CMEG Crop Management Extension Group

Field Crop News

Website Address: http://fcn.agronomy.psu.edu/

July 22, 2008    Vol. 08:20

IN THIS ISSUE:

Weather Outlook — Paul Knight, Pennsylvania State Climatologist

A push of cooler air will be accompanied by showers and thunderstorms on Wednesday. The focus of the most frequent showers and therefore the heaviest rainfall will be in a zone across eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey and southeast New York. It is likely that some counties will receive as much as 5 inches of rain in the two day period ending Thursday night. The western half of the state should see little or no rainfall during this same timeframe. With the additional clouds, daytime temperatures will stay below seasonal levels. After dry weather on Friday, yet another push of cool air will trigger more evenly scattered showers or thunderstorms on Saturday. Generally dry and seasonably cool conditions will dominate the final work—week of July, though a small disturbance may bring showers to parts of the state (especially southern sections) on Monday. A pronounced warming trend will mark the start of August and indicators still point to a very warm period from late August into September with drier than normal conditions in most sections. An active hurricane season is likely near the Atlantic Seaboard from mid—August through late September.

Check out the predicted Growing Degree Days (base 55) for Pennsylvania for the next two weeks at: http://climate.met.psu.edu/data/regional_gdd.php

Cover Crops and No—till: video released — John Rowehl, Extension Educator, York County

Cover crops may not seem like they are as important in a no—till farming system as they are for fields that are tilled. However, there are several reasons why cover crops are a vital part of no—till farming, especially on farms where the goal is to have continuous no—till.

We have a new video posted on the Crop Management Extension Group webpage in which several experienced no—till farmers explain why they use cover crops in their no—till fields. Maybe they will convince you to take a look at using them. http://cmeg.psu.edu/video/cover_crop/cover_crop.cfm Though it is only July, start getting your cover crop seed supply lined up now. Don’t wait until harvest to start looking for cover crop seed.

Determining the Cost of Hay — Andrew Frankenfield, Extension Educator, Montgomery County (Adapted from Rory Lewandowski, Ohio Extension Educator, C.O.R.N Newsletter June 9, 2008 — June 17, 2008)

I’ve had several conversations regarding the cost of hay recently. One person, trying to determine what to charge for essentially renting hay ground, reasoned that if the renter was going to sell small square bales for $5 or more per bale, then they ought to have at least $2 per bale as their share. Another person told me that if there is a lot of grass growing that gets made into a lot of hay then hay will again be cheap ($100/ton?) as in past years. The cost of producing hay can be determined from the value of nutrients removed plus the equipment costs. Whether hay is actually worth what it costs to produce it is yet another question.

According to the Penn State Agronomy Guide, each ton of grass hay removes 50 lbs of nitrogen, 15 lbs of phosphate (P2O5) and 50 lbs of potash (K2O). Using average bulk fertilizer prices, Urea (46–0–0) $750; DAP (18–46–0) was quoted at $1150 and potash (0–0–60) $700/ton. Using these prices to replace the nitrogen, phosphate and potash removed in a ton of hay resulted in a cost of $84 per ton. Since I was using DAP to replace the phosphate removed, this also provided about 6 lbs of nitrogen. The remaining 44 lbs was replaced using urea. Besides the fertilizer cost, there should be something figured in for spreading the fertilizer. Using the 2008 PA Farm Custom Rates, the average cost for spreading dry bulk fertilizer is about $10.00acre.

It is true that hay can be produced without fertilizing. I see it happen all the time. So, should fertilizer cost be part of determining the cost of hay? Yes, because each ton of hay removes those nutrients whether they are replaced or not. It is a matter of pay now or pay later. The soil can get mined to the point where it is no longer practical to produce hay. To restore soil to good productivity, one must takes a massive investment to restore soil fertility. Every year I get phone calls where people say they will fertilize in the future, or they are waiting for fertilizer to get cheaper because it is too expensive. If your soil fertility levels are good, and you are pretty sure fertilizer prices are going to decrease, then go ahead and delay fertilizing. However, you should still include some fertilizer charge into your hay cost calculation based on that future fertilization.

The next part of calculating the cost of hay production is machinery/equipment expense. I used average cost figures from the 2008 PA Farm Custom Rates (These rates are based on survey responses of PA farmers, I increased the values by 17% to account for increased fuel costs). Your own equipment costs may vary, and if you know what they are, plug those in. For those who don’t know, this is a good place to start. Mowing/conditioning is valued at $16.85/acre, tedding (not listed, a little cheaper than raking) at $8.00 acre, raking at $9.83/acre and large round bale baling and hauling at $9.01 per bale. Since we talk about hay in terms of price/ton, these per acre costs will have to get converted into costs /ton. Here is where fertility will pay some dividends. As tonnage yields increase, the machinery costs of mowing, tedding and raking decrease on a per ton basis.

Let’s consider an example where hay production is at 2 tons per acre and large round bales weigh 1000 lbs. The machinery costs are $8.43/ton for mowing, $4.00/ton for tedding, $4.92/ton for raking and $18.02/ton for baling and hauling the bales. If we need to do one tedding and one raking before baling, our total machinery cost is $35.37/ton. Adding the machinery cost to our fertilizer quote ($84.00) results in a total hay production cost of $119.37/ton. This does not include the cost of spreading fertilizer.

Now, it may be possible to reduce these hay production costs somewhat. You might find a better deal on fertilizer. Maybe you have an even distribution of 30% or more legumes in your hay mix, so the legumes provide nitrogen. Possibly you can spread some livestock manure that accumulated on a heavy use—feeding pad. You might be able to take out a pass with the tedder if the weather is right and just rake the hay or pick it up without raking. Maybe your machinery costs are a little lower. The point is, even with some of these conditions, hay is still going to be an expensive commodity. If you are making your own hay, these production costs are there whether that hay is mowed and baled at 15% crude protein and 65% TDN or at 7% crude protein and 48% TDN.

Don’t forget about establishment costs of hay fields, lime and herbicide applications and with timothy seed costs at $2.00 per pound and a 10–15 pound seeding rate your seed costs are around $25 per acre and $20 per acre to no—till drill or $5.63 per ton over 4 years. Two tons of lime @ $40/ton at establishment = $80 per acre ($10/ton) and $20 per acre ($10.00/ton) for annual herbicide application. Total of these establishment costs = $25.63/ton Establishment ($25.63) + Fertilizer ($84/ton) + Machinery Cost ($35.37) = $145.00/ton.

Oh I almost forgot, what are you paying for land rent? $30 $50, $100 per acre? Don’t forget to add that on to the cost of the hay. If you pay $30/acre you are up to $160/ton.

Then again, maybe the best situation is to find a neighbor or some other person who likes to make hay and hasn’t pushed a pencil on the costs. You just might run into a good deal.

A Good Time to Plan — Jonathan Rotz, Extension Educator, Cumberland County

As we hit a time in the growing season where things typically slow down a little; now may be the best time to take a few hours to plan your fall and winter manure applications. Although the spring is the best time to apply manure, few of us have the storage capabilities to apply all our manure in the spring. This article is for those who will need to apply manure this fall and possibly this winter.

During this planning time get your latest soil sample results and try to rank your fields based on the needs of the crops that will be growing next year. Make sure to pay attention to the crop you are rotating out of the field this year, the crop you will be planting and the phosphorus (P) level in the field. These will all play a critical role in where the field is ranked.

Your initial listing of fields should place highest nitrogen (N) requirements on top. Typically these will be corn to corn fields followed by beans to corn, alfalfa to corn and finishing with alfalfa fields. Once these fields have been listed on your nitrogen needs make sure to take into consideration the P levels of the fields. Fields with high soil P (<200ppm) should be moved to the bottom of the list so they will be the last to receive manure.

Always consider setbacks when looking at your fields. Don’t plan on spreading manure within 100ft of; the bank of a perennial or intermittent stream, lake or pond, an existing open sinkhole or an active well. Buffers for streams, lakes, ponds and sinkholes can be 35 feet if a permanent vegetative buffer is in place; however, a well’s set back is always 100ft. These recommendations should be followed by all farmers to help minimize the risk of polluting the groundwater or surface waters.

Now consider the type of manure you have and the fields you want to spread it on. Fields far away from the site of manure production may be given an increased ranking for getting liquid manure, which is typically easier to transport over further distances then pen pack manure. When fields are close to the manure source plan on using them for pen pack manure. This is also a good time to take your field knowledge and put it into practice. A fall application of manure may be spread on a field that lays wet during the spring. Steep slopes where manure could wash off, especially when the ground is frozen, should be saved for spring application. These slopes are a good place to plant fall cover crops.

Cover crops are another management option to be considered. Utilizing grass cover crops on manure ground retains the manure nutrients over winter in a safe form. This will keep the nutrients in place for the next growing season. Cover crops along with no—till farming will help minimize compaction during fall and winter manure applications. Compaction is minimized through the combination of the cover crops live roots growing in the soil and better soil structure from no—till farming. For more information check out this video which includes farmer’s testimonies on how cover crops and no—till have worked for them (http://cmeg.psu.edu/video/cover_crop/cover_crop.cfm)

Questions may arise as you go through this planning process. Feel free to give me or your local extension agent a call if you need assistance.

Weekly Roberts Agricultural Commodity Market Report

Mike Roberts Commodity Marketing Agent Virginia Tech
July 22, 2008

CORN on the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) finished down again on Monday. The SEPT’08 contract finished at $5.892/bu, off 20.2¢/bu. The DEC’08 contract closed at $6.082/bu, off 20.2¢/bu; 74.0¢/bu lower than this time last week and $1.388/bu (18.6%) lower than two weeks ago. Chart based selling continued to pressure prices as funds liquidate long positions and the 14—day Relative Strength Index (RSI) stayed just below 70 at 67.63. An RSI at or above 70 is considered overbought. Support in the December contract is now at $5.49/bu with a measuring objective of $4.79/bu. Increased concern of congressional influence on curbing speculative influence in commodities; good crop weather, improving crop conditions; the settling of the export tax issue in Argentina; and reports that Brazil has planted a larger corn crop all have put pressure on prices. Rising crude oil prices are putting money back into jittery fund’s pockets supporting prices somewhat. Weather will continue now to be the leading factor in price volatility for crops. USDA placed the U.S. corn crop at 65% good—to—excellent, a 1 point improvement over last week. The August 12 USDA World Agriculture Supply Demand Estimate report is expected to show the effects (or non—effects) of the floods back in June. Exports picked up as USDA placed corn—inspected—for—export at 29.8 mi bu vs. expectations for between 23–27 mi bu. Cash bids in the U.S. Corn Belt were steady to weaker while those in the U.S. Mid—Atlantic States on Monday were between 15.0¢/bu–22.0¢/bu lower. Funds were net sellers. Hopefully up to 60% of the ’08 crop has been priced. It would be a good idea to price another 10% now.

SOYBEAN futures on the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) were down on Monday. The AUG’08 contract finished at $14.094/bu, down 60.4¢/bu from last Friday’s close. NOV’08 soybean futures closed at $14.030/bu, off 45.0¢/bu and $1.560/bu (10%) lower than last Monday. Prices were pressured by sinking corn; good weather; lower wheat prices; as well as chart based selling and the same regulatory and international worries affecting the corn market. Good crop weather contributed to USDA placing the U.S. soybean crop at 61% good—to—excellent condition. This is 1% better than last week. Exports were disappointing with USDA placing soybeans—inspected—for—export at 3.6 mi bu vs. estimates for between 6–9 mi bu. Funds continued to shrink long positions amid fears that congress is going to do so for them. Unwinding of old crop/new crop spreads also pressured prices. Funds and large speculators were net sellers of soybeans. It would be a good idea to get up to 40%–50% of the ’08 crop sold now.

WHEAT futures in Chicago (CBOT) took another skid on Monday. The SEPT’08 contract closed at $7.910/bu, off 13.0¢/bu. JULY’09 wheat futures closed off 14.0¢/bu at $8.656/bu; 20.4¢/bu lower than this time last week. Good spring crop weather; prospects for a huge global crop; and sinking corn and soybean prices pressure the wheat market. According to USDA global wheat production for the ’08/’09 crop is projected at 664 mi tonnes (24.4 bi bu) vs. the 611 mi tonnes (22 bi bu) grown last year. Export numbers were good with USDA reporting 28.4 mi bu inspected for export. Iraq bought 100,000 tonnes (3.7 mi bu) of wheat from the from Europe rather than the U.S. Harvest activity for the U.S. winter wheat crop is progressing very well placed at 71% harvested with very good yields being reported. USDA placed the U.S. spring wheat crop at 63% good—to—excellent condition, up 2% from last week. Some floor sources said that traders were expecting that number to drop by 2% rather than go up. We’ll see what happens tomorrow but my guess is that this will further pressure prices. Even though funds were busy buying at times today they were net sellers by 3,000 lots. Hopefully the entire 2008 wheat crop has been sold. It would be a good idea to have up to 20% of the ’09 crop sold now.

The full report is available at http://www.ext.vt.edu/news/periodicals/roberts/2008wp/July22_2008.html

Mid—Season Checkup On Corn Nutrient Status — Douglas Beegle, Extension Fertility Specialist

As the corn crop begins to tassel and silk we have a good opportunity to use plant leaf analysis to give the crop a checkup so see if it is getting the nutrients needed for optimal production. Plant analysis is commonly looked at as a tool for diagnosing problems and it is very useful for that purpose. However, it is also a great monitoring tool to assess the nutrient status of the crop. It is especially useful for fine—tuning top management by making sure nutrients are not limiting the response to all of the other management inputs. With this in—season checkup you can determine if the crop is actually getting the nutrients that were applied or that you thought the soil would supply. Marginal levels of a nutrient in the plant when adequate amounts were applied or when the soil test levels were optimum for the nutrient can indicate that some other factor is limiting the ability of the plant to access that nutrient. Possibilities to look for include: compaction, root injury, low pH, poor drainage, droughty soils, etc.

Remember that even though the plants may look fine, plants can experience what is called hidden hunger. This is when the plant does not have adequate nutrition for optimum production but the deficiency is not severe enough to show up as clear deficiency symptoms on the crop. If you are pushing for top management, this is critical information which plant analysis can provide. There have been several reports this year of corn showing potassium deficiency which probably means that there are also many situations where K maybe limiting production but not showing symptoms. Another area where plant analysis is especially useful is for assessing micronutrient status of the crop. We don’t currently have good soil tests calibrated for sulfur and micronutrients in our area, but plant analysis is a good way to assess micronutrient status of the crop.

To use plant analysis for monitoring nutrient status there are several very important rules that must be followed for the results to be valid. The three big ones are:

Sample at the correct stage of growth — for corn this is at silking
Sample the correct plant part — for corn is this the ear leaf
Take a representative sample — for corn collect 15–25 ear leaves from typical plants in the field.

Follow the instructions from your ag testing lab for submitting the samples for analysis. Details from the Ag Analytical Services Lab (AASL) at Penn State can be found at: http://www.aasl.psu.edu/plant_tissue_prog.html. For other crops see the instructions from the lab for details on sampling. The Penn State AASL plant sampling instructions can be found at: http://www.aasl.psu.edu/Taking%20Plant%20Samples%20Web_7_1_04.pdf. Most famers who use plant analysis do not sample all fields but select a few representative fields to sample for this in—season checkup. The lab will most likely provide interpretations of your results or you can consult sufficiency level tables such as Table 1.2–10 in the Penn State Agronomy Guide (http://agguide.agronomy.psu.edu/cm/sec2/table1-2-10.cfm) or the AASL web site (http://www.aasl.psu.edu/Plt_nutrients.htm) to interpret the results. Look at the results in light of the whole management program on the fields tested. This includes nutrient application records, soil test levels, yield and yield variability, etc. It is obvious that using plant analysis in corn production will not usually allow corrections for the current year but will be useful for making management adjustments in the future. As a side note, for perennial crops like forages plant analysis can be used to make management changes for the current crop.

Cover Crops—Not Just for Cover Anymore — John Rowehl, Extension Educator, York County

Although the term “cover crop” implies serving the purpose of protecting the soil from erosion, cover crops also play a role in enhancing soil productivity and crop production.

At this time of year, options include seeding legume cover crops that can create nitrogen for the next crop in the rotation that can take advantage of it. Fields that had wheat or oats harvested recently and aren’t being double cropped provide an opportunity to get these types of cover crops in on time and should not have herbicide residue complications. There are several options available. Consider agronomic management; seed cost, herbicide carryover, potential pest complications, burn down herbicide selection and timing, seeding equipment and soil preparation, residue management.

With legume cover crops, there is a balance between letting it grow longer to add more nitrogen and what you sacrifice with planting date. They can also create a dense mat that can hold too much moisture in conditions like we had this past spring and we saw some seed slot closure problems in demonstration fields.

The window of seeding ranges from mid—August to very early September. In southern Pennsylvania they could also possibly be planted in early harvested silage fields without herbicide residues that could affect them. Hairy vetch is a legume that is most often mentioned because of its ability to produce large amounts of nitrogen. However the maximum production at comes at bloom, which can be in late May. There are some named varieties that mature earlier than the common type. Growth in the fall is minimal so some growers mix in some rye or wheat for added cover. Seed is relatively expensive. Crimson clover is another potential legume for August or very early September seeding. It is considered marginal for winter hardiness above the Mason—Dixon Line but it has been working in southern Pennsylvania. It blooms earlier than hairy vetch and seed cost is more reasonable (And it really looks nice in the spring if you let it go into bloom). Red clover, although a perennial, seems to work similarly in recent observation and demonstration plots.

There are other cover crop options and more details on all cannot be covered in the limited space of this article. To find out more, I recommend that you utilize the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) resource Growing Cover Crops Profitably. It is available free on—line to download or the book can be ordered at http://www.sare.org/publications/index.htm

Upcoming Events

Manure Haulers Spill Response Field Day
August 5, 2008
9 a.m. – 3 p.m.
At Lehman Ag Service 300 Douts Hill Road Holtwood, PA 17532
Don’t miss this opportunity to participate in a hands—on field day that will review safety issues of manure application including: safe equipment management, safe operational procedures, demonstration of over application response, first response demonstrations for accidents involving human injury and response procedures to manure spills. A spill response demonstration conducted at the end of the event will include a controlled manure tank roll—over and execution of clean—up procedures.
Certification Credits
4.5 continuing education credits will be available for Commercial Manure Haulers and Brokers.
Questions?
Contact: Amy Bradford
(717) 651–5920 or abradford@pennag.com

The registration form can be downloaded by clicking on the following link. http://www.pennag.com/pdf/FieldDayRegistration.pdf

Hay Baling and Handling Meeting

September 3rd, Southeast PA Crops Conferences is again coordinating a fall equipment meeting.
This year we will be in the Lehigh Valley at Heidel Hollow Farm, Dave Fink and Family will be hosting the event.
Don’t miss this opportunity to see and discuss big square balers, bale accumulators, stacker wagons and Fink’s large bale processing machine.
Click on the following link for the brochure, there is no fee to attend!
Carpool with your neighbor, it will be an event you won’t want to miss.
We will also have a session on the economics of this equipment.
http://montgomery.extension.psu.edu/Agriculture/HayBalingHandlingmeeting.pdf

Contributors: County Educators: Mark Madden (Sullivan), Mena Hautau (Berks), Kevin Fry (Armstrong), Jonathon Rotz (Cumberland), Jeff Graybill (Lancaster), John Rowehl (York). Department of Crop and Soil Sciences: Greg Roth, Doug Beegle.

Editor: Andrew Frankenfield, Montgomery County.

Upcoming Events

Real time pest and heat unit activity: http://psu.zedxinc.com/cgi-bin/site.cgi?location=2&user=psu#

Calendar of Events: http://www.events.psu.edu/cgi-bin/cal/webevent.cgi?cmd=opencal&cal=cal209&

Readers can subscribe electronically to this newsletter at the Field Crop News Web site.

If you have problems subscribing or wish to cancel your subscription, please contact Lisa Crytser by e-mail at lac8@psu.edu or by phone at 814-865-2543.

Information presented above and where trade names are used, they are supplied with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by Penn State Extension is implied.

This publication is available in alternative media upon request.

The Pennsylvania State University is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to programs, facilities, admission, and employment without regard to personal characteristics not related to ability, performance, or qualifications as determined by University policy or by state or federal authorities. It is the policy of the University to maintain an academic and work environment free of discrimination, including harassment. The Pennsylvania State University prohibits discrimination and harassment against any person because of age, ancestry, color, disability or handicap, national origin, race, religious creed, sex, sexual orientation, or veteran status. Discrimination or harassment against faculty, staff, or students will not be tolerated at The Pennsylvania State University. Direct all inquiries regarding the nondiscrimination policy to the Affirmative Action Director, The Pennsylvania State University, 328 Boucke Building, University Park, PA 16802-5901, Tel 814-865-4700/V, 814-863-1150/TTY.