Agronomists Notes

Hello Reader,

This is the 46th and final issue of Beyond Agronomy News for 2012. Where did the year go! Let’s recap the season and then cruise through some top articles of Volume 7.

The spring started off very dry for many without significant precipitation since July 2011. Rainfall was light in the west with six to seven inches and wet to the east with ten to thirteen inches. Excessive heat in July took its toll on all crop yields along with moderate disease and insect pressure. In the end, wheat and pea yields faired above average with barley and canola yields below average. The shining star this year was CPS wheat with excellent yields and prices just below HRS wheat.

Land rental values continue to climb and have hovered between $60-$70/ac with 50-60 bu/ac wheat average potential and $70-$100/ac with 75-85 bu/ac average potential. Nitrogen prices remain high relative to the price of natural gas and will track grain prices rather than cost of urea production until grain prices settle. Producers have shifted to purchasing more certified seed in the past few years, which may continue until farm margins drop significantly. Used machinery prices are still unreasonable and likely will be until grain prices correct sometime in the future. Grain prices have been excellent for five years and you have to wonder how long the trend will continue. We should see wheat prices fall as we move into a cycle of high sun spot activity.

Thank you for subscribing to Beyond Agronomy News. I hope you’ve enjoyed this past year as I have. Have a blessed Christmas and New Years. See you January 8th, 2013!

Photo: A reminder of the beautiful harvest weather we had this fall. Photo taken by Vanessa Larocque after picking up our children from a ride in the combine at Michichi.

Walking beams the ticket for speed & accuracy at seeding

I’ve been battling back and forth on Twitter about the need to gain speed and accuracy with our seeding systems. As it stands, the focus on efficiency with seeding tools is about wider drills and tyne openers rather than discs. I think that tyne openers will always be limited by speed because they throw dirt at higher speeds and lose seed placement at the same time. Disc drills on the other hand have the ability to maintain seeding depth and accuracy at much higher speeds. In my opinion the next revolution in air drills will be to pair width with speed and that can only be done with a disc opener.

I reviewed Nuffield Scholar Stephen Ball's paper, available here, to look at disc drill designs after he had the opportunity to travel around the world looking at disc drills. The design I’m most impressed with is the one produced by Avec in South America. Here are Stephen’s comments on the benefits of Avec disc drill with a walking beam assembly:

“The benefit of this method of attaching the assembly as shown in the picture [above] allows the discs and closing mechanism to be truly ground following. The double disc assembly is connected to the walking beam and the beam then attaches to the main frame. In the model from Avec, all of the down pressure came from an air over hydraulic system for dampening and keeping each unit independent. With a large number of double disc units, the depth control wheels are connected at the rear behind the discs. This creates a pushing motion and a separating force pulling the depth control wheels away from the discs. Trends in the new designs incorporate a forward fixing point. The force generated by pulling rather than pushing the depth control wheels keeps them tight against the disc which reduces strain and fatigue on the steel. It can also help with cutting action applied to the residue.”

The problem with most disc opener assemblies is the angle at which they attack the ground. An improper angle can lead to uneven seeding depths in unlevel fields especially at fast traveling speeds. Stephen included comments from Dwayne Beck, Dakota Lakes Research Farm, on his opinion of the assembly attachment styles of certain disk drills:

1. The JD and similar machines have radial attachments, which mean the angle of attack is correct for only one spot in its travel.
2. The parallel (or parallelogram) linkage has the proper angle of attack as long as the frame of the implement is parallel to the soil surface (very level fields).
3. The walking beam attachment has the proper angle of attack at almost all times.

The future of seeding efficiency lies in the merging of speed and width and can only be achieved with proper disc drill assemblies. I believe the Avec walking beam disk opener assembly is brilliant and I just wanted to show you an example of what’s out there besides North American drills. My aim in the next ten years is to get a speeding ticket while seeding and still maintain accurate seeding depth. I suspect the walking beam would help achieve that goal. Take notice red, green and blue! SL

Pictured above: Avec disc drill walking beam. Photo by Stephen Ball.

Boot stage: when wheat yield potential means the most

Have you ever wondered what the genetic yield potential of wheat is? Some would say 250 bu/ac or 300 bu/ac. In reality, the genetic yield potential of wheat is actually greater than 1,000 bu/ac. Yes, that’s right, 1,000 bu/ac! Unfortunately, 90% of that yield potential is lost due to stress factors that occur during critical growth stages. Today, we’ll focus on the one growth stage in wheat where we typically lose half of our yield potential, the boot stage.

Before I begin, you’re probably wondering where I came up with 1,000 bu/ac+ yield potential. Any given wheat variety can generate between 20 and 30 florets (rows) per head with up to 6 kernels per floret (row) on average. If we know the number of heads per m2, the kernels per head and the average kernel weight, we can calculate a theoretical yield. Let’s run some numbers.

Steve’s quick math
Plants m2 × heads/plant × kernels/head × g/tkw ÷ 100,000 = T/ha
325 × 3 × (30 florets × 6 kernels) × 45 ÷ 100,000 = 78.95 T/ha (1,174 bu/ac)

In this example, we’ve generated a yield potential 1,174 bu/ac. Not bad from my desktop. Unfortunately, when that wheat seed hits the furrow things go south. Yield loss is caused by weeds, insects, disease, seed placement, cold temperatures, hot temperatures, soil structure, drought, floods, nutrient deficiencies, low sunlight, low carbon dioxide, poor aeration and the list goes on. Today we’ll focus on the growth stage where we lose roughly 50% of our yield and it begins at the boot stage and finishes at flowering.

The boot stage in wheat is very sensitive to environmental stresses because there is so much going on physiologically. The stems are reaching maximum growth rate, leaves and heads are expanding, pollen and embryos are developing and roots are branching. All of these processes create a huge demand on the plant to supply itself with carbohydrates and nitrogen. If there is a shortage of water, yield is reduced. If temperatures climb above 18 degrees C, the plant has difficulty generating enough carbohydrates because it’s growing too fast. If the crop is too thick, it shades itself and reduces photosynthesis and subsequently the ability to produce and supply carbohydrates to the growing points. If disease is present the leaves cannot generate enough carbohydrates to support all the plant growth that is occurring during this critical time. This is why research suggests that up to 50% of the potential florets (kernels) never develop. (Kirby 1988)
Boot stage up until the end of flowering typically occurs roughly 60 days after planting or during the first two weeks of July. Unfortunately, this critical growth stage coincidences with our hottest month when rain begins to taper off. Temperatures above 18C begin to reduce pollination because the plant is growing too fast and cannot produce enough carbohydrates. Any deficiency in soil moisture at this time can have a huge impact on carbon and nitrogen availability, the two key drivers components to growth at that stage.

There are a number of strategies you can use to help improve the chances of producing viable kernels at a time when mortalities reach an astronomical 50%. We’ll focus on the nutrients that play a key role in developing viable kernels as a starting point to help you design a foliar nutrition program.

• Nitrogen is the building block of amino acids and protein. Apply foliar nitrogen either through long chain urea products like N-Pact or foliar urea with rates equivalent to 5 lbs actual N/ac. (Gabala et al. 2003)
• Copper improves nitrate assimilation and can be in short supply when the top six inches of soil dries out in July. Apply 0.125 lbs/ac copper at boot stage.
• Magnesium is a key component in chlorophyll production which helps supply the plants with carbohydrates. Apply 1 to 2 lbs/ac of MgS04
• Boron increases the pollen producing capacity of anthers and pollen grain viability. Apply foliar boron at 0.2 lbs/ac.
• Calcium is critical to the movement of nitrite in plants. Apply foliar calcium at 0.2 to 0.5 lbs/ac.
• The use of fulvic acids have been known to help plants assimilate nitrogen and carbohydrates more efficiently, especially during periods of stress. (Xudan 1986)

The key to generating an adequate supply of nutrients during peak demand is to load the plant during the ten days prior to the boot stage. This ensures nutrients have had enough time to absorb and translocate to the correct areas of the plant. Also, in order to achieve maximum absorption of foliar nutrients, the droplets must stay on the leaf for as long as possible. This requires applications to be done in the evening when humidity levels climb and nutrients remain in solution longer.

Unfortunately, what I can’t tell you at the moment is which nutrients will respond most in your soil, in your climate with your management background. I do suggest you look at these nutrients to try and load the plant prior to its peak demand. The boot stage and up until flowering is one of the most critical times in a plants life where kernels are generated. We often get 24 to 32 kernels per head on average. The genetic yield potential of wheat is to develop between 120 to 180 kernels per head. The boot stage is where kernel numbers are set, and it doesn’t take Steve’s quick math to tell you we’re a long way from 180 kernels per head. SL

Pictured above: Wheat plant at boot stage.

CTF & inter-row seeded canola shines this year

This spring, canola emergence has averaged 50-60% in spite of warm soil temperatures and rain before and after seeding. Precision drills with on row depth control are achieving 75-85% on average from what I’ve seen. I’ve also noticed, once again, that our canola emergence is hitting 75-85% in our CTF and inter-row seeding system, using a 35-year-old Concord air drill with gang packers.

The three major causes of reduced emergence in my opinion are deep seeding, over-packing and heavy residue. We’re able to address those issues in our system in a couple of ways. We keep stubble height tall and inter-row seed. We reduce packing pressure by dropping tire pressure and placing seed on the outside of the packer wheel. We’re able to keep seeding depth consistent since wheel traffic is reduced which usually creates lumps and skews depth.

The picture above is of our Liberty Link 5440 canola seeded at 4.3 lbs/ac with a 98% germ and 5.12 tkw. At 100% emergence we should see 8.5 plants/ft2 and we’ve achieved 6 plants/ft2 on average. See how nicely the canola is tucked beside its guardian- 10-12 inches of barley stubble? Drying winds after seeding were a non-issue.

To improve emergence and achieve more uniform stands we simply must address the three big issues: deep seeding, over-packing and heavy residue. We’ve been able to make that old Concord sing and if we can achieve 80% emergence rates on canola with old technology, something tells me the CTF and inter-row seeding system is working. SL

Research

Picture: 2 leaf canola planted inter-row in our CTF 3-inch offset inter-row seeding system.

Precision drill tour 2012

Assessing performance outside the tradeshow floor

When it comes to assessing precision air drills, there’s no better place to look than in the field just after emergence. You have to wonder how so many drills are sold on the tradeshow floor by someone who’s never operated the drill they’re selling. Last week, I hosted a precision drill tour for my clients and looked at five precision air drills to see which ones performed the best and to find out first hand the pros and cons of each machine.

DISCLAIMER: All precision seed drills do a good job of placing seed in the ground accurately within reason. Compaction, steep rolling terrain and heavy residue will reduce the performance of these machines. Also, packing pressure and seed depth must be adjusted properly to really make these drills perform. Almost every precision drill we viewed in the field had a consistent seeding depth, unfortunately the canola was accurately placed at 1.25 to 2 inches deep, which is less than ideal. I also viewed some canola fields with too much packing pressure that left half an inch of cement above the canola seed. Packing pressure can be changed as field conditions change and so can seeding depth. All in all, with the right adjustments, these drills do provide better seed placement which translates to better emergence. The question is how does it pencil out in the end?

SeedHawk: 72 feet and 800 bushel tank

• The 800 bu/tank offers a 240 bu, 135 bu, 425 bu split which can do 120 ac/fill with a 300 lb/ac fertilizer blend in canola. Wow!
• The conveyer is fast loading in 25 minutes but very tough to man handle from the ground.
• Frame depth is 15ft from front to back which can be troublesome on steep knolls or depressions. Openers lift out of the ground or dig deep in steep situations.
• The Viper monitor doesn’t have enough storage capacity to map fields larger than 300 acres. You have to start a new job every 300 acres or monitor stalls out. Upgrade coming.
• The sectional control works excellent and saves a few percent on overlap in each field depending on field shape or the number of wells and sloughs.
• The front castor wheels outside the centre section rub against frame and drag tires when filled with mud. There is only ¼ inch of clearance between wheels and frame. Upgrade coming.
• The trash flow is not great on this machine with bunching very common in mildly tough conditions.
• The dual fan allows you to reduce air velocity on one fan for canola and crank up fan speed on fertilizer if need be.
• The stainless distributor system underneath the air tank is nice and changing rollers is easy.
• The height from ground to paralink hinge point is roughly 19 inches which gives it good trash clearance to ride up the shank but the dual shank seed and fertilizer opener catches residue which then piles up.
• The owner mentioned that they had to change fertilizer tubes after one season after putting all 300 lbs of fertilizer down the same fertilizer tubes

Bourgault 3310: 67 ft and 700 bu tank

• The 700 bu/tank offers a 370 bu-95 bu-30 bu-205 bu split, which can do 80 ac/fill with a 330 lb/ac blend in canola.
• The owner we talked with greases machine seasonally. No bushings or bearings have been replaced after 13,000 acres.
• This frame is the second shortest of all from front to back at 10 ft 2 in, second to the Flexicoil design of the Case/New Holland at 7 ft 2 in. It allows excellent ground following capability.
• The short frame depth does not make it easy to crawl underneath and check openers for plugging.
• The mid-row banders don’t like big rocks but what disk does.
• The stainless meter augers stay clean longer than original nylon augers.
• The packer to seed opener is 10 inches. This leaves room for residue to flow back on to the furrow before the packer versus other precision drills which vary from 4 to 6 inches.
• Fill time is 30 minutes and auger is easy to move across the school bus-sized air tank.
• Height from ground to paralink hinge point is 21 inches roughly which allows it to travel through longer straw or residue.
• The single shank design reduces seeding depth variability. Dual shank designs open up furrow with fertilizer knife first and if soil doesn’t close furrow, seeds drop down.
• The packer wheel presses soil over top of seed, sometimes creating a hard surface above seed but this is true for all precision drills except the Conserva Pak.

What I learned most on our tour was that an expensive air drill does not necessarily out perform lesser models or make you a rockstar in the field. Residue issues, seeding depth, packing pressure can all be managed poorly and leave you with an average seeding job no better than a regular hoe drill. It’s the ability to make those subtle but crucial changes that will improve germination and emergence from a precision hoe drill. SL

Picture: SeedHawk and Bourgault shanks.

Canola shows response to potassium in high potassium soils

The addition of potassium fertilizer has long been debated in our area due to the high background levels of potassium. Research from Alberta Agriculture has shown that a response to potassium fertilizer is unlikely when soil test levels reach 125 ppm or 250 lbs/ac. However, based on the results of variable rate potassium in canola, perhaps we need to revisit this assumption.

Garth Donald from Decisive Farming VRT shared the zone soil test info along with some great photos of canola showing a response to potassium fertilizer on a high potassium soil. The photo shown here shows the canola in bloom a week earlier on the left where potassium was applied in this Zone 2 versus the right side where no potassium was added.

The potassium was applied at a rate of 45 lbs/ac actual to Zone 2 where potassium levels show 286 ppm or 572 lbs/ac in the top six inches. The Base Saturation levels which some folks call BS, is below 4% and under the ideal level of 4-6%. Interestingly enough, this Liberty Link canola, L-150 responded to potassium fertilizer on a soil that contained twice the level where research suggests we should see a response.

Potassium’s role in canola production is to help transport nitrogen up through the xylem and throughout the plant. It plays a key role in over 60 enzyme interactions which drive photosynthesis, improve nutrient uptake, increase plant vigour and even maturity. For these reasons I suspect we are seeing a response from the potassium as it drives root growth, vigour and crop maturity. For more on potassium’s role in plants click here.

It’s not often we get to see a side by side like this one and even if it doesn’t translate to yield, which it probably will, gaining a week’s maturity inside our 100-110 day growing season is golden. Those of you on high potassium soils may want to initiate your own research and test the theories that have always been held as gospel. SL

[Editor's note: Unfortunately, yield data on Garth's project was unavailable due to severe wind damage at harvest time.]

Chart above: Zone test data. Garth Donald, Decisive Farming VRT

Inter-row seeding minimizes lodging in peas

Tall stubble provides a support system that's key to harvestability

The biggest issue for most producers growing peas or wanting to grow peas is the issue with harvesting severely lodged fields. No one is a fan of swallowing rocks and or combining at 1.5 mph in one direction only. The answer to improving harvestability of peas is inter-row seeding into tall stubble.

Last Tuesday a hail storm carrying grape-sized hail hammered through half our acres leaving the CPS wheat stripped and peas smashed flat. The ‘before’ picture of our peas makes me tear up. In the ‘after’ picture, the crop is flattened, but the silver lining is that they are still off the ground, 5 or 6 inches at least (bottom photo).

Early in the year you could see the tendrils wrapping themselves around last year’s stubble, adding strength and standability. After the hail and three inches of rain in the past seven days, the peas are laying on top of the stubble and even starting to dry out underneath, believe it or not. I know of peas on rolled fields that are sitting right on the ground and starting to rot and will struggle to dry down under the heavy, wet canopy.

Harvesting the crop will require a few special measures. The header will have lifters spaced every twelve inches which is the row spacing of our drill. The placement of the lifters will be set by engaging the autosteer on the tram lines and dropping the header to the ground. From there we can locate exactly where the lifters should be placed on the header to remain in between last year’s stubble and this year’s pea row. This will dramatically improve the performance of the lifters as they glide between the rows while lifting the crop instead of plowing through or on top of the lodged peas. Precision lifter placement, now that’s a new one!

Inter-row seeding provides a great solution to harvestability in peas. The risk of picking up rocks is less, harvest efficiency climbs as you travel faster and more peas have the potential to be harvested. Providing a trellis for peas to lean on improves air flow under the canopy to reduce rotting and speed up drying. Combine that with precisely spaced lifters that glide between the rows and you’ll naturally do a better job of cutting and setting peas on to the table. Now add CTF to inter-row seeding and you’ve got yourself a killer system to produce pea crops. Less hail wouldn’t hurt either. SL

Pictured above: Meadow peas take a dive after hail damage but not to the ground thanks to inter-row seeding. Source: S. Larocque

Unique business model adds strength to individual farms

While in Kenya, I spent a week touring farms within a group called AgVenture Ltd. The AgVenture group includes ten farms that buy inputs and sell grain together, share equipment or parts and intellectual knowledge. They have previously brought in several crop consultants from abroad to help introduce new agronomy, farming practices and technology. I was so impressed with the structure and opportunities inside this type of business model I thought it could be a good fit for producers in Western Canada.

The AgVenture business model has four objectives:

1. Procure Farm Inputs. To date it has been chemicals and fertilizer.
2. Marketing of Crops. 2% levy to farmers on all crops, except peas are 5% levy.
3. Processing of Crops. To date, AgVenture-owned crushing facilities extract oil from canola and sunflower.
4. Research and Development. Bi-monthly field walks are conducted at each farm to learn new agronomy techniques. International agronomists are brought in and hosted by group members to introduce new farming techniques and agronomy practices.

The AgVenture group has a managing director who is on a salary plus bonus remuneration package. His role is to procure crop inputs for the group, manage the sale of grain and handle the relationships with millers and processors.  He also addresses any issues with rejected loads or price discrepancies. There are a number of advantages with this business model and some group members have provided a brief summary.

Buying Inputs. It is up to AgVenture to negotiate a price reduction from the chemical companies. It does this by guaranteeing payment on time, volume purchases, forecasting, etc. The member essentially pays the same (or less) as he always did. AgVenture keeps the margin. Benefits to members are that AgVenture profits, he has more clout and all the ordering hassle is removed. He now has one invoice and one order once a week. No longer does he have to call around to all the companies, reconcile bills, etc.

Selling Grain. This is a hard one to make in-roads on. The millers in Kenya are well established and really don’t want AgVenture to succeed as they have been very successful in their past ‘divide and rule’ policy. AgVenture has targeted two or three millers and have begun to develop relationships and partnerships with them. With this approach, they have begun to understand the group and it’s benefits. They find it easier to deal with one company rather than a number of individuals, payments are streamlined and quality issues are easily resolved.  The group also helps out when they request such as selling them canola cake from AgVenture-owned crushing facilities, or cash flow issues. With this tactic and additional volumes, the group has generally managed to get a small margin. The member pays 2% and basically AgVenture owns his crop. AgVenture does all the marketing, chasing of funds, and handles all issues.  The 2% is easier to justify with less well established crops like peas. The ideal is to move up the value chain to start processing crops.

Advantages. The advantages are never ending. It is amazing what two people can achieve over one. The key is that members are on the same wavelength. Members have to be sold on the concept and as opposed to their individual farms. Members must be prepared to discuss everything and think long term. No disadvantages have been found to date.

Shareholder Obligations

• To purchase all agricultural inputs from the Company (unless in an emergency).
• To pay all AgVenture invoices on time. (In order to retain AgVenture’s reputation/integrity, if a Shareholder defaults on a payment the remaining shareholders are liable to pay the outstanding bill.)
• All crops that can be processed internally must be sold to AgVenture.
• 90% of ‘non-processable’ crops must be sold through AgVenture.
• To remain in AgVenture, annual cropping acreage can never be below 600 acres.
• To join AgVentures, annual cropping acreage needs to be over 1,000 acres.
• The joining fee is $12,000 CDN.
• The Shareholder’s Nominee is the only person, and shall remain the only person authorized to deal with the Company in relation to the business.
• Structure and other interesting points
• AgVenture is a Private Limited Company.
• Share capital of 100,000/= divided into one thousand shares of 100/= each.
• Shareholding to always to remain equal.
• Unless it will have a material detrimental effect on the ordinary course of business, 50% of the Net Operating Profits for that year will be injected back into The Company.
• The Board may distribute up to 50% of Net Operating Profits in the form of a credit/bonus to each shareholder. These will be in direct proportion to that shareholder’s value of business.
• In order to show minimum profit, at least 90% of the funds have to be disbursed by the end of the accounting year.

In Western Canada, it is likely that most of the purchasing of crop inputs would be through crop input dealers and not chemical companies. You can imagine the volume discounts accompanied with a group of ten farms plus the rebates on seed, seed treatments, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides. I believe you could achieve a 10% to 15% reduction in fertilizer and chemical cost which would go straight to the company. There is the possibility of purchasing equipment as one unit and the multi unit discounts that are available. Reducing equipment costs by 5% to 10% through multi-unit discounts may add some significant dollars to the overall gross margin of the company. The remaining margins can be divided amongst the group equally at year end or put back into the company.

The sale of grain may be a little tricky given our autonomous nature to control grain sales but operating as a group could provide some advantages. I can see a group working direct with maltsters, millers and processors with the ability to offer volume and reduce the divide and conquer strategy they use to reduce the price you receive. With operating profits a group could begin its own processing facilities or direct to market sales strategy.

Steve’s quick math on ten 3,000 acre farms.

10 x 3,000 acres = 30,000 acres
30,000 acres x 1 T/ac = 30,000 tonnes of grain
$130/acre (fert/seed/chem.) x 30,000 acres = $3,900,000.00
$3,900,000.00 x 12% margin from rebates and bulk discounts = $468,000.00
30,000 tonnes x $300.00/tonne avg x 2% levy = $180,000.00
Total potential operating margin = $468,000 + $180,000 = $648,000

You could pay a managing director an excellent salary plus bonus and find a top notch individual to run the business with $648,000+ in annual gross margin. The remaining margin can be put towards processing facilities, value adding, on farm research, bringing in international crop consultants and other possible ventures in the future. You would have one invoice for all your crop input bills and enjoy the benefits of economies of scale without the additional risk of farming more acres. I think this business model would fit inside a group of five two to three thousand acre farmers easily. Bottom line, with the right group you could gain some serious competitive advantages over farms that operate autonomously. SL

Photo:  Some of the AgVenture members who flew to Stuart Barden’s farm for a field day, October 29, 2012, near Athi River, Kenya.

What wheat to grow in 2012

Deciding what to grow based on grade and protein

I’ve been wracking my brain trying to decide whether to grow HRS wheat or CPS wheat in 2012. The criteria I’ve put together are simple: 1) can you grow wheat with protein above 12.5% consistently, and 2) can you produce a No. 2 grade or better each year. If you answer no to one or both of these questions then maybe you should look at CPS for 2012. Here’s why.

Steve’s quick math
No. 2 11.5% HRS: 60 bu/ac × $5.80 = $348.00/ac
No. 1 13.5% HRS: 60 bu/ac × $7.80 = $468.00/ac
Risk spread: $468.00/ac - $348.00/ac = $120.00/ac

No. 2 11.5% CPS: 70 bu/ac × $6.30 = $441.00/ac
No. 1 11.5% CPS: 70 bu/ac × $6.80 = $476.00/ac
Risk spread: $476.00/ac - $441.00/ac = $35.00/ac

If you look at the protein spread between a No. 1 HRS 13.5% versus No. 1 HRS 11.5%, you are potentially risking $120.00 an acre in revenue should your protein not meet spec, even if it grades a No. 1. If you look at the spread between a No. 1 CPS 11.5% and No. 2 CPS 11.5%, you’re risking $35.00 an acre in revenue if it doesn’t meet spec. Even if the CPS went feed, where values hover around $5.30 per bushel, you’d still generate $23.00 an acre more than a No. 2 HRS 11.5%.

Based on experience and conversations with regular CPS growers, you can comfortably bank on a 15-20% yield bump with CPS over HRS wheat so long as you follow up with the right agronomy. Here are some considerations if you decide to grow CPS:

1. Yield potential may not be realized on sandy or coarse textured soils so a 15-20% yield advantage over HRS may not be realistic.
2. CPS wheats tend to have less tolerance to disease than HRS wheat varieties. A fungicide is a must in the program and possibly two applications in a wet year with high disease and decent yield potential. Stick to premium fungicides like Folicur, Prosaro, Headline or Quilt. Tilt and Stratego are very short lived and don’t provide the extended protection needed against disease.
3. Aim for high plant densities (28/ft2 to 35/ft2) to minimize tillering and encourage main stems.
4. CPS has much larger seeds compared to HRS. CPS ranges 39 to 55 tkw versus HRS ranges 31 to 45 tkw. Seeding rates of 160 to 180 lbs/ac not unusual.
5. To meet 11.5% protein in CPS you aim for 1.75 lbs/N/bu versus 2.5 lbs/N/bu for HRS. For example: 1.75 lb/N/bu × 80 bu/ac = 140 lbs/N/ac - soil N - OM nitrogen
6. I like the varieties 5700PR, 5702PR, SY985 AC Foremost. If you’re pushing nitrogen and yields over 100 bu/ac, then 5700PR and AC Foremost have great standability.
7. Look up a CPS variety comparison chart here.

If you look at the cost of growing high protein HRS versus CPS wheat, you’ll notice that they are basically the same, depending on whether you normally pencil in a fungicide or not with HRS. I’m confident we can achieve a 15-20% yield increase over HRS wheat with an agronomy program that includes the right variety, plant population, fungicide and fertility. In my opinion, if you don’t normally produce wheat with protein above 12.5% or typically grade less than a No. 2 HRS, then CPS may be a fit on your farm this year. SL

[Editor's note: CPS was the highest grossing margin crop on all of our client's farms for 2012. It paid off big time.]

A land rental agreement idea from the UK

Expanding when capital is short

James Peck, a young farmer near Cambridge, England, shared an interesting land rental agreement that has allowed him to expand his farm by 380% since 2007. Land costs in his area, about one hour NE of London, are $12,000 an acre and competition for farm land is high, much like it is here. James found a way to expand his land base by reducing up-front capital costs, minimizing financial risk and increasing cash flow by offering an attractive land rental arrangement to his land lords. Here is how it works in a nutshell:

The land lord pays a custom rate to the tenant for seeding, spraying and harvesting the crop as well as all the variable input costs (seed/fertilizer/herbicide/fungicide). The tenant pays the landlord a fixed rent and the profits are split 50-50. The custom seeding, spraying and harvesting costs are broken down into monthly payments paid by the landlord to the tenant.

Benefits:

• The landlord maintains farmer status and enjoys significant tax breaks versus a straight cash renter.
• The landlord receives land rent plus 50% of the profits earned each year.
• The tenant receives monthly payments for custom work which creates cash flow.
• The tenant receives only 50% of the profits but is risking 50% or less of the costs.
• The tenant always has enough cash flow to cover his machinery costs.

 

This rental agreement is brilliant for the young, cash stricken farmer who wants to expand but can’t access the capital to do so. It also reduces the financial risk because if things go south and profits are negative, you’ve agreed to be paid for custom farming the land. You’ll always be able to cover your fixed costs of machinery if you set up your custom rates correctly. The upside may be considered limiting with a 50-50 revenue split but it’s proportional to the amount invested. You could earn 100% of the profits but you’re risking 100% of the capital in a straight cash rent deal.

Let’s run through a quick example.

Landlord pays
Seed: $45.00/ac canola
Fertilizer: $90.00/ac
Chemical: $25.00/ac
Custom: $55.00/ac
Total costs: $215.00
Rental income: $70.00/ac
Yield: 40 bu/ac × $10.00/bu = $400.00/ac

In this scenario, the landlord would receive $215 an acres to cover his variable costs plus $70 rent from the gross revenue. The profit margin would be $185 an acre ($400.00 - $215.00) which is split 50-50 for a total of $92.50 each. The tenant benefits from steady cash flow and reduced capital requirements while the landlord receives fair rent plus the upside of 50% of profits. You could tweak this agreement anyway you like and make it fit.

Thank you, James, for sharing this innovative and proven idea for farm expansion. SL

Side-dressing nitrogen is a viable option

One of the goals in our controlled traffic farming system is to side dress NH3 nitrogen in wheat, barley and canola with coulters. Our equipment set-up allows us to move in between the stubble very accurately which gives us the option of side dressing with minimal crop disturbance. We know that a well-timed split application of nitrogen can improve yield, protein, reduce lodging and spread out risk. However, today’s methods rely on broadcast urea or dribble banding UAN, two very inefficient practices of applying nitrogen.

I came across Dave Mengel’s research at Kansas State University on side dressed applications of NH3 using coulters versus broadcast urea in winter wheat. Dave is applying between 30 and 120 lbs/ac of nitrogen with NH3 using JD coulters on 15-inch and 20-inch row spacing in winter wheat planted on 7.5-inch row spacing. These are the preliminary findings of his research:

• Soil conditions need to be right to get a good seal after the coulter runs through to avoid NH3 gassing off.
• Without a good soil seal, the ammonia gasses off and crop foliage is damaged by high rates of nitrogen.
• There was no foliar damage at the lower rate of 30 lbs/N/ac.
• Foliar damage was severe at 90 lbs/N and 120 lbs/N/ac.
• There was a 2.2 bu/ac difference that favored broadcast urea due to the crop damage caused by coulters running on top of the rows.

I corresponded with Dave over email and he felt that in drier climates like ours and 12-inch row spacing, it would be possible to run the coulters between every other row using RTK and auto steer. This would eliminate crop damage from the coulters running directly on the row. In our situation, the only limitation would be the height of the hitch on the Steiger which is 16 inches. We could travel in-crop up to flag leaf without crop damage.

I prefer to use NH3 is because it is a) less expensive than other sources of nitrogen, b) is ammonical nitrogen which means it is immediately plant available, and c) is 82% nitrogen versus UAN which is only 28% which means more acres per fill. The reason I don’t prefer UAN in a side dress application is because it is only 50% available initially. UAN is 25% nitrate that encourages vegetative growth and not reproductive growth, 25% is ammonium which is plant available, and the remaining 50% is urea which requires two conversions before it becomes plant available.

This is the plan for our system. We would put a MaxQuip high pressure NH3 system with a frame mounted 1,000 gal NH3 tank on the top of a 30-foot Frigstad air seeder with 12-inch row spacing. I’d use the MaxQuip NH3 system so I can get down to 30 lbs of N/ac and maintain accuracy. We would upgrade to Field IQ with our current Trimble FMX monitor to control the MaxQuip NH3 system. We have RTK and have successfully set up an inter-row seeding system with hitch modifications on our drill already. We would do the same hitch modifications on the Frigstad to move inter-row. I estimate the cost of the 1,000 gallon frame mounted tank, MaxQuip system and plumbing to be roughly $22,000 installed on a 30 ft toolbar. The field IQ is an additional $2,000. I’d like to find used Bourgault mid-row banders which retail brand new for about $1,215 per shank. I may find a deal on Yetter, Dawn or even John Deere or Case IH. The total cost for the set up should be approximately $38,800. 

To kick it up a notch and for an additional $20,000 we could mount an OptRx or a GreenSeeker and variable rate our side dress nitrogen using real time NDVI sensory images. This would allow us to apply inter-row variable rate nitrogen on the go which would really boost our efficiency by placing nitrogen in the right place. That, like many things, will remain in the idea warehouse for now but I really see the value in it.

So, let’s do a little Steve’s very quick math on this crazy idea:
$38,800 NH3 kit ÷ 640 ac = $60.00/ac

We would need to generate an additional $60.00 an acre to pay for this side dress nitrogen set up the first year. If we were to amortize this cost over three years, there’s no doubt we could start generating a return greater than $20.00 ac in yield, protein and harvest efficiency from reduced lodging. It may seem far-fetched to some but my ambition is to intensify and do more with less land base. CTF, inter-row, side dress nitrogen, liquid injection in-furrow, inter-row cultivation, shroud spraying, disk openers, strip till, vacuum planters, on-row fungicide spraying, and inter-row herbicide spraying are all on my radar for intensifying production. Three systems down, eight more to go. That is if I don’t find something else in the mean time. SL

Watch this YouTube video for Dave’s comments on side dressing nitrogen in wheat.