Making Nutrient Management Work —
Agronomics, Cooperation, and Technology

Richard M. Vanden Heuvel
Agronomy Technical Services
Cenex/Land O' Lakes
St. Paul, MN

Nutrient management planning (NMP) has existed in many parts of the country principally as part of voluntary cost-sharing programs, but in some cases mandatory regulations. As farm operations continue to increase in size, animal densities increase and the need for a plan becomes more important. Regardless of what drives NMP, cost-share dollars, regulations, or the realization it should simply be done, more farm acres will be managed under a written plan. As this process takes place, plan writing will need to move from agency and extension personnel to private sector agronomists. Plan writing will need to be increasingly more of an integrated farm management system, and eventually, include new technologies such as yield monitors, to help demonstrate agronomic effectiveness.

The planning process, in general, requires soil sampling, inventorying manure resources, crop rotation, field acreages, and following university fertilizer recommendations. Manure, legume and commercial fertilizer nutrients are appropriated up to an allowed limit specific for each field. Ideally, after the plan is implemented, scouting of fields is done to evaluate crop conditions. In addition, the plan should be updated annually. All of this amounts to a good deal of work - requiring agronomic expertise and training. Although extension and agency personnel are involved in many states in actively writing plans, consideration needs to be given to allowing private sector agronomists the opportunity to conduct this work and develop a market for the service. Several advantages will be gained if this is done:

• Competition among private sector vendors is encouraged
• A greater number of trained planners will result
• A greater awareness of the availability of the services will result
• Nutrient management comes one step closer to being part of a complete, integrated farm
• Plan, not a separate plan by itself.
• Enhanced credibility. Many growers would prefer that their agronomist, who is more familiar with their operation, write the plan
• Agency personnel can focus on program development and administration
• Extension personnel can focus on education

To encourage the private sector to do this, the responsibility of plan writing must be placed in their hands. This approach has been used in the state of Wisconsin and has mobilized a large population of private sector individuals. Although significant cost-share dollars provided the initial boost in planning, growers and their advisors are increasingly recognizing the need for this service. Land and water stewardship issues are at an all time high. Nutrient management planning, as a best management practice, needs to move forward as a standard practice.

The acceptance of planning process by growers has been hindered by a number of factors that the private sector can greatly assist with and help overcome. It is one thing to write a plan. It is another to implement it, and yet another to effect permanent change. Whether a plan can achieve in the field what is promised on paper is often a significant and practical doubt in the mind of a grower. Doubt can occur about the value of required soil testing, a change in fertilizer recommendations, the timing of applications, or about legume and manure nutrient crediting, among other things. The learning/acceptance curve is slow but can be accelerated with support by the practitioner, recognizing that local agronomic expertise is essential and that "hand-holding" counts greatly in this endeavor.

Local proof that the new practices will work and provide benefits is essential. Regional field demonstrations certainly help in this regard, but doubt about "what will happen on my farm" may still exist. New technologies, such as yield monitors, will eventually assist in providing greater amounts of local, on-the-farm evidence that management changes required by new programs will work. Seeing is believing, particularly in agriculture. These technologies are still early in their development but are advancing quickly. Gradually, over time, their use will allow a greater comfort level to be achieved by growers. The technology will allow direct measurement, direct proof of yield response, or a lack of it. We have not had this ability before, at least not in as practical a form. Agronomists who make their living providing advise will provide this expertise for the majority of growers. It is time to begin using these technologies wherever possible to help accelerate the learning process for all of us.

Nutrient management planning makes sense. It simply strives for improved efficiency of nutrient inputs. It cannot stand for reduced yields or reduced profitability for producers. Flexibility in the planning process must be allowed while growers, their agronomists, and various NMP program sponsors, learn more about what efficiency really is for individual fields, and within individual fields. Initially, simplicity will enhance implementation and acceptance. Learning and behavioral changes take time. Over time, a greater level of sophistication can be expected. Programs that encourage participation by the private sector will enhance progress and better ensure that advancing technologies are also incorporated as they are shown to benefit producers.

To Top