28 minute read
Opinion
Ammo for the anti-dairy brigade
Alternative View
Alan Emerson
I WAS halted by a recent headline that read “Emissions from cows on dairy farms reach record levels”. I thought that was surprising as cow numbers are dropping.
It was data from Statistics NZ for the years 2007 to 2019 that showed dairy emissions rose 3.18% in 2019. We were then told that “emissions created by the digestive systems of New Zealand’s 6.3 million cows are among NZ’s biggest environmental problems”.
My response, in a word, is bollocks.
Here’s the rub. Stats NZ count all emissions from dairy farms regardless of where they come from. That’s fine as far as total emissions are concerned, but it isn’t if you’re providing ammunition to the anti-dairy brigade. What that means is that if a farmer has a dairy herd, a beef unit and some sheep on harder country, then all those emissions are counted as dairy, which they’re obviously not.
What it does is to allow some deskbound bureaucrat to publish a pile of alarmist figures that aren’t correct.
Conversely, the Ministry for the Environment, (MfE) only publishes the figures from dairy cows, which shows a decrease in emissions over the same period of .4%. I’d suggest there is a lot of difference between plus 3.8% and minus .4%. On one hand dairy gets pilloried, when on the other, using MfE figures, it is to be congratulated.
That was followed by a headline that read “NZ records the biggest drop in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions ever”. The Government reported that emissions from agriculture, forestry and fishing had dropped 1.7%. Conversely, our electricity, gas, water and waste services were up 13%, as we had to burn coal to generate electricity.
Hasn’t the primary sector done well.
The whole GHG reporting system is, as you can see, inconsistent. In addition, there are other factors that get conveniently ignored. For example, we know the ‘average’ dairy animal produces 82 kilograms of methane a year but that isn’t definitive. Individual cows vary, as do different types of feed. Logic would also suggest different breeds have different outputs as well. That makes statements like “3.18% increases” meaningless in my view.
Federated Farmers chair Andrew Hoggard says we need to look at trends not annual variations. He also believes we should be looking at the entire agricultural sector and not just part of it. I agree with both statements.
If we consider the facts, total methane emissions from all livestock have moved little over the past decade. They’re just .45% higher than they were in 2009. Putting it in perspective, road transport emissions have more than doubled between 1990 and 2019. They’ve risen 28% since 2009. Adding to that, methane emissions have to fall just .3% a year over the next 30 years to meet our commitments, whereas transport emissions must fall to zero.
Looking at it another way, in 2009 our meat and dairy export receipts were a little over $13 billion. That has since more than doubled to over $28b and that was achieved with an increase in emissions of just .45%.
The sectors are to be congratulated on vastly improving NZ’s economic wellbeing, with an infinitesimal increase in GHG emissions.
In addition, as I’ve mentioned in the past, NZ is by far the most energy efficient food producer in the world when it comes to GHGs. We should be growing more animals here, not less, if we are serious about saving the planet.
Alas, it seems our achievements are massive but our acknowledgement for those achievements is verging on the non-existent.
For a start, I’m unaware of any plaudits from our politicians – of whatever colour. Come on folks, we’ve kept the country prosperous and maintained our environmental footprint. The provinces are awaiting plaudits.
The mainstream media, always quick to criticise, remain blissfully ignorant when it comes to agriculture’s considerable achievements.
I expect Greenpeace to lead the charge of the ill-informed and in the current case they didn’t disappoint.
Their spokesperson told me in all seriousness that “the dairy industry itself wants to make (the GHG figure) look a lot better than it actually is”. He added “the burning of coal for dehydration of milk powder by Fonterra is not counted as a dairy emission”. Greenpeace felt it should be.
Well matey, if you buy an EV there’s a chance your charging will be with electricity supplied from the burning of coal. Conversely, Fonterra is taking steps to reduce coal use. It is to be congratulated.
Then we had the ubiquitous Mike Joy from Victoria University suggesting that the Government pays farmers $12b to stop dairying. He went on to claim “the dairy industry’s yearly $12 billion export earnings were effectively a government subsidy that allowed harmful land use”.
Really?
My only advice to him would be to stay in the shallow end.
PERCEPTION: Alan Emerson says recent reports suggest the mainstream media remain blissfully ignorant when it comes to agriculture’s considerable achievements.
Your View
Alan Emerson is a semi-retired Wairarapa farmer and businessman: dath.emerson@gmail.com
In the crosshairs of a magpie
From the Ridge
Steve Wyn-Harris
WHEN Tom and Elizabeth took the farm
The bracken made their bed and Quardle oodle ardle wardle doodle
The magpies said.
Denis Glover’s opening stanza of his famous and familiar poem The Magpies – a favourite of mine and I’m sure of many of you.
In just six stanzas, Tom and Elizabeth start farming, flourish then wither and pass on, but the magpies are a constant presence and remain.
Twenty-five years of this column and I don’t recall ever having mentioned magpies.
Somewhat surprising as they are a daily part of my life here on the farm and I need not remind you that the Hawke’s Bay rugby team dressed in their black and white are known as the Magpies and supported by Hawkeye their mascot.
There have always been heaps of them around the house and on the farm. There are often raucous engagements of groups of them around the house during the day and if you listen for them, they are always calling to each other. I enjoy watching them harass the gliding hawks who try to appear nonchalantly annoyed but not scared of these spitfire-like attacks.
Having read that they were tough on the native birds, I once attempted an extermination programme on them but despite a decent cull, it seemed to make little difference to the numbers and I soon tired of the killing. I later read that their nastiness to other species was overstated, so I just went back to accepting them as part of the resident fauna.
One might assume that like many other Australian bird species, they had been swept across the Tasman by ferocious gales sometime in the past few thousand years. They are decent fliers. That’s what happened to the ungainly flying pukeko, perhaps 800 years ago.
But they were introduced from Australia by Acclimatisation Societies between 1864 and 1874, mainly to control insect pests.
When they do tick me off is their territorial attacks at this time of the year during their nesting season.
Many of us have had this experience.
The cyclists from Waipukurau who ride this way have taken to wearing various paraphernalia on their helmets to help ward off attacks. Little balls bobbing on springs, wires, painted eyes on the back and such.
The past three years, what I imagine is the same bird, has divebombed me on the lambing beat, always in the same place. Once you learn to anticipate the attack it’s not so bad, but this fellow clipped me the other day and that’s not on.
The next day I took my shotgun but went on the four-wheeler instead of the usual two-wheeler. It’s the male who does the attack and I know they are less likely to have a decent go if you are looking at him, so I averted my gaze.
I couldn’t incite him to attack even though I went backwards and forwards in the usual strafing region.
I figured it was the change in the bike so next day I was back on the two-wheeler and sure enough I saw him coming directly from his tree. I quickly stopped and popped two shells in the gun. I didn’t have time to dismount as he was coming like an arrow directly at me.
I should point out that I am one of the worst shots I know and don’t shoot ducks for this reason, but also because I don’t enjoy it. But this was life and death or at least self-preservation.
I had planned to wait until he swooped up and became a slower moving target, but I think I must have slightly panicked as he showed no sign of doing so. I aimed at this hurtling missile and fired a barrel.
His wings immediately stopped beating and he passed a couple of metres over my head and hit the ground dead as a doornail. My only regret was that no one had witnessed this extraordinary feat of gunmanship.
I was interested to hear the following day that the Aussies were reporting strange happenings in what they call the ‘swooping season’.
It seems that magpies will target people they see as a threat. They can recognise human faces and research has shown they can identify up to 100 different people.
Some people are constantly victimised by the same magpie year after year and others completely left alone.
However, with face mask requirements because of the virus, it seems the birds are becoming more agitated as they can neither read faces nor identify the ones they have always considered threats.
So, they are now having a go at everyone rather than their usual favourite targets.
With a new appreciation of how smart they are with this facial recognition ability going on, next time I’m constantly attacked, I’ll just put up with it as I’ve done in the past.
Quardle oodle ardle wardle doodle.
TARGET: Steve Wyn-Harris shares his recent encounter with a swooping magpie on his farm.
Calf rearing economics a threat
Meaty Matters
Allan Barber
THE high milk price means more calves are being sent on the bobby truck this season, with slaughter numbers half-way through August 11%, or 80,000, ahead of last year across the country. This inevitably signals an equivalent drop in the number of beef cattle available for the 2023 season. The question is whether this is permanent or cyclical.
Conversations with calf rearers suggest fewer calves reared every year could be a longer-term trend unless the industry dynamics change in favour of rearing. There are several factors to consider. The most obvious one is the milk price, which on its own is a deterrent for many dairy farmers for whom it clearly makes economic sense not to retain the calf beyond four or five days old. Those that decide to retain them will ideally have a sale to a grazer or finisher contracted at a satisfactory price.
Dairy farmers who take a chance on rearing a few calves and selling them on the spot market have got a bit of a hiding over the past two years, especially if they hold them into November when there are too many available, forcing the price down. However, a lot of dairy farmers who would in past years have reared 30 or 40 calves have decided it does not make sense to use the milk, knowing it is more valuable in the vat.
Te Awamutu-based Kirkham Group’s main focus is on dairy farming, but calf rearing has been an important part of the business, which group director Debra Kirkham says “gets in your blood”.
A major deterrent is the lack of suitable staff to perform what is a very labour-intensive activity. It is also getting harder to secure contracts with beef farmers, so they halved this year’s spring calf numbers, which has worked out well for them.
As autumn calves attract greater demand and are not as numerous, they can generally be fully contracted. However, the company looks carefully every year at whether they should continue to rear calves, because as Kirkham says “the calf rearer is at the bottom of the pile and gets squeezed hardest”.
A standalone calf rearer would expect to pay $80-$100 for a well-marked 40kg calf and $250 for feed, assuming the whole milk powder price remains constant, plus labour and an allowance for deaths. A 100kg calf is worth $500 at present, but by November this could drop to $450. As can be seen, the margins are tight, unless there is a guaranteed contract price to fix the margin. Unfortunately, the Kirkham Group’s experience with securing contracts is increasingly typical across the industry.
The main issue for the red meat sector is its reliance on the dairy industry to provide a large proportion of its annual throughput and whether this presents an undue risk to its future viability. The current season’s slaughter figures, with six weeks of the season to go, show that prime steer and heifer make up 42% of the national kill, with the other 58% comprising cull cow and bull. While there will be a small percentage of prime cow and bull in the latter category, the vast majority will be from the dairy sector. In addition, a growing proportion of the prime kill will be from the tail-end of the dairy herd, covered by a beef bull, with whitefaced calves particularly sought-after.
The 2020 season saw prime make up only 38% of the total national cattle kill, so the increase this year may represent a carryover as a consequence of drought. It is unlikely to be the result of a sudden massive lift in the number of beef cattle on farms which, according to Beef + Lamb NZ’s stock numbers survey as at June 30, increased 2.5% over the previous year. Beef cows mated for the year actually declined slightly, so no major change there.
It may be that bull farmers are content to ride the swings and roundabouts of calf availability and the store stock market for their replacements, being prepared to buy and sell on the day, rather than contracting to buy bull calves from a rearer at a guaranteed cost. But contracting would encourage a continuing supply of an essential input to their farming model, which will become harder and more expensive to buy. Federated Farmers dairy section chair Chris Lewis makes the point that dairy rearers have also lost the live export market, which used to provide a valuable alternative. From his perspective, he used to rear a number of beef calves, but the present state of the market has given him cold feet.
Lewis believes B+LNZ, which earns levies from all dairy cattle slaughtered, should take the initiative and encourage beef farmers to commit to contracts with calf rearers, ensuring a continuation of the pipeline on which the red meat sector depends for an important proportion of its supply. While B+LNZ may not consider it their responsibility to make decisions on farming matters, it would surely be worth talking to farmers on both sides of this transaction to see what initiatives would result in a change in behaviour.
There have been campaigns over the years to drive the rearing of beef-cross calves from the tail of the dairy herd, but the success of such programmes depends on both parties being willing to make a contractual commitment. Unfortunately, it looks as though this is still being left to the vagaries of price and supply on the day which seems to be a wasted opportunity.
MOTIVATION: Farmers dairy section chair Chris Lewis believes B+LNZ should take the initiative and encourage beef farmers to commit to contracts with calf rearers.
Your View
Allan Barber is a meat industry commentator: allan@barberstrategic. co.nz, http://allanbarber.wordpress. com
RICK ALEXANDER
for the RAVENSDOWN BOARD
I will bring a life time of practical farming experience to the Ravensdown Board. Multiple years of governance experience running a large commercial multi-site healthcare organisation strongly supports my candidacy. Hard working, genuine and honest, I care deeply about the success of New Zealand’s agriculture sector. For many years I have benefited from sound management at Ravensdown and wish to contribute to the future success of the co-operative. Nominator: Chris Grace Seconder: Hugh Donald Area: 5
24 FARMERS WEEKLY – farmersweekly.co.nz – September 6, 2021
Opinion
A new sense of leadership
REDEFINING ROLES: AWDT general manager Lisa Sims says the 2021 KPMG AgriBusiness Agenda shed light on the different priorities between male and female leaders, which demands further discussion. Lisa Sims
THE 2021 KPMG Agri-Business Agenda hit hard in its honesty. Our primary sector leaders are overloaded and struggling under the pressure of accelerating change.
They are not the only ones. Many in the rural sector are struggling with the pace of change and additional requirements around data and compliance.
That fatigue risks our ability to act decisively and seize the opportunities that change offers. But in the same report, there is a glimpse of the way forward.
When asked to rank their top priority for the agri-food and fibre sector, female contributors to the agenda identified “equipping leaders with critical skills” as number one. For men, it was priority number 21.
That’s a big difference. For the first time in the agenda’s 11-year history, a contributor demographic has considered an issue to be more pressing than biosecurity. But there is a deeper meaning here.
This 20-point differential signals that a new kind of leader – spanning ages, backgrounds, genders and characterised by purpose-driven women – is emerging in New Zealand’s primary sector.
Inspired by the thousands of women in the Agri-Women’s Development Trust (AWDT) community, I see three common characteristics that help us define this new sense of leadership.
The first is a tendency to prioritise personal development and support for others. Looking broadly at our female leaders, we see journeys that often started with conscious investment in building the confidence and skills to lead. This creates a ripple effect as they step up to leadership in their local communities and onto national and regional boards and organisations. We see it in AWDT Escalator alumni who remain tightly connected years after their leadership and governance programme ends, and in the women who work through the pipeline of our programmes.
Is it any wonder then that when these women arrive in positions of influence and are confronted by big, strategic issues their go-to response is to invest in people? As demonstrated by the agenda differential, their priority is to make the skills, development and support that got them there, accessible to others. When confronted with a challenging problem, these emerging leaders focus on mindset, skills and support, before reaching for strategy.
The second characteristic of these emerging leaders is purpose-led leadership. They don’t wait for authority or position to do something for the people and places they care about. They are characterised by their roll-up-their-sleeves, boots and all approach, which often inspires others to follow. They are collaborative, authentic and care deeply about the issues they engage in and are determined to succeed. They are not told. They just choose to take responsibility for the issues they care about.
Finally, these women lead with skills that engage, relate and connect to others. As a sector, we are moving past the farm gate and towards a future of values-led, collaborative projects driven by the needs of diverse stakeholders. Catchment groups are a great example. Driving this future is the ability to genuinely connect with others, to see life from their perspectives and hear their needs, hopes and fears.
Let’s use an analogy from the farm.
On leaving an AWDT programme, women realise that they can add a tremendous amount of value to their farming business as a critical farming partner. We see women taking the lead on finance, HR, strategic planning, succession planning, farm planning, and health, safety and wellbeing.
As overseas markets look for assurance in animal welfare and environmental standards, women are leading the way in finding tools and ways to satisfy this requirement. Farming businesses who are using the skills and strengths of both men and women are destined to succeed. How can they not?
None of this is to say that men aren’t capable of purpose-driven or empathetic leadership, of course they are. But when we consider the nature of primary sector leadership today – that 88% of chief executives are male and our boards are small, similar and overworked – we begin to see the 20-point Agri-Business Agenda differential for what it is. A diversity gap that our emerging leaders intend to fill with leadership that prioritises investment in people, purposedriven impact and that seeks to understand and collaborate.
KPMG are right when they say that “organisations cannot afford to ignore the message in the survey”. They must utilise all their available talent – male and female. They must appreciate that solving complex problems requires diversity of thought and leaders with empathy and people skills.
Because this call-to-action comes at a time of strain and fatigue, we have a simple message for NZ’s primary sector leaders. You aren’t on this journey alone.
Speaking from our pan-sector perspective and experience in developing almost 5000 people (including some men) – the diversity of thought you need is already in your organisation. Encourage them to grow into the future leaders you need.
Use the AWDT. Either via our existing programmes, like Escalator and Next Level that accelerate women’s leadership and governance pathways, or the upcoming ‘Know Your Mindset. Grow your Influence’ series – a shorter programme supporting rural people to manage change.
To close, I want to share one final story from the farm. It’s about navigating a crisis. When we ask our farmer graduates what really matters amongst the compounding pressures of regulation, climate and markets, they generally say the same thing: it’s the next generation. Prioritising the needs of those who will take our place, is the way forward.
NEW FROM
D r Bert Quin
Dr Bert Quin Dr Bert Quin
Quinfert Hi-Lime RPRV2 0-10-0-3 NPKS plus 36% Ca Only $396+gst/tonne ex Waharoa/Te Poi, $433+gst ex Rolleston
• Contains 100 kg P/tonne, all present as Algerian RPR V2 • Minimal P leaching or runoff, no Boucraa waste or manufacturing rock present • Slaked lime added to ensure a high 70% liming value • Annual application is fi ne • Suitable for aerial and surface spreading – max 2% moisture • To maintain soil pH and soil P supply, apply annually at 25 kg/ ha per stock unit (drystock) or 40 kg/ha per 100 kg milksolids/ha dairy • Add any additional S required as highly effi cient S90 or as pHneutral S90/lime mix • Up to 45% cheaper applied than alternative lime, P and S maintenance options
Quinfert Hi-Lime RPR V2 –the regenerative farming solution
Call Quinfert on 0800 784 633 or Bert Quin direct on 021 427 572 www.quinfert.co.nz
For more info, email Bert Quin on bert.quin@quinfert.co.nz, or phone 021 427 572, or visit www.quinfert.co.nz For more info, email Bert Quin on bert.quin@quinfert.co.nz, or phone 021 427 572, or visit www.quinfert.co.nz annual amount you are using now. Easy to mix with your prilled urea. Leaching of anions like nitrate will be minimised as well. annual amount you are using now. Easy to mix with your prilled urea. Leaching of anions like nitrate will be minimised as well. Fact 10. Potash is more e cient, and must less likely to cause metabolic problems, if applied in small doses 4 times a year, adding up to 50-60% of the total Fact 10. Potash is more e cient, and must less likely to cause metabolic problems, if applied in small doses 4 times a year, adding up to 50-60% of the total cut in half with big savings. cut in half with big savings. Fact 9. For N, rather than granular urea, use prilled urea, sprayed immediately prior to, or during, the spreading with urease inhibitor. Use of N can be literally Fact 9. For N, rather than granular urea, use prilled urea, sprayed immediately prior to, or during, the spreading with urease inhibitor. Use of N can be literally situations or low rainfall, use a blend of RPR and high-analysis soluble P. situations or low rainfall, use a blend of RPR and high-analysis soluble P. Fact 8. In a nutshell, for maintenance of P levels any genuine RPR (not an RPR/Boucraa mix please!) can be used. Just check the Cd content. For low fertility Fact 8. In a nutshell, for maintenance of P levels any genuine RPR (not an RPR/Boucraa mix please!) can be used. Just check the Cd content. For low fertility strips can be harvested in summer to be fed out, to improve P and N cycling. strips can be harvested in summer to be fed out, to improve P and N cycling. bacterial and sediment losses. Neither will have any signi cant long-term bene cial e ect (on a whole -farm basis) on soluble P and nitrate-N loss. But grass bacterial and sediment losses. Neither will have any signi cant long-term bene cial e ect (on a whole -farm basis) on soluble P and nitrate-N loss. But grass Fact 7. in any case simple fenced-o 3-metre wide grass riparian strips are essentially as e ective and vastly cheaper than more complex strips. Both reduce Fact 7. in any case simple fenced-o 3-metre wide grass riparian strips are essentially as e ective and vastly cheaper than more complex strips. Both reduce idea of their long-term e ectiveness and maintenance costs, and before you have established whether changing to sustained-release RPR is all you need to do! idea of their long-term e ectiveness and maintenance costs, and before you have established whether changing to sustained-release RPR is all you need to do! Fact 6. It is nonsensical to give in to pressure to install expensive mitigations riparian strips, excessively large wetlands and ‘phosphorus walls’ when you have no Fact 6. It is nonsensical to give in to pressure to install expensive mitigations riparian strips, excessively large wetlands and ‘phosphorus walls’ when you have no huge amounts of money! huge amounts of money! Fact 5. Following 1-4 above will greatly reduce P run-o and leaching. This should be done before anything else, and the situation reassessed before spending Fact 5. Following 1-4 above will greatly reduce P run-o and leaching. This should be done before anything else, and the situation reassessed before spending (sulphur 90) is far more e cient than the excess sulphate in super. (sulphur 90) is far more e cient than the excess sulphate in super. Fact 4. There is nothing to lose and everything to gain. RPR-based fertilisers are even cheaper than super-based products as well! Added sulphur bentonite Fact 4. There is nothing to lose and everything to gain. RPR-based fertilisers are even cheaper than super-based products as well! Added sulphur bentonite in a sustained fashion for plants. in a sustained fashion for plants. Fact 3. If you want to build up your soil P in an environmentally-protective way, simply apply R Fact 3. If you want to build up your soil P in an environmentally-protective way, simply apply R environment. environment. Fact 2. Once you have Olsen P levels that are more than a third of the P retention (ASC), application of additional soluble P is very prone to loss to the Fact 2. Once you have Olsen P levels that are more than a third of the P retention (ASC), application of additional soluble P is very prone to loss to the Fact 1. The overuse of soluble P fertiliser is by far the largest cause of P run-o and leaching, and therefore of the decline in the quality of Kiwi waterways. Fact 1. The overuse of soluble P fertiliser is by far the largest cause of P run-o and leaching, and therefore of the decline in the quality of Kiwi waterways. Ten Basic Fertiliser Facts You Must Know and Adopt to Meet 2025 Water Quality Limits:
When confronted with a challenging problem, these emerging leaders focus on mindset, skills and support, before reaching for Ten Basic Fertiliser Facts You Must Know and Adopt to Meet 2025 Water Quality Limits: Fact 1. Fact 1. strategy. The overuse of soluble P fertiliser is by far the largest cause of P run-o and leaching, and therefore of the decline in the quality of Kiwi waterways. The overuse of soluble P fertiliser is by far the largest cause of P run-o and leaching, and therefore of the decline in the quality of Kiwi waterways. Fact 2. Fact 2. Once you have Olsen P levels that are more than a third of the P retention (ASC), application of additional soluble P is very prone to loss to the Once you have Olsen P levels that are more than a third of the P retention (ASC), application of additional soluble P is very prone to loss to the environment. environment. Fact 3. Fact 3. If you want to build up your soil P in an environmentally-protective way, simply apply R If you want to build up your soil P in an environmentally-protective way, simply apply R in a sustained fashion for plants. in a sustained fashion for plants. Fact 4. There is nothing to lose and everything to gain. RPR-based fertilisers are even cheaper than super-based products as well! Added sulphur bentonite (sulphur 90) is far more e cient than the excess sulphate in super. (sulphur 90) is far more e cient than the excess sulphate in super. Fact 5. Fact 5. Following 1-4 above will greatly reduce P run-o and leaching. This should be done before anything else, and the situation reassessed before spending Following 1-4 above will greatly reduce P run-o and leaching. This should be done before anything else, and the situation reassessed before spending huge amounts of money! huge amounts of money! Fact 6. Fact 6. It is nonsensical to give in to pressure to install expensive mitigations riparian strips, excessively large wetlands and ‘phosphorus walls’ when you have no It is nonsensical to give in to pressure to install expensive mitigations riparian strips, excessively large wetlands and ‘phosphorus walls’ when you have no idea of their long-term e ectiveness and maintenance costs, and before you have established whether changing to sustained-release RPR is all you need to do! idea of their long-term e ectiveness and maintenance costs, and before you have established whether changing to sustained-release RPR is all you need to do! Fact 7. Fact 7. in any case simple fenced-o 3-metre wide grass riparian strips are essentially as e ective and vastly cheaper than more complex strips. Both reduce in any case simple fenced-o 3-metre wide grass riparian strips are essentially as e ective and vastly cheaper than more complex strips. Both reduce bacterial and sediment losses. Neither will have any signi cant long-term bene cial e ect (on a whole -farm basis) on soluble P and nitrate-N loss. But grass bacterial and sediment losses. Neither will have any signi cant long-term bene cial e ect (on a whole -farm basis) on soluble P and nitrate-N loss. But grass strips can be harvested in summer to be fed out, to improve P and N cycling. strips can be harvested in summer to be fed out, to improve P and N cycling. Fact 8. In a nutshell, for maintenance of P levels any genuine RPR (not an RPR/Boucraa mix please!) can be used. Just check the Cd content. For low fertility situations or low rainfall, use a blend of RPR and high-analysis soluble P. situations or low rainfall, use a blend of RPR and high-analysis soluble P. Fact 9. Fact 9. For N, rather than granular urea, use prilled urea, sprayed immediately prior to, or during, the spreading with urease inhibitor. Use of N can be literally For N, rather than granular urea, use prilled urea, sprayed immediately prior to, or during, the spreading with urease inhibitor. Use of N can be literally cut in half with big savings. cut in half with big savings. Fact 10. Potash is more e cient, and must less likely to cause metabolic problems, if applied in small doses 4 times a year, adding up to 50-60% of the total Fact 10. Potash is more e cient, and must less likely to cause metabolic problems, if applied in small doses 4 times a year, adding up to 50-60% of the total annual amount you are using now. Easy to mix with your prilled urea. Leaching of anions like nitrate will be minimised as well. annual amount you are using now. Easy to mix with your prilled urea. Leaching of anions like nitrate will be minimised as well.
