Issue 06 Fall 2018
A Spotlight on Products, Promos, Insights and More
Maximizing yield vs. optimizing yield Getting Yourself the Biggest Piece of the Pie We have all heard about the exciting contests that give top honors along with bragging rights to the producer who can maximize crop yield -- or in other words, produce the most bushels per acre of a crop. A goal of maximizing crop yields assumes there is a greater potential in total returns for the produce r… but that may not be the reality of the situatio n. Maximizing yield means there is a bigger pie, but it does not account for additio na l crop input costs require d to produce that increased yield. Adding inputs to increase a cosmetic crop response may add biomass, but the costs do not guarantee that it is going to provid e an increa se d dollar return to the produce r.
Some practices like reducing tractor speed when seeding canola may have a minimal cost but provide significant improvement to crop establishm ent and higher yields. Applying best management practice s is not without costs but it optimizes crop yield to provid e a larger share of the leftovers; or more dollars in the je ans of produce rs. Currently, there are no official contests for optimizing yields in Western Canada; however, at the end of the day, there is a more valuable prize for optimizing crop yields which no contest can rival. That prize is the increased profit for the producer and the sustainability in the business of farming, long term.
Crop inputs are investm e nts that are expecte d to provide an increm e ntal return above the actual cost of the product. This investment may cost 'x' amount but can provide yield increases of 2x or 3x. Producers spend the money to gain incrementa l yield productio n, but a contest based on maximizing yield can lead the use of crop inputs which gives a declining return on a producer’s investme nt. It can also lead to incurring a cost of a crop input in hopes of winning the yield competitio n, but does not provide a return on the investment and becomes a true cost. Maximizing yield contests might provide honor and recognition amongst peers, but
When it comes to protect i ng your Nitroge n against
leachi n g, dentrifi c ati o n and volatil i z ati o n.... it’s your battle to win.
it m ay not be sustainable for the long term. So how can produce rs get a bigger share of the leftover pie or “profits?” The applicatio n of best managed practice s to optimize yield makes more sense as a real goal for crop produce rs. Best managed practices may incur added costs, but often double or triple a producer’s return on the initial investment. Take the use of a pre-burn application prior to seeding example. Early weed control reduces competition during the critical weed-free period of the crop -- increa sing overall crop yield -- and it may save on a second in-crop herbicide. This can be a double return on an investme nt (ROI).
By applyi n g NEO N Su r fa ce to urea for fall broadc ast i ng or bandi ng you are protecti ng your investm e nt from volatiliz at i on, denitrifi c ati on & leachi ng with Penxc el technology and thebalanced formulation of 17% NBPT & 25% DCD.
For more in format ion
call u s
1.800.234.5678 or g o on lin e
nexusag.com