| SUBSCRIBE MARKETS WEATHER LINKS HOME |
|
L E T T E R S
Prohibition of fall manure would create chaosI was quite disturbed to see in print the discussion concerning the permission for fall spreading of manure ("Looking ahead: Will Nutrient management planning continue to evolve?" Better Farming, Dec. 2004).I have been involved in Ontario agriculture since 1981 and have worked with livestock producers since that time in better managing their manure asset. I have read too many articles by researchers who would prefer all the manure to be applied in the spring. On high clay soils, we prefer not to apply any manure in the spring. The risk of compaction is far too great. The loss of corn yield to late planting following spring manure is huge. One of the best times to apply manure on high clay soils is in the winter. Of course, rate and field slopes must be taken into consideration. The risk of movement of manure in fine-textured soils is minimal. There is no point in matching application of nutrients to crop uptake if the soil has been compacted and the roots cannot access them. I agree there are options. The drag hose has greatly mitigated the compaction factor. However, the drag hose cannot deal with fields any significant distance from the manure generation. Side-dressing manure after planting has some merit. Again, there are practical limitations. For instance, dairy farmers will be heading to hay fields as soon as corn is planted. There is a trend to custom manure application. Custom operators could not be timely if they had to put all of the manure out in the spring. The nutrient index in nutrient management takes care of vulnerable soil types by limiting fall spreading rates or requiring a cover crop to sequester the manure nutrients and recycle them to growing crops in the spring. It recognizes the crop cover provided by no-till farming. We have come a long way in better managing manure in the last two decades. Prohibition of fall manure would create chaos and loss of both short-term and long-term soil productivity. We do not want to go there.
Allan Spicer,
$30 million potential gain for hybrid corn is unrealisticCan growers really make another $30 million by hybrid choice ("Picking the right corn hybrid," Better Farming, Dec.2004)? You can -- on paper at least. But first you have to make a lot of unrealistic assumptions.The first of those assumptions is that an extra bushel of corn is pure profit, regardless of the cost to attain it. A little work with a pencil tells us that the above-mentioned article used a price of $2.60 to $3 per bushel for your corn. That is unrealistic in today's market. The same article also implies that seed price has little bearing on profitability. The means of making the extra $30 million was by producing an extra five to seven bushels of crop per acre. If the hybrid selection cost criteria was less than $10 per acre you might stand a chance, but that is unlikely. More than that and you are only helping to support your big business "charity" of choice. The potential gain or loss in any given year is ultimately determined by the weather. The cost of seed, on the other hand, is completely in the hands of the producer. A $60 reduction in the cost of a bag of seed corn is equivalent to savings of $20 per acre. This equates to nine bushels of corn at today's prices. That would also equate to $40 million in savings on Ontario's two million acres of corn. Choosing hybrids based solely on things like "root strength, emergence, dry-down, plant health and flowering" will not guarantee a profit. I don't know of any seed company that sells seed "A" because it has the above characteristics while seed "B" has not. Nonsense. These characteristics are important, but all seed companies already use those same criteria to bring their seed to market. There are variations between hybrids but, other than dry-down, few of them can affect your bottom line as significantly as the growing season itself. What use is flowering date unless you know next year's weather during that same time-frame. You can make an educated guess and may be totally wrong. Many fine people involved in the sale of seed corn may have been offended by the advice in the same article not to support "good ole boys" and "friends and neighbours" in buying seed corn. On the contrary, there is much farming wisdom (agronomic skills as well) amongst our neighbours. Of course, I am biased as I am one of those neighbours trying to sell seed. Just remember that, ultimately, you are the one who pays for it all.
Bob Hulley, Write to usWe welcome the views of all readers. To be published letters, must be written exclusively to Better Farming and include the writer's name, address and telephone number to allow for verification. Letters may be edited, condensed or rejected. Due to space limitations, we suggest a length of less than 300 words.
|