is part of the Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

  • American Agriculturist
  • Beef Producer
  • Corn and Soybean Digest
  • Dakota Farmer
  • Delta Farm Press
  • Farm Futures
  • Farm Industry news
  • Indiana Prairie Farmer
  • Kansas Farmer
  • Michigan Farmer
  • Missouri Ruralist
  • Nebraska Farmer
  • Ohio Farmer
  • Prairie Farmer
  • Southeast Farm Press
  • Southwest Farm Press
  • The Farmer
  • Wallaces Farmer
  • Western Farm Press
  • Western Farmer Stockman
  • Wisconsin Agriculturist
conservation-compliance-nrcs

I’m Tom Buman and this is what’s bugging me…

Tom Buman talks about how people confuse efficiency with conservation and stewardship.

I’m Tom Buman and this is what’s bugging me…
Everybody wants to put their best foot forward. I get it. I realize it is important to report the good news, but when the good news is misleading, it bugs me. So here’s what’s bugging me.

Yield vs. Profitability:

For years, conservationists have criticized farmers who just look at yield and not profitability. But now, the headlines are espousing cover crops because they increase yield. Conservationists are on the cover crop bandwagon. I realize that cover crops are good conservation practices, but most research shows they are not profitable. It bugs me that people who promote cover crops are not being transparent about profitability. Conservationists should report profitability along with yield. As my mom would say, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Efficiency vs. Stewardship:

It bugs me when people confuse efficiency with conservation and stewardship. Ag businesses and organizations often tout how efficient agriculture is and somehow, they end up tying efficiency to conservation and stewardship. I say, efficiency is great, but so what? It is good business to strive for better efficiency but people shouldn’t confuse efficiency with conservation and stewardship.

In a study completed at the University of California Davis, researchers concluded that Kansas farmers who received payments under the conservation subsidy were using some of their water savings to expand irrigation or grow thirstier crops, not to reduce water consumption. “Policies aimed at reducing water applications can actually increase water depletions,” the researchers said. I think the same can be said about nutrient management. Just because someone can achieve more nitrogen efficiency, it does not necessarily follow that nitrogen water loading will be reduced.

Averages vs. Specifics:

It bugs me when I hear the average of this or that, as if knowing the average outcome is helpful for the individual farmer. Averages mean little to farmers. Farmers need specific information about their farm. If we intend to encourage and support farmers in their efforts to reduce sediment delivery to water, then we need to provide specific directions to achieve that. Telling a farmer that he has 10 tons/acre/year of erosion is pretty meaningless if he can’t relate that erosion to sediment delivery. What we need to do instead, is to tell farmers where the sediment delivery is occurring and then tell them the most cost-effective method to reduce that sediment delivery. If we can’t provide farmers with that level of specificity, we aren’t doing our job.

It bugs me that not enough farmers have access to this information. Agren has the technology solution right now that can give individual farmers the specific information they need to make the best decision. For more information, call me today at 712-792-6248.

Hide comments

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Publish