It seems to me that snow and cold have been the norm here of late. I’m sure
spring is just around the corner because the farm shows are wrapping up and
everyone is talking about planters. We had a great winter with four Innovator
Roundtables, the addition of David Swaim to our brain trust and an alliance
with technology provider, Precision Partners, a Trimble and Precision Planting
dealer, just to name a few hot items. Optimizer seed placement and rate
recommendations are churning out now and we’re getting our bearings on
spring soil sampling. Grain MarketMAX took a nice step forward and many
farmers are discovering GrainBridge. This should be an exciting spring and a
rewarding summer. Hopefully all is well around your farm and you enjoy
another edition of our newsletter!
“Population Goals” by Michelle Sweeten, CCA, Regional Agronomist
When growers purchase their seed there is always the question of what the target population should be. As
standability has increased, so have populations, but how much is too much. Some of the questions that arise
when considering how high to go:
• Does the hybrid in question have a flex or non-flex ear?
• How are we planting (twins, 30's, or 20's)?
• Type of corn: dent, flint, harvested for silage
• Cost of seed (what is the target population for the most return?)
• Soil types?
• Field productivity (pH, fertility, drainage)
• Are crops rotated (corn on corn, soybeans, wheat)?
More important than the above is what is the weather going to be? Of course
we can only make best guesses on that. However, when you are planting using traditional methods, we have
found that concentrating on uniform emergence and having a harvest (not planting) population goal of 30,000
plants per acre will enable growers to most likely meet their yield goals. Increasing populations in tough
planting conditions will help you meet these goals. VRT can also help you to change populations on the go to
help maximize profits.
"Opportunity Cost”" by Daryl Starr, CCA, President
Do you understand opportunity cost? This is a fairly difficult concept for a farmer to grasp in economic terms
but something very real in the activity of running a business. My guess is that each of you have a fine
understanding of it but do not consider it a true COST. Let's start with a definition.
Opportunity Cost: The cost of a resource, measured by the value of the next-best, alternative use of that
resource. In other words, the cost is the amount of income foregone by not using it for an alterative activity.
Here is the complicated part. You have one, highest returning endeavor in your business or businesses. Every
activity that is not the highest must be compared to the highest. So let's say that you grow corn and this
enterprise earns you 18% on your investment. Then, you grow soybeans and earn yourself 15% on your
investment. If these two enterprises were not related and you could simply chose which one to do you should
incur a cost of foregoing raising corn when you raise the soybeans (which in most cases your soybeans change
yield and machinery use and so forth…but hang in there with me…).
I believe that if we looked at our farms more often through the lense of "what opportunity am I forgoing?" we
would become better managers. I once heard someone say that the decision NOT to do something was as
important as the decision TO DO something. Hopefully you have good systems in place to identify your most
profitable elements and ways to shift least profitable dollars toward higher profit enterprises. Finally, look for
ways that your systems can compliment one another, making each more profitable as a whole. I believe some
would call that wholistic management. Best wishes this season!
Learn more about Farm Risk Management.
Word on the Street
"The Development of Recommended Soil Sampling Patterns" by Dave Swaim
Over the years differing soil sampling protocols have developed from state to state, often reflecting different field scenarios and particular university and industry interests. Although the grid point sampling method has been heralded by farm magazines and now the NRCS as the latest and greatest of techniques, it was popularized by University of Illinois agronomists over 60 years ago. At that time the points were stepped off by the sampler and he took four probes encircling his feet and bagged them as one composite sample. In the 80’s, this system was adapted to GPS possibly first in Minnesota but soon after in Illinois and other prairie states. Then the ag electronics developers and the Potash Phosphate Institute promoted it across the industry as a basic element of “site-specific” or “precision farming” concept.
This technology based system was appealing because it was standardized, required few judgment calls on the part of the sampler, and was relatively easy to mechanize. It greatly increased the perception of increasing precision, but did not significantly increase field time compared to other methods requiring the same number of probes. Incidentally this approach also increased lab revenues with the large number of samples per field.
Farther east, another approach had been in use since before WWII. With Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin and others each adding their modifications, sampling was based on dividing the fields into topographically distinct areas within historic field boundaries, not exactly by soil type but correlated with changes in surface characteristics.
The western approach on flat or consistently rolling prairie farms with large fields, few fences, tree lines, or distinguishing surface characteristics was to use the 2.5 A grid method. In the east, with the increasing awareness of the dramatic differences in cation exchange capacity within some fields, samplers started dividing the typical 20 A fenced field into high ground and low ground samples. As the decades passed, the sample densities increased and probes per sample decreased from 20-30 probes/20 A to 15-20 probes/10 A to 10-12 probes/5 A to 5-6 probes/3.3 A. This compares to the 4-5 probes per 2.5 A square centered on a single sampling point typically used on prairie soils. More recently individuals have compared the 3.3 A and 2.5 A sampling grids to a 1A grid but typically found to be cost prohibitive for row crops.
Sampling boundaries were originally determined by visual approximation and then began to conform more to the hand-drawn published boundaries of soil types. Thus the grid sampling method was popularized in the west on the prairie and the soil type sampling method was developed for cleared woodland soils, both the glaciated swale-swell topography to the north and the unglaciated hill country to the south. Recently there’s been an effort to combine the two approaches into smart grids taking soil boundaries into account or defining crop zones based on cumulative yield data or Veris readings.
Back in the sixties, the plant food industry typically recommended a sample every twenty acres. Taking more than one sample per field was considered too expensive and time consuming to be offered as a free service. For several years soil testing was offered by dealers for free and was viewed as a primary sales tool. With the Potash-Phosphate Institutes’ promotion of “precision farming” and the “CCA certification” training programs, dealers began to charge for agronomic services and went into direct competition with the independent crop consultants scattered around the country.
Prior to the sixties most fields in the Midwest were in a livestock based four or five year rotation. This was before anhydrous ammonia was readily available and cattle feeding had yet to move west. The rotation would often start with a crop of corn, followed by soybeans or spring oats, then fall-planted wheat often over-seeded with red clover and then a year or two of clover or alfalfa. The legume stand could be harvested as hay or utilized as pasture before the last cutting was plowed under as a green manure crop or used as a site for spreading manure. Soil samples were typically taken on hay fields prior to plowing for corn. At times the government subsidized liming. The farmer would side-band a couple of hundred pounds of dry bagged fertilizer with his two or four row corn planter.
The concept of sampling every four years still influences most sampling programs, although some consultants prefer to sample fields every other year just after soybean planting or soybean harvest. The goal is to have data ready prior to preparation for the next year’s corn crop that will receive the fertilizer it needs plus enough for subsequent soybeans.
