities—A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Applied Ecology, vol. 60, no. 7, 2023, pp. 1239–1253. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.14437.

  • Rose, Michael T., et al. “Impact of Herbicides on Soil Biology and Function.” Advances in Agronomy, vol. 136, 2016, pp. 133–220. doi:10.1016/bs.agron.2015.11.005.


Broad Overviews of Agricultural Management Impacts



Economic Impact




Visit these “Growing Resilience Through Our Soils” information pages:

1. Podcast page for drought planning fact sheets, Q&As, news, podcasts, and more.

2. Video page to watch videos of other ranchers’ journeys toward improved rangeland/pasture.

3. Follow Growing Resilience on social media:

  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Instagram

© 2024 Growing Resilience SD

bottom of page