regional strategic ltd....regional strategic, ltd. [email protected] • phone:...

Regional Strategic, LTD.

[email protected] • Phone: 515.802.0938 • P.O. Box 36534 • Des Moines, Iowa 50320

Regional Strategic, LTD.

[email protected] • Phone: 515.802.0938 • P.O. Box 36534 • Des Moines, Iowa 50320

EstimationofFinancialImplicationsResultingfromtheImplementationofFarmConservationPractices

PreparedfortheIowaSoybeanAssociation

By

MarkImerman,SeniorConsultantEricImerman,SeniorConsultant

RegionalStrategic,Ltd.DesMoines,Iowa

October4,2019

ForwardThisinvestigationwasdevelopedtogenerateinterview-basedestimatesofenterprise-levelfinancialimplicationsresultingfromtheimplementationoffarmconservationpracticesinIowa.TheimpetusforthisanalysisisaninterestindevelopingrobustinformationfromIowafarmenterprisestoprovideamorefocusedandlocalizedrepresentationofthefarmcasestudiesincludedin2018’s“FarmFinanceandConservation”publicationpresentedbytheEnvironmentalDefenseFundandK-COEISOM.Thegoalistobetterunderstandwhatinfluencesfarmers’participationintheimplementationandmaintenanceofconservationpractices.Attheoutset,itwashopedthatinformationgeneratedherewouldshowthattherearefarmfinanceandprofitincentivesforengaginginconservationpractices.TheworkhasbeenundertakenbyRegionalStrategic,LtdwithfundingfromtheIowaSoybeanAssociationandtheWaltonFamilyFoundation.

KEYFINDINGSPrimaryproducersonparticipantoperationstendtobeolderthanIowaprimaryproducersoverallasreportedbythe2017U.S.CensusofAgriculture.ParticipantfarmsaregenerallylargerthanIowafarmsreportedinthe2017CensusofAgriculture.Onlyoneparticipantoperation,at294acres,wassmallerthantheIowaaveragefarmsizeof355acres.Thelargeststudyoperationwas5,200acres.Two,at2,000acreseach,wereofminimumsizetogetintothelargestsizecategory.Thefinallarge-categoryfarmwas2,200acres.Totalacreage(row-cropandotherwise)inthestudygroupwas29,056.Thisislessthanone-tenthofonepercentofIowafarmland.Amongthetwentyparticipants:

Eighteenproduced6,889acresofsoybeansaftercornwithcovercropFourteenproduced6,002acresofsoybeansaftercornwithoutcovercropFourteenproduced6,222acresofcornaftersoybeanswithcovercropFifteenproduced5,420acresofcornaftersoybeanswithoutcovercropThreeproduced1,447acresofcornaftercornwithcovercropSixproduced1,225acresofcornaftercornwithoutcovercrop

Covercropacreageandnon-coveredacreagewerecomparedinthreeways

1. Averagesacrossallparticipants(seventeen)thatsuppliedsufficientinformationforcomparison2. Averagesforparticipantsthatproducedbothcoveredandnon-coveredacreagewithinaparticular

rotationandcoulddistinguishyields3. Averagesforparticipantsthateithercoveredallacreagewithinarotationorcoverednoacreage

withinarotationAcrossthreerotations

A. SoybeansfollowingcornB. CornfollowingsoybeansC. Cornfollowingcorn

Covercropproductionwasdisadvantageousforallthreecomparisonsinthecornfollowingcornrotationduetoyieldshortfallsrelativetoacreagewherenocovercropwasproduced.Soybeanyieldsaftercovercropproductionweresuperiortoyieldswherenocovercropwasproducedinallthreecomparisons,butincomparison1theyieldpremiumwasinsufficienttooffsethighercostsofcovercropproduction.Incomparisons2and3soybeansfollowingcornandacovercropshowedadvantagesoversoybeansonacreagewherenocovercrophadbeengrown.Cornfollowingsoybeanandacovercropoutperformedacreagewherenocovercropwasproducedincomparisons1and3.

ForrotationsAandB,cropsfollowingcoversshowedadvantageouslyintwooutofthreecomparisonsforeachrotation.Totalpesticideexpenditures(herbicide,insecticide,andfungicide)wereconsistentlylowerforacreagefollowingacovercroprelativetoacreagewherenocovercrophadbeengrown.Thisrelationshipdidnottransferconsistentlytopesticideapplication(sprayer)costs.Innearlyallcomparisonswherecovercropacreagewasadvantageousrelativetoacreagewherenocoverhadbeengrown,totalfertilizerexpenditureswereloweronthecoveredacreage.Themajorityofotherwiseeligibleparticipantsforcomparison2couldnotbeutilizedbecausetheydidnotprovidedifferentiableyieldsforcoveredandnon-coveredacreage.Fiveparticipantsharvestedcovercropsfrom560acresin2018.Theseharvestsgeneratedanetrevenueof$78,160afterharvestcostswerepaid.Asixthparticipantownsacovercropseedsalesandservicebusinessthatcontractsfor1700acresofryeandoatseedsfromcovercrops.Nearlyalloftheseparticipantsindicatedaninterestinexpandingtheircovercropharvestoperations.Participantsdisplayedawiderangeofrecordkeepingsystems.Theserangedfromnearlyone-thirddemonstratingnovisibledocumentationtoone-thirdutilizingcomputer-basedaccountingandagronomicinformation.Theremainderwerescatteredbetween.Betterrecordsappeartobecorrelatedwithmoreintenseparticipationinconservationpractices,butgoodrecordsdonotappeartobeafunctionofoperationscale.Participantsindicatethatmovingtono-tillandstrip-tillgeneratedsavingsof$10-88peracrerelativetoconventionaltillage.Theseestimatestendtobehigherforparticipantsthatarebetterabletoaccountforthemthroughqualityrecordkeepingsystems.Estimatedpotentialfuelandequipmentsavingsrangeupto$265millionannuallyonastatewidebasisforIowa.Participantaveragenitrogenapplicationsaresignificantlyhigherthanthemaximumreturntonitrogen(MRTN)ratespromotedbytheIowanutrientreductionstrategy.Onaverage,reducingparticipantapplicationratestoMRTNwouldresultinincreasedreturnsofapproximately$6peracreaccordingtotheonlineMRTNcalculatoratIowaStateUniversity.Fiveparticipantsareregularlyapplyingnitrogentoacreagegoingintobeans.Nearlyhalfofmanureusersindicatetheyaregiftedmanure,barterformanure,orreceivemanureasaby-productfromleasinglivestockproductionfacilities.Severalothersnotethatthepricetheypayformanureissubstantiallylessthanwhattheywouldpayforitspotassiumandphosphoruscontent.Itappearsthatalotofmanureisbeingpurchasedandappliedasfreenitrogen.Whileparticipantsstrivetotreatrentedlandasownedlandfromaconservationperspective,theyacknowledgethatthereisareducedwillingnesstoinvestonthepartoflandlords.Additionally,astenantshowtheymanagelanddependsuponhowmuchispaidinrent.

Whileitisdifficulttonaildownthemechanism,itisclearthatstrongfarmtransitionplansareconducivetomaintainingconservationpracticesasafarmoperationchangeshands.

TableofContentsINTRODUCTION 1PARTICIPANTSUMMARY 3THREECOMPILATONSOFAVERAGECROPROTATIONYIELDSANDCOSTS 7AveragesAcrossAllParticipants 8SelectiveCropRotationComparisonsOTHERISSUES 10ConcludingThoughtsonThreeComparisons 16HARVESTINGCOVERCROPS 17OTHERISSUES 18CoverCropIssuesandRecordKeeping 18ReducedTillage 19Diversification 20CombiningandStackingConservationPractices 21SUMMARY 22CASESTUDY1–RECORDMANAGEMENT 24CASESTUDY2–RISKMANAGEMENT 31CASESTUDY3–COVERCROPSANDMONETIZATION 37CASESTUDY4–REDUCEDTILLAGE 43CASESTUDY5–NITROGENMANAGEMENT 47CASESTUDY6–OWNERSHIPIMPACTS 51CASESTUDY7–FARMTRANSITIONS 53CASESTUDY8–WAYNEFREDERICKS 56

1

IntroductionFarmconservationisimportanttothelong-termeconomicviabilityofallfarmoperatorsandfarmlandowners,allconsumersoffoodandfarmproducts,andalldownstreamconsumersofwaterresources.Theimplicationsoffarmconservationpracticesonproduction,soilhealth,foodsupply,andwaterqualityreceivesubstantialattention.Thefield-levelcostsofimprovingconservationpracticesatthefarmlevelarealsowellsubstantiated.Theenterprise-levelandstatewidesavingsthatcanresultfromsignificantimplementationofconservationpracticesacrossanoperationreceivelessattention.ThisreportistheresultofaninvestigationintothelevelsandsignificanceofsuchsavingsthroughdirectinterviewsanddatacollectionwithselectIowaconservationadopters.ThefoundationofthisinvestigationisaseriesofinterviewswithtwentyIowafarmoperatorsknowntohaveadoptedconservationpractices.Thepopulationofparticipantswasidentified–andtheirparticipationwasarrangedby–theIowaSoybeanAssociation’sEnvironmentalProgramsandServicesteam.InitialinterviewswereconductedfromlateFebruarythroughearlyAprilof2019.Eachparticipantreceivedaninterviewquestionnaireandcropbudgetworksheetspriortocommittingtotheprocess.Eachparticipantwhocommittedtothestudyagreedtoandscheduledaninitialinterviewcovering

• Generalfarminformation• Specificcroppingandconservationpractices,costs,andoutputsforthemostrecentavailableyear

orrotation• Farmlifecycleandsuccessioninformation

Interviewsandcropbudgetsfocusedonthe2018croppingyeardefinedastheperiodfollowing2017cropharvestthrough2018cropharvest.Wherecovercropswereplanted,thecoverwasplantedinfall2017andterminatedin2018beforeorshortlyafterthe2018(budgeted)cropwasplanted.Thegoalwastoprovideasnapshotofcropcostsandoutcomesforcornandsoybeansfollowingcovercropsrelativetocropcostsandoutcomesforcornandsoybeansnotfollowingcovercrops.Thesecondyearsofsixtwo-yearcroprotationswereconsidered:

SoybeansaftercornwithcovercropSoybeansaftercornwithoutcovercropCornaftersoybeanswithcovercropCornaftersoybeanswithoutcovercropCornaftercornwithcovercropCornaftercornwithoutcovercrop

Followingsummarizationandreviewofinitialresults,stafffromtheIowaSoybeanAssociationandRegionalStrategic,Ltd.selectednineparticipantsforfollow-upinterviews.Eightoftheseparticipants

2

scheduledfollow-upinterviews.Theseadditionalinterviewssupportaseriesofeightcasestudiesincludedinthisreport.Thisreportprovidessummariesofparticipantcharacteristicsandfindingsfromtheinitialinterviews.Additionally,seventopicalcasestudiesaddressthefollowingtopics:

1. Recordsmanagementandinformationsystems2. Riskmanagement3. Covercropvaluationandmonetization4. Reducedtillage5. Nutrientmanagement6. Ownershipimpacts7. Transitions

AneighthcasestudyfocusesonWayneFredericks’farmoperation,recordmanagement,andconservationprofile.

3

ParticipantSummaryInFebruaryandMarchof2019,theIowaSoybeanAssociationselectedtwentyfarmoperatorstobeinterviewedforthisinvestigation.Selectionwasnotrandom.Operatorsselectedrepresentasubsetofthefarmoperatorpopulationthatmaintainshighvisibilityinconservationdiscussions,events,andorganizationsrelatedtoIowaagriculture.Figure1showsthedistributionofparticipantsbycountyinIowa(removedtoensureparticipantanonymity).Table1andFigure2showtheagedistributionoftheprincipalproducers1involvedinparticipant’soperationscomparedwithadistributionofprincipalproducersfromthe2017CensusofAgricultureforIowa.Studyparticipants’principalproducersaregenerallyolderthanIowafarmers.2Fiveprincipalproducers(all65yearsormoreinage)reportedjointdecision-making.Twoofthesereportedapartnerofthesamegeneration(awifeandabrother).Onereportedawifeandchildren.One,sonsofthenextgeneration(45-54)andayoungernephew(25).Onereportedason(35).Inthe3caseswherechildrenwerenoted,itwasasonoftheprincipalproducerwhoparticipatedintheinterview.TABLE1:AgeofPrincipalProducers

Age of Principal Producer

2017 Census of Agriculture

Study Participants

Number Percent Number Percent

Under 25 years 859 0.74 0 0.00 25-34 years 8,093 7.00 0 0.00 35-44 years 12,708 10.99 2 10.00 45-54 years 19,040 16.47 4 20.00 55-64 years 34,387 29.74 3 15.00 65-74 years 25,433 22.00 10 50.00 75 years and over 15,110 13.07 1 5.00

1“Principalproducer”referstotheactiveoperatorcontrollingthelargestshareofland,equipment,andproductionontheparticipantfarmoperation.2Thistablecomparesprincipalproducersinparticipantoperationsinordertogetadirectcomparisonto2017CensusofAgriculturedata.Atleastoneparticipantinterviewwaswithanoperatorunder35,buthewasinpartnershipwithhisfather.

4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Under25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75&over

Figure2:PrecentofPrincipalProducersbyAgeforParticipantsandIowa2017CensusofAg

2017Census Participant

5

Giventheagedistributionofparticipants’principalproducers,itisnotsurprisingthatfarmoperationtransitionisaconcernforseveralstudyparticipants:

• Sevenreportnotransitionplan(37%ofparticipantacreage)• Threereportthatthecurrenttransitionistothecurrentprincipalproducer–meaningthefarmis

transitioningfromnon-operatingowners(retiredoperatorsand/orestates)tothecurrentprincipalproducer(7.9%ofparticipantacreage)

• Ninereportaplantomovefromthecurrentprincipalproducertomembersofayoungergeneration(48.5%ofparticipantacreage)

• Onereportsthefarmisacorporationownedbythefamily(6.6%ofparticipantacreage)TABLE2:StudyParticipantFarmSize

Farms by Size (acres)

2017 Census of Agriculture

Study Participants

Number Percent Number Percent

1-9 acres 9,120 10.59 0 0.00 10-49 acres 18,183 21.12 0 0.00 50-179 acres 20,831 24.19 0 0.00 180-499 acres 19,172 22.27 1 5.00 500-999 acres 10,381 12.06 9 45.00 1,000-1,999 acres 6,525 7.58 6 30.00 2,000 acres or more 1,892 2.20 4 20.00 Table2showsthedistributionofstudyparticipantsbyfarmsizeinacrescomparedtoallfarmsinthe2017CensusofAgricultureforIowa.Likethedistributionofprincipalproducerage,studyoperationsizedistributionisskewedtowardslargerfarmsrelativetoIowaallfarms.Figure3providesavisualinterpretationofthisdistribution.Onlyoneparticipant,at294acres,wassmallerthantheIowaaveragefarmsizeof355acres.Thelargeststudyoperationwas5,200acres.Two,at2,000acreseach,wereofminimumsizetogetintothelargestsizecategory.Thefinallarge-categoryfarmwas2,200acres.Totalacreageinthestudygroupwas29,056.Thisislessthanone-tenthofonepercentofIowafarmland.

6

05101520253035404550

1-910-49

50-179

180-499

500-999

1,000-1,999

2,000ormore

Figure3:PercentofFarmsbyNumberofAcresforParticipantsandIowa2017CensusofAg

2017AgCensus Participants

7

ThreeCompilationsofAverageCropRotationYieldsandCostsTables3,6,and7presentthreecompilationsofproductioncostandyieldinformationacrosstheparticipantpopulation.Thethreetableswereallconstructedbycalculatingaverageyieldsandproductioncostsperacreacrossthreesubsetsofthetwentystudyparticipants.

• Table3providesaveragesacrossseventeeninterviewparticipantswhoprovidedbothproductionpracticeactivitiesandout-of-pocketinputexpenditureinformation

• Table6providesaveragesonlyforparticipantswhoplantedintobothcoveredgroundandnon-coveredgroundforanygivenrotation

• Table7providesaveragesforparticipantswhoeithercoveredalltheirrow-cropacreageorcoverednoneoftheiracreageinanygivenrotation

Eachofthetableswasproducedbyaveragingparticipantreportedcostsoverreportedacres.Participantswereaskedtoprovideadescriptivenarrativeoftheiroperationsandtoprovidecroppingbudgetsbycrop,rotation,andthecultivationofacovercrop.Wherevernecessary,gapsinoperatorknowledgeaboutspecificfield-levelcostswereaugmentedwithbenchmarkdatafromIowaStateUniversity’s2018IowaFarmCustomRateSurvey.3EveryparticipantreliedatleastpartiallyonIowaStateUniversitysurveyestimatesforpracticecosts.Amongthetwentyparticipants:

Eighteenproduced6,889acresofsoybeansaftercornwithcovercropFourteenproduced6,002acresofsoybeansaftercornwithoutcovercropFourteenproduced6,222acresofcornaftersoybeanswithcovercropFifteenproduced5,420acresofcornaftersoybeanswithoutcovercropThreeproduced1,447acresofcornaftercornwithcovercropSixproduced1,225acresofcornaftercornwithoutcovercrop

Forthepurposesofthisinvestigation,themostimportantdataprovidedwaspre-harvestpractices4(howmanyactivitieshappenedinthefield)andcovercropestablishmentandharvestyieldinformation.Pre-harvestcostsincludethecostsofestablishingandterminatingcovercrops,savingsfromreducedtillage,savingsonfertilizer,herbicides,andpesticidesthatcanbeattributabletocroppingpractices,andincreasesordecreasesinyield(revenue)thatmaybeattributabletocroppingpractices.

3Availableathttps://www.extension.iastate.edu/hancock/sites/www.extension.iastate.edu/files/hancock/2018_CustomRateSurvey.pdf4The2018cropyearwasdefinedastheperiodfrom2017harvestthrough2018harvest.Falltillage,fertilization,andotheractivitiesthatoccurredfollowing2017harvestareconsideredpre-harvestpracticesforthe2018cropyear.Falltillage,fertilization,andotherpracticesthatoccurredfollowingthe2018harvestareconsideredaspre-harvestactivitiesforthe2019cropyear.

8

Otherthanminimalcostdifferentialsduetoyield,primary-cropharvestcostdatadoesnotdirectlyreflectthecostsorsavingsfromconservationpractices.Salescostinformationreflectsmarketingchoicesratherthanproductionpractices.Interestandinsurancereflectfinancechoicesandriskallocation.Thesedifferencesaremuchlesslikelytobeattributabletocroppingpractices.AveragesAcrossAllParticipantsTable3showsrotationaveragesforpre-harvestoperatingandcovercropproductioncostsacrosstheacreageofallparticipantsthatprovidedbothoperationalpracticeandout-of-pocketexpenseinformation.Thetableprovidesinformationonaper-acrebasis.Inmostcases,itisassumedthataparticularapplicationortreatmentwascarriedoutinasinglepassacrossthefield.Inthecasesofspraying(bothgroundandaerial),thenumberofpasses(sprayevents)wasincludedasaseparatelineinadditiontoaverageoverallpracticecostperacre.Thisreflectstherealitythatsprayingregularlyhappensmultipletimesperseason.Italsoreflectsaninterestinwhethercovercroppracticesconsistentlyaffectsprayingactivity.ItisimportanttonotethatthedatainTable3cannotbeinterpretedashead-to-headcomparisons.Therearedifferentpracticesandmanagementinformationsystemsacrosstheseventeenparticipantsinthecomparison.Itispossiblethatparticipantsgrowingcovercropsarebettermanagersthanthosethatdonotorviceversa.Thereisnowaywithinthedatatodeterminetheallocationofhigh-qualitylandtoonepracticerelativetoanother.DifferencesinTable3maybeduetogeneralparticipantpracticesorlandselectionratherthantheimplementationofacovercrop.Thereare,however,someinterestingobservationstobemadewithrespecttoTable3.Yieldsandyieldexpectations(lines2and3)weresimilarforcoverandnon-covercropsinbeansfollowingcornandcornfollowingbeans.Averageyieldsinbothsituationsfavoredcropsfollowingcovercrops(0.5bushelperacrepremiumonbeansfollowingcornandacoverand2.2bushelsperacrepremiumoncornfollowingbeansandacover).Theyieldpremiumonsoybeansfollowingacovercropwouldnotbesufficienttooffsethighercostsevenaftertakingreportedcovercropsubsidiesintoaccount(line26).The2.2-bushelyieldpremiumoncornfollowingbeanswithacovercropwouldbesufficienttooffsetincreasedcostsatcornmarketpricesof$3.37perbushelwithaveragereportedcovercropsubsidiesof$7.85peracre(line26).Forcornfollowingcorn,however,averageparticipants’yieldgoalwas6.7bushelperacrelowerwhenacovercropwasplanted.Actualreportedyieldsshowedanaverage44.9bushelperacreshortfallwhereacovercropwasestablishedbetweencorn-on-corncropsrelativetotheuncoveredrotation.Whilethecoveredrotationshoweda$36.56input-costadvantageafteraccountingfortheaveragecovercropsubsidyof$15.81,thiswouldnotoffsettheyieldshortfallatanysustainablemarketprice.Thesefindingsareforasinglecropyearandaselectgroupofparticipants.Theydonotcarrytheweightthatresultsofmultiple-yearrandomizedstriptrialsoveralargerpopulationwouldcarry.Nevertheless,

9

theyareimportantbecauseriskstoregularsummercropsareasignificantfactorindecisionstoestablishacovercrop.Table3:Productionpracticeandcostforallparticipantsprovidingbudgetinformation

BeansAfterCorn CornafterBeans CornafterCorn

Row and

CoverandNoCover

andCover

andNoCover

andCover

andNoCover

1 Acres 5638.6 5577.0 5642.2 4370.0 1222.0 525.02 Yieldgoal(bu./acre) 61.0 62.5 212.6 211.8 200.3 207.03 Actualyield(bu./acre) 59.1 58.6 209.0 206.8 166.9 211.84 Actualyieldaspercentofgoal 96.9 93.7 98.3 97.6 83.3 102.3

5 Chiselplowpasscost($/acre) 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.006 Fieldcultivatepasscost($/acre) 0.00 0.26 1.57 0.50 0.00 6.867 NH3applicationcost($/acre) 0.00 0.00 1.04 0.89 0.00 1.058 Strip-tillpasscost($/acre) 0.67 0.00 6.21 5.10 12.28 1.479 Sidedresspasscost($/acre) 0.00 0.00 5.26 4.01 1.91 3.8910 FertilizerpassCost($/acre) 0.00 0.18 1.00 1.41 0.00 4.0611 Othertillagepasscost($/acre) 0.93 0.62 0.00 0.75 0.00 9.1912 Plantcost($/acre) 18.64 18.14 19.16 18.56 13.24 19.2613 Numberofgroundspraypasses 2.50 2.49 1.77 1.62 2.95 2.0014 Groundspraycosts($/acre) 15.65 16.07 10.55 10.02 14.53 13.7515 Numberofaerialspraypasses 0.25 0.10 0.31 0.35 0.00 0.2516 Aerialspraycosts($/acre) 2.86 1.08 3.00 3.70 0.00 3.2417 Seed($/acre) 62.86 61.38 96.95 98.91 111.16 114.6618 Fertilizer:All($/acre) 40.16 36.13 103.79 109.20 90.34 92.18

19Herbicide,insecticide&fungicide:All($/acre) 41.76 44.85 40.33 45.39 42.18 49.79

20 Reportedcostspriortocovercosts($/acre) 186.28 181.61 290.92 300.42 288.59 334.65

21 CoverCrop:Seed($/acre) 11.19 0.00 11.76 0.00 14.52 0.0022 CoverCrop:Plant($/acre) 10.85 0.00 10.83 0.00 7.93 0.0023 CoverCrop:Termination($/acre) 1.36 0.00 2.15 0.00 2.86 0.00

24 Reportedcostswithcovercosts($/acre) 209.68 181.61 315.67 300.42 313.90 334.6525 Reportedcoversubsidies($/acre) 10.19 7.85 15.81 26 Netreportedcosts($/acre) 198.96 181.61 307.82 300.42 298.09 334.65

Itisalsonotablethataveragereportedproductioncostspriortocovercropestablishmentcostsforbothcornrotationswerenotablyloweroncoveredground(line20).Thebulkofthesesavingswereinaveragecostsforseed,fertilizer,andherbicide,insecticide,andfungicide(lines17-19).Averagepesticide(totalherbicide,insecticide,andfungicide)expenditureswerelowerforcovercropacreagethanforuncoveredacreageinallrotationsinTable3.CostsanddifferencesareshowninTable4.

10

Althoughaveragepesticidematerialcostswereloweroncoveredacreageforallrotationswhenaveragingallparticipants,thisrelationshipisnotconsistentlyseenwhenaveragingsubsetsofparticipantsinTables6and7below.Table4:Totalreportedherbicide,insecticide,andfungicidematerialcost($/acre)comparisonforacreagewithandwithoutcovercrops

Cover Nocover Coversavings

Soybeanfollowingcorn 41.76 44.85 3.09Cornfollowingsoybean 40.33 45.39 5.06Cornfollowingcorn 42.18 49.79 7.60Consistentlylowerpesticidecostswerenotreflectedinapplication(sprayer)costs.Sprayercostswerehigherforcoveredlandinthesoybeansfollowingcornrotationbutlowerforbothcornfollowingsoybeansandcornfollowingcorn.Table5showscombinedpesticidematerialandsprayercostsbyrotationandadvantagesforacreagewithacovercrop.Table5:Totalreportedherbicide,insecticide,andfungicidematerialandsprayercost($/acre)comparisonforacreagewithandwithoutcovercrops

Cover Nocover Coversavings

Soybeanfollowingcorn 60.27 62.00 1.73Cornfollowingsoybean 53.88 59.12 5.23Cornfollowingcorn 56.72 66.78 10.06Covercropsubsidies(row25)weresubstantiallylessthanthecostofproducingcovercrops(rows21-23)onaverage.Participantsinthiscomparisonreportedcovercropsubsidiesrangingfrom$0to$25.38peracre.Threeparticipantsdidnotengageincovercroppingforthe2018cropyear.Tenreportedaveragecovercropsubsidiesoflessthan$10peracre,andthreeofthesereportednosubsidiesatall.

11

SelectiveCropRotationComparisonsAsnotedabove,thecomparisonofoverallparticipantaveragesdoesnotaccountfordifferencesthatmayexistinoperationmanagement,landallocation,orotherfactors.Covercropproducersself-select.Individualsthatfeelcomfortablewiththerisksandreturnsavailableinthepresenceofcovercropswillchosetoproducethem.Individualsthatareuncomfortablewithrespecttotheassociatedrisksandreturnswillchosenotto.Individualcomfortlevelsandselectiondecisionsmayreflectpastsuccess,managementexpertiseand/orconfidence,qualityoflandavailable,etc.Allthesefactorsaffectthechoicetoproducecovers,andthoseselectivechoicesalmostcertainlyaffecttheaverageyieldandproductioncostinformationpresentedinTable3.Toexpandonoverallaverages,twoadditionalcomparisonsareprovidedhere.Attemptingtogetbeyondoperatorqualifications,Table6providesacomparisonbetweencoveredandnon-coveredrotationsamongparticipantsthathadbothcoveredandnon-coveredcropswithinanyspecificrotation.Table7comparescoveredandnon-coveredrotationsbetweenparticipantsthateithercoveredalltheirrow-cropacreageorcoverednoneoftheirrow-cropacreagewithinaparticularcroprotationTheseventeenparticipantswhoseaveragesarecomparedinTable3included:

• Threeparticipantsplantingcovercropsonalltheirrow-cropacreage• Threeparticipantsnotplantingcovercropsatall• Tenparticipantswithsoybeansfollowingcornbothwithandwithoutcovercrops• Eightparticipantswithcornfollowingsoybeansbothwithandwithoutcovercrops• Oneparticipantwithcornfollowingcornbothwithandwithoutcovercrops

Atotalofelevenparticipantsprovidesituationswherewecandirectlycompareagivencropinagivenrotationbothfollowingandnotfollowingacovercrop.Ofthese,onlyfourparticipantswithsixrotationshadrecordsthatallowedparticipantstodistinguishyieldsbetweentheircovercroplandandtheirnon-covercropland:

• Twoparticipantswithbeansfollowingcorn• Threeparticipantswithcornfollowingbeans• Oneparticipantwithcornfollowingcorn

Table6replicatesTable3withdatafromonlythesefourparticipants.Table6eliminatessomeoftheself-selectioneffectsthatundoubtedlyaffecttheaveragesinTable3.EachparticipantintheaveragespresentedinTable6producebothcoveredandnon-coveredcropsforeachrotationinwhichtheyareincluded.Thisshouldsubstantiallyreducetheeffectsofmanagementabilitybetweenaveragesforcropsthatfollowacovercropandcropsthatdonot.

12

Table6:Productionpracticeandcostforparticipantsraisingbothcoveredandnon-coveredcropsinanygivenrotation BeansAfterCorn CornafterBeans CornafterCorn

Row and

CoverandNoCover

andCover

andNoCover

andCover

andNoCover







CovercropsubsidiesinTable6(row25)aresubstantiallyhigherforsoybeansfollowingcornandforcornfollowingsoybeansthantheyareinTable3.OneofthefourparticipantsinTable6reportedreceivinganaverageof$25/acrecovercropsubsidyonbothhisbeans-on-cornrotationandhiscorn-on-beansrotation.Oneparticipantincludedinthecorn-on-beanrotationreportedanaverageof$25.38/acreincovercropsubsidies.Thatleftoneparticipantineachcategorythatwasnotreceivingcovercropsubsidies.

13

Inthebeansfollowingcornrotations,thetwoparticipantsaveragedinTable6showthatoncovercropacreagethey:

• Benefitedfromanextrayieldof1.1bushelsofsoybeansperacre(row3)• Spent$26.42peracrelessinproductioncostspriortocovercropcosts(row20)• Spent$2.25peracremoreonproductioncostsincludingcovercropcosts(row24)• Receivedanaverageof$15.09percovercropacreincovercropsubsidies(row25)

TheoverallresultisthatsoybeansfollowingcornandacovercropforTable6participantswithbothcoveredandnon-coveredacreagenetted$12.85incovercropsubsidiesovercosts(row26)and1.1bushelperacreinincreaseyield(row3)oversoybeansfollowingcornwherenocovercropwasplanted.Atmarketpricesover$2.05perbushel,theyieldpremiumwouldbesufficienttopaycovercropestablishmentcostsandreportedsubsidieswouldbefreecashflow.Costsavingsforsoybeansafteracovercropinthisrotationmanifestedthemselvesprimarilyinreducedexpensesfor

• Tillage(rows5-11)• Totalfertilizer(row18)• Totalherbicide,insecticide,andfungicide(row19)

Itispossiblethatsavingsfromreducedtillage(whichreduceserosionandphosphorusloss)isanimportantcomponentinoffsettingcostsforcovercropestablishment(whichfurtherreduceserosionandsequestersnitrogen).Insomecombination,thetwopracticesareassociatedherewithreducedfertilizerandchemicalpestcontrol(herbicide,insecticide,andfungicide)useinthebeanfollowingcornrotation.ReducedfertilizerutilizationisalsoseenoncoveredacreageforcornfollowingcorninTable6.Thisinvestigationdoesnothaveenoughinformationtomakeclaimsofcausation,butmoredetailedmulti-yearfield-levelpracticestudiesmightbeofinterestinthisregard.The4participantsengagedincorn-following-beansandcorn-following-cornrotationsinTable6hadadifferentaverageexperience.Bothrotationsshowedanaverageyieldshortfalloncoveredground(row3).Averagereportedcostspriortocovercropcostswerehigherforcropsfollowingcoversforcornfollowingbeansbutlowerforcornfollowingcorn(row20).Addingacovercropresultedincostsforcornaftercoverbeinghigherbothafterbeansandaftercorn.Averagecovercropsubsidieswereinsufficienttooffsetthoseincreasedcosts.Yieldshortfallsinbothcasesrelativetoyieldsintheno-coveredcornrotationsmeanthathigherproductioncostscouldnotbemadeupforthisgroupofparticipantsin2018.ThecomparisonsinTable6providecover-to-no-covercomparisonsforfarmparticipantsengagedinbothpractices.Thisoptionfordirectcomparisonsatleastpartiallyaccountsfordifferencesinoperatorefficiencyandmanagementability,aseachoperatorineachrotationwasengagedinbothcoveredandnon-coveredrowcrops.Thereisthepossibility,however,thatsomepracticesarecommontobothcoveroptionsonanyoftheseoperationssimplybecauseitiseasiermanageriallyoroperationallyratherthanoptimalfortheexistenceofacovercrop.Thiswouldmuteanydistinctionsthatcanbedrawn.

14

Onewaytogetaroundthisistocompareoperationsthatcoverallacreageinagivenrotationwithoperationsthatdonotcoveranyacreageinagivenrotation.Ineachofthesecases,onewouldexpecttheparticipanttoengageinonlypracticesthatareoptimalforeitheroptionratherthanblendingpracticestosimplifyoperationsormanagement.Ourparticipantsincludedtwelveoperatorswhometoneofthesecriteriaforatleastonerotation.Table7providesacomparisonofaveragecostsandyieldsforparticipantsthatcoverallrow-cropacreagewithinagivenrotationorcoverednoneoftheirrow-cropacreagewithinagivenrotation.Table7:Productionpracticeandcostforparticipantsraisingonlycoveredornon-coveredcropsinanygivenrotation BeansAfterCorn CornafterBeans CornafterCorn

Row and

CoverandNoCover

andCover

andNoCover

andCover

andNoCover







15

ThecomparisoninTable7showsthatcostsbeforecovercropexpendituresforcoveredacreswerelowerforbothcornrotations,andnearlyequalforthebeanrotationrelativetouncoveredacreage.Fertilizerexpensewaslowerforthecoveredportionofbothcornrotations.Herbicide,insecticide,andfungicideexpensewaslowerforthecoveredportionsofallthreerotations.ThisechoesresultsseeninTable6,and,again,mightwarrantmoredetailedmulti-yearfield-levelpracticeanalysis.Table7showsthatthecoveredportionofacreagegenerateda

• 7.0bushelperacreyieldpremiumoveruncoveredacreageforsoybeansfollowingcorn• 5.1bushelperacreyieldpremiumoveruncoveredacreageforcornfollowingsoybeans• 28.3bushelperacreyieldshortfallrelativetouncoveredcornaftercornacreage

Forthesoybeanfollowingcornrotation,participantsthatcoverarebetteroffthantheirnon-coveringcounterparts(afterreportedcovercropsubsidies)atsoybeanpricesabove$1.33perbushel.Atpricesover$2.27participantsproducingacovercropwouldbebetteroffevenwithoutcovercropsubsidies.Table7showsasimilarstoryforthecornfollowingsoybeanrotation.Afteraveragereportedcovercropsubsidiesof$6.38peracre,productioncostsforcoveredacreageare$3.98lowerthancostsfornon-coveredacreage.Evenintheabsenceofanycovercropsubsidies,atanycornmarketpriceabove$0.48perbushel,covercropproducerswouldbebetteroffthannon-coveredproducersinthecornaftersoybeanrotation.ThesituationforcornfollowingcornparticipantsproducingacovercropintheTable7comparisonisnotsoadvantageous.Coveredacreageexperiencedayieldshortfallof28.3bushelsperacrerelativetoacreagewhereacovercropwasnotproduced.Whilecostsafteraccountingforcovercropsubsidieswere$80.35peracrelowerforcoveredacres,participantsproducingcornaftercornwithoutacovercropwouldbebetteroffthancovercropproducersatanymarketpriceabove$2.84perbushelofcorn.However,inremovingparticipantsthatmightblendpracticestosimplifyoperationsandmanagement(Table6)wehavepotentiallyreintroducedmanagementbiasintoTable7.Participantsthatcompletelycoveragivenrotationarelikelytoberelativelyconfidentcovercroppers.Thisconfidencemaycomefromahistoryofmoreintensemanagement.Participantsthatleaveentirerotationsuncoveredmayfallontheothersideofthescale.InremovingthepotentialforpracticeblendingfromTable6toTable7wereintroducedtheparticipantbiasthatwespecificallytriedtoremovewithTable6.ConcludingThoughtsonThreeComparisonsThethreecomparisonswerepresentedinordertoseeifdifferentbiasesamongtheparticipantsofeachgroupmightleadtosignificantlydifferentconclusiveresults.Therewerenohard-and-fastconclusionstobedrawnacrosscomparisons,butsomegeneralobservationscanbemade.

16

Toacertainextent,comparisonsinTable7echoresultsinTables3and4.

• Innocasedocovercropproducersout-performnon-covercropproducersincornaftercornrotations

• CovercropproducersshowanadvantageincornfollowingbeanrotationsinTable3andTable7• CovercropproducersshowanadvantageinbeanfollowingcornrotationsinTable6andTable7

Innearlyeverycasewherecovercropshavetherotationaladvantage,thatadvantageisaccompaniedbylowerfertilizerandlowertotalherbicide,insecticide,andfungicidecosts(thesingleexceptionisfertilizerappliedtobeansfollowingcorninTable7).Insomecases,lowertillagecostsarealsoafactor.Tillagecostsmightbemoreofafactorifparticipantswerenotsoheavilyengagedinreducedtillagealready.Whilethisinvestigationisnotabletospeculateonthedirectionofcausationorthemechanismoftherelationships,itdoesappearthatthereisarelationshipbetweentillage,fertilizeruse,pesticideuse,andcovercropadvantagesinthesoybeanfollowingcornandthecornfollowingsoybeanrotationalcomparisonsineachofthethreecomparisonsconstructed.Theseresultsappeartoindicatethatmuchmightbelearnedfromamoreintensivestudy.WhilethereismeritinlookingatsmallerandmoreselectiveparticipantgroupsinTables4and5,itishardtoconsistentlyrecognizeageneralpatternofoutcomesacrosstheseandtheaveragesofallparticipants(Table3)giventhesmallsamplegroupandvariationsinrespondentdetail.Developingastudywithalargerrandomizedcontrolpopulationandoneormorespecificallydefinedproductionandmanagementpracticescouldprovidemorerobustinsightsintocostandyielddifferentialsassociatedwithcovercropping.

17

HarvestingCoverCropsFiveparticipantsgeneratesubstantialreturnsongrazing,harvesting,andmarketingtheircovercropsinthesoybeanfollowingcornrotation.Alltold,about560participantacresweremonetizedinthisway.Table8showsaverageharvestrevenueperacreandharvestcostperacreforharvestedcovercropacreage.Table8doesnotincludeestablishmentcostsforthecovercropontheseacres,asitisassumedthecovercropisproducedforconservationpurposesandexistsregardlessofwhetheritisharvested.

Table8:HarvestedCoverCropAcresandRevenue Participantharvestedcovercropacres 560Harvestrevenue($/acre) 165Harvestcost($/acre) 25Netrevenueperharvestedacre($/acre) 140

Totalnetrevenuefor560harvestedacres($) 78,160Onaverage,participantsrealizedapproximately$165peracreinmarketrevenueandaccruedapproximately$25peracreinharvestcosts.Giventheexistenceofacovercropasaconservationpractice,participantswereabletonetanaverageofapproximately$140peracrebyharvestingthatcovercropratherthanterminatingitinthefield.Thisnetreturnisrelativelyhighcomparedtoparticipants’expectationsregardingtheirregularsummercrops,butestablishmentcosts,landcosts,andsomepercentageofpestcontrolcostsarealreadyallocatedtotheproductionofsummercrops.Thesecostswouldbeincurredinanyevent.Subtractingharvestcosts,whichwouldnototherwisebeincurred,yieldsanaveragenetrevenueperharvestedcovercropacreofapproximately$140.Inaddition,oneparticipanthasdevelopedacovercropseedingandconsultingbusiness.Thisbusinesscontractswithotherfarmoperatorstoharvest,clean,andselltheircovercropproductionasseedforotherfarmoperators.Italsoprovidescustomplantingservices.

18

OtherIssuesThesectionsabovefocusedonyieldandreportedproductioncostdifferencesforparticipantscroppinglandthathadeitherbeencoveredorleftbarefollowingthepreviouscrop.Intheprocessofgatheringandanalyzingthisinformationseveralotherissuespresentedthemselvesthatmaybeoffurtherinterestorsubjecttofutureinquiry.Seventopicswereselectedforfollow-upinterviewsandcasestudiesthatwillbepresentedseparately:

1. Recordmanagementandinformationsystems2. Riskmanagement3. Covercropvaluationandmonetization4. Tillagereduction5. Nitrogenmanagement6. Landownershipimpacts7. Farmtransitions

Aneighthcasestudyfocusesonanindividualparticipant.Inaddition,therearesomeissuesthatwerenotfolloweduponforcasestudiesthatwarrantsomediscussion.Thefollowingsectionsprovidesomeinsightontheseandgeneralnotesoncasestudytopicswherewarranted.CoverCropIssuesandRecordKeepingEvaluatingtheeconomicvalueofproducingcovercropsishobbledbyrecordkeeping.LookingatTable3,acomparisonacrossallparticipantsthatprovidedcostinformation,threeparticipantshadtobeomittedforlackofout-of-pocketcosts.Thesethreeparticipantsrepresentednearly17%ofallparticipantrow-cropland.Twoofthemcoveralltheirrow-cropacreage.Onerepresentsthesecondlargestoperationamongparticipants.ThesethreewereomittedfromallthreecomparisonsrepresentedinTables3,6,and7becausetheiroperatingpracticescouldnotbematchedtoinputcosts.LookingtoTable6,twoparticipantswereincludedinthecomparisonofcoveredacreagetonon-coveredacreageinthesoybeanfollowingcornrotation.Eightotherparticipantscouldnotbeusedforthecomparisonbecausetheydidnotdifferentiateyieldsbetweencoveredandbareacreage.Theseeightrepresentedover85%oftheacreageinthisrotationthatcouldhavebeendirectlycompared.Addingoneotherwiseeligibleparticipantthatdidnotprovideinputcostdatapushestheomissionratepast90%.Theinabilitytodifferentiateyieldsbetweencoveredandbaregroundisnottrivial.Itisimportantbecauseoneoftheregularlystatedbenefitsofcovercropproductionisincreasedyieldsthroughmoistureretentionandsoilquality.Theinabilitytodifferentiateyieldsmeansthatthisbenefitcannotbeevaluatedintheinvestigationoronindividualparticipant’sfarmoperations.

19

Similarly,forthecornfollowingsoybeanrotationinTable6,threeparticipantswereavailable.Fiveadditionalparticipantswereomittedbecausetheydidnotdistinguishyieldsbetweencoveredandbareacreage.Thesefiverepresented75%oftheacreageinthecornaftersoybeanrotationthatcouldhavebeendirectlycompared.AnotherimplicationthishasforTable6isthereisanenhancedpossibilitytheinsightsdrawnfromthetablearedrivenbyoutliers.TheissuecascadesbackintoinsightsdrawnfromTable3,asdifferencesinactualyieldswithrespecttocoverstatusareminimized,limitingthereliabilityofanycalculationofpriceswherecovercropproducersarebetterofforworseoff.TheomissionofthreeparticipantswhodidnotprovideinputcostinformationalsoaffectedthepopulationavailableforTable7,astwoofthoseparticipantscoverallrow-cropacreageandtheremainingomissionplantsnocoversinrotationsgoingtocorn.Beyondtheinabilitytodistinguishyieldswithregardtocovercropproduction,ineverycasewherecovercropshadanadvantagewithinagivenrotation,thisadvantagewasaccompaniedbereducedfertilizercostsandreducedtotalherbicide,insecticide,andfungicidecosts.Reducedtillagewasalsoafactorinsomecases(althoughreducedtillageisnearlythenorminallrotationoptionswiththeparticipantpopulation).Veryfewbudgets,however,distinguishedfertilizerandpesticideapplicationpasseswithrespecttocovercropproduction.Applicationcostssavingsmightreasonablybeexpectedtomagnifysavingsinfertilizerandpesticidematerial.Thesesavingsdidnotshowupintheproductionbudgets.TheinsightsavailablefromTables3-5suggestthatadvantagesaccruingtocovercropproductionareunderstatedinthecropproductionbudgetsprovidedforthisinvestigation.Thiswouldhaveimportantimplicationsforcontinuedcovercropadoption.Moreimportant,however,isthepossibilitythattheuncertaintyinthebudgetcompilationsmaskstheoppositeresult.Accurateoperatingrecordsthatdistinguishcovercropproductionwithinrotationsisnecessarytoquantifycovercropadvantages.Itisalsonecessarytoassurethatthoseadvantagesexist.Thelackofrecordssufficientlydetailedtodrawoutthesedistinctionsalmostcertainlyincreasestherisksfacedbyindividualparticipants.

ReducedTillageParticipantsalmostuniformlystatedmovingfromconventionaltillagetostrip-tillandno-tillpracticessavesthemequipment,fuel,andtimewhileimprovingtheirsoilqualityandreducingsoilloss.Oneparticipantdocumentedequipmentcostssavingsof$44peracreandlaborcostsavingsof$27peracre.Anotherindicatedthemovecuttractorhoursbytwo-thirdsandfueluseby80%.Participantsalsodocumentedincreasedsoilorganicmatter,whichleadstoincreasedretentionofnutrientsandwater.Noneofourparticipantsweremovingawayfromthesepractices,andallofthosethathadopportunitiestodeepentheirexposurewereintheprocessofdoingso.

20

Inspiteofallthis,itisdifficulttodirectlycompareconventionalandreducedtillagepracticesinthisinvestigationbecausenearlyallparticipantsaresoheavilycommittedtoreducedtillage.MuchoftheconventionaltillageidentifiedwaspracticedbyaparticipantwhodidnotgivesufficientinformationtobeincludedinthecomparisonsinTables3,6,and7.Tillagemightbeanothervaluabletopicforanin-depthstudywithalargerpopulation.DiversificationOneoftheissuespresentedforthisstudythatwasnotpursuedwastheimpactofconservationonfarmdiversificationandviceversa.Thereareatleasttwodimensionstothis:

1. Diversificationoffarmoperationsandincome2. Diversificationoffarmoperatorincomewithoff-farmincome

Bothareofinterestbutbeyondthescopeofwhatcouldbehandledunderthisproject.Oneoftheimportantissuesinvolvedisthedirectionofcausation.Doestheadoptionofconservationpracticesleadtomorediverseenterprises,oraremorediverseenterprisesmorelikelytoengageinconservationpractices?Whilereducedtillagepracticesdonotappeardependentuponfarmdiversification,itdoesappearthatcovercropmonetizationispartiallydependentuponthepresenceofunconfinedlivestock.Muchofthecovercroputilizationidentifiedinthisinvestigationtooktheformofgrazingorbalinghayorstraw.Expandingtheseusesislimitedbythelocallivestockindustryinanygivenarea.Theotherprimarycovercropmarketiscovercropseed.Thismarketisconstrainedbytherateofgrowthincovercropacreage.Thisrateofgrowthmaybeacceleratedbythedevelopmentofnichemarketsforcovercropproducts,butthatisadevelopmentthatremainstobeseen.Off-farmincomechangestheriskprofileofthefarmoperatorandshouldprovidefreedomtoexperiment.Therewasnodirectinquiryinthefirstroundofinterviewsonoff-farmincome,butsomeparticipantshadregularoff-farmwork.Ininquiriesregardingfarmtransitionsduringfollow-upinterviewsparticipantswereexplicitlyaskedhowtheywouldcoverhouseholdexpensesduringthefarmtransitionperiod.Everyrespondentdiscussedoff-farmincome.Mosthadsufficientoff-farmincomethattheycouldleavefarmearningsentirelytofinancetransitiondebtandexpenditures.Untetheringfarmoperationsearningsfromfamilyincomerequirementsshouldhavesubstantialimplicationsforfarmmanagement.Whiletherelationshipbetweendiversificationandconservationpracticesisanimportanttopic,itisbeyondthescopeoftheinvestigationandinterviewshere.Itdoes,however,provideaninterestingtopicforfuturestudy.

21

CombiningorStackingConservationPracticesToacertainextent,ourparticipantsarecombiningorstackingconservationpractices.Muchofthecovercroppedacreageinthecomparisonsaboveisalsoeitherno-tilledorstrip-tilled.Thisaccountsforaportionofthecostdifferentialsbetweencoveredandnon-coveredlandwherecoveredlandshowsanadvantage.Participantswhoaresuccessfulcovercropproducersareearningthatsuccessatleastpartiallyonreducedtillage.Savingsfromapracticethatprimarilycontrolserosionandphosphoruslossarebeingutilizedtofundapracticethatfurtherreduceserosionandsequestersnitrogen.Betterrecordswouldprovideabetterpictureofhowthisworks.Anothercharacteristicofcomparisonsfavoringcovercropproductionisreducedexpendituresforfertilizerandpesticides.Thesereductionsareadirectconservationpracticethatiseitherpartiallyfundingorismadepossiblebysuccessfulcovercropproduction.Therearealmostcertainlysomestackingbenefitsfromthesepracticesintermsofcostreduction,soilhealth,andenvironmentalsustainability.Theinterviewsinthisstudy,however,arenotsufficientlydetailedanddonothaveadeepenoughofahistoricalseriestoteaseouthowthepracticesaugmentoraredetrimentaltooneanother.Thecoexistenceofthesepracticeshassubstantialrisk-managementandsustainabilityimplicationsthatwouldalsobenefitfromenhancedrecordkeeping.Itwouldbeusefultohavefield-levelpractice,crop,yield,andsoilqualityinformationoveralongertimeseries.Thiswouldallowforstatisticalanalysisintohowrotations,tillage,nutrients,andcoverstatusinteractovertime.Suchatimeserieswillhavetobeaprojectgoingintothefuture,asmostfarmoperatorswillnotbeabletoregenerateaccuratefield-levelpracticesandcostsfromthepast.Manyofthisinvestigation’sparticipantshavethetechnologicalabilitytodevelopandmaintainfieldleveldataseries(utilizingtractorandimplementmounteddatacollectionsystems)andintegratingitwithcomputer-basedaccountingsystems.Developingthiscapacitywouldbeacriticalnextstepinunderstandingthevalueofstackingconservationpracticesaswellasinmonetizingsoilquality.Variableproductioncostsarelargelydrivenbyfield-levelpractices.Returnsonthosecostsaredrivenbyfield-levelresults.Fixedproductioncostsarelargelyafunctionoffield-levelpracticesandproductionscale.Generatingrobustestimatesofcostsavingsand/oryieldpremiumsthataccruetoindividualconservationpracticesorconservationpracticesthatarestackedrequiresrobustfield-leveldata.

22

SummaryThisreportisbaseduponinterviewswithtwentyIowafarmoperatorswhowerechosenbytheIowaSoybeanAssociationonthebasisoftheirperceivedfocusonconservationandlandstewardship.ParticipantfarmsarelargerthanIowafarmsingeneralasreportedbythe2017CensusofAgriculture.PrimaryproducersamongparticipantoperationsaresomewhatolderthanprimaryproducersforIowa,butthisismitigatedbythenumberofparticipantprimaryproducerswhoareactivelyinvolvedintransitioningoperationstoyoungerpartners.Participant-suppliedproductioncostandyieldinformationwasutilizedtogeneratethreecomparisonsofaveragecostsandyieldsforcropsfollowingacovercropandcropsnotfollowingacovercropforthreecroprotations.Thecomparisonsaveragedinformationfrom:

1. Seventeenparticipantswhoprovidedbothproductionpracticebudgetsandout-of-pocketinputexpenses

2. Participantswhoproducedcropsonbothcoveredacreageandnon-coveredacreageinanyrotationandcoulddistinguishyieldsbetweencoveredandnon-coveredproduction

3. Participantswhoeithercoveredallacreageinagivenrotationorcoverednoneoftheirrow-cropacreageinagivenrotation

Conclusionsonthefinancialviabilityofcovercropestablishmentwerenotcompletelyconsistentamongcomparisons,butsometrendswereidentifiable

• Incomparison3(Table7)yieldpremiumsandcovercropsubsidiesoncropsfollowingacovercropweresufficienttomorethanoffsetcovercropestablishmentcostsforsoybeansfollowingcornandforcornfollowingsoybeans

• Thiswasalsotrueforsoybeansfollowingcornincomparison2(Table6)• Bothsoybeansfollowingcornandcornfollowingsoybeansincomparison1(Table3)generated

yieldpremiumsoncropsfollowingacover.Forsoybeansfollowingcorn,however,thispremiumisnotsufficienttocoverthecostofestablishingthecovercrop–evenafterreportedcovercropsubsidiesaretakenintoaccount.Forcornfollowingsoybeans,theyieldpremiumoncropsfollowingacovercropwouldpayestablishmentcostsatcornpricesof$3.37perbushelormore

• Acreageincornfollowingcornandacovercropunderperformeditsuncoveredcounterpartsinallthreecomparisons

• Coveredsoybeanfollowingcornacreageandcoveredcornfollowingsoybeanacreagehadadvantagesoveruncoveredacreageintwooutofthreecomparisonsforeachrotation

• Innearlyallcaseswherecoveredacreageshowedarotationaladvantage,itwasaccompaniedbylowertotalfertilizerandtotalpesticide(herbicide,insecticide,andfungicide)expenditures

23

Byrotation:

• Forsoybeansfollowingcorn,allthreecomparisonsgeneratedanaverageyieldpremiumforcoveredacresrelativetouncoveredacres

o Incomparison1(Table3)thisyieldpremiumwasinsufficienttopaycovercropestablishmentcosts–evenafterreportedcovercropsubsidiesareaccountedfor

o Incomparisons2and3(Tables6and7)thisyieldpremiumissufficienttopayforcovercropestablishmentcostsafteraccountingforreportedcovercropsubsidies.

• Forcornfollowingsoybeans,comparisons1and3(Tables3and7)generatedyieldpremiumsfor

cropsfollowingcovercrops,andthispremiumplusreportedcovercropsubsidieswassufficienttooffsetcovercropestablishmentcosts

• Cornfollowingcornandacovercropgeneratedloweryieldsthancornfollowingcornwithouta

covercropinallcomparisonsItappearsthattheabilityofyieldpremiumsandreportedcovercropsubsidiestooffsetexpensesisatleastpartiallydependentupontheimplementationofotherconservationpractices.Innearlyallcaseswherecovercropproductionwasassociatedwitharotationaladvantage,covercropproductionwasassociatedwithloweraveragetotalcostsforfertilizersandpesticides.Often,covercropadvantageswerealsoassociatedwithreducedtillageexpenses.Fiveparticipantsaregrazingorharvesting560acresofcovercrop.Thisactivityistakingplaceoncoversfollowingcorninacorn-soybeanrotation.Harvestingintothesoybeanplantallowsalittleextratimebeforeplantingthesummercrop.Averagecovercroprevenueforthese560acresis$165peracre.Averagecovercropharvestcostsare$25peracre,givinganetrevenueoverharvestcostsof$140peracre.Grazingandharvestinghayorstrawissomewhatdependentuponlocalpopulationsofunconfinedlivestock.Ontheflipside,covercropproductionmightencouragetheexpansionofdiversificationintolivestock.Theothermajorharvestmarketiscovercropseed.Thismarketisdependentupontherateofgrowthincovercropacreage.Wewerenotabletodoin-depthevaluationsofno-tillandstrip-tillrelativetointensivetillagebecauseparticipantswerealmostentirelyengagedinreducedtillagepractices.Itisclear,however,thatourparticipantsuniversallyseesignificantsavings.Somecanaccessspecificrecordstodocumentthosesavingsandallwhostillhavetillagereductionstomakeareheadingthatdirection.Also,wheretherearecostadvantagesinourcomparisonsofcroprotationswithandwithoutcovercrops,thosecostadvantagesareoftenpartiallytiedtotillagecosts.Soybeansfollowingacovercrop,inparticular,arecloselytiedtono-tillpractices.Finally,wehavebeenheartenedtoconnectwithanumberofyoungfarmerswhoareontheballwithrespecttorecords,transitionmanagement,andconservation.Similarly,wevisitedwithseveralestablishedfarmerswhoareobjectivelymanagingtheiroperationswiththehelpofdetailedrecords,randomizedproductiontrials,andawealthofexperience.

regional strategic ltd....regional strategic, ltd. [email protected] • phone:...

Documents