Future of fert in Iowa

Discussion in 'Fertilizer Application' started by twomancrew, Aug 15, 2014.

  1. twomancrew

    twomancrew LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 940

    I thought others might want to watch last night's IA gov's debate because they discuss the future regulations on fert in IA. Go to 43:25ish for the discussion.
    http://www.iptv.org/iowapress/story.cfm/12028/video/ipd_20140814_gov_debate
    Lets not make a political conversation. Maybe focus on personal responsibility and any land stewardship practices you have to better utilize the fertilizer in your program?
    Sadly I must be honest and say most my accounts haven't had a soil sample taken. None of them have had any service other than mowing for who knows how long. I don't do anything other than not waste the product. I apply less than a ton of 46-0-0 a year. Usually I put a 50# bag across 30K instead of 20K that is on the label. I only do this once in the Spring. I sprayed some UAN a few weeks ago, the day before we got out last rain, but I only sprayed a couple of small accts I mow. I was spraying some dicamba and 2,4-d that day to zap some pesky clover and plantains that survived the first spray I did when I spread the 46-0-0 back in the Spring.
    The fact that it comes up in a debate opened my eyes a bit. I hope I am doing all I can to be responsible.
     
  2. The Turf Guys

    The Turf Guys LawnSite Member
    from Midwest
    Posts: 135

    Notice how they want to shift the blame from the farmers????? If anything certain mandates will come down the line for us but farmers will get a pass just like they usually do.

    And I come from a long line of farmers down around Lamoni so I'm not just some hater.
     
  3. Skipster

    Skipster LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,074

    The senator said “If you put fertilizer on your land, you’re part of the problem.” Watch this video from the University of Minnesota (bordering Iowa) and listen to Dr. Horgan’s words at the end of the video.

    University Research Dispels Fertilizer Myth

    He says:
    If we don’t get the word out about the benefits of lawn fertilization and if we don’t back it up by making responsible applications, our industry is going to be regulated out of existence and the environment will be no better off.
     
  4. larryinalabama

    larryinalabama LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 16,776

    I don't know how you can make it "not political" because that's all it is.

    Your best hope is that Scotts lines the pockets of the Iowa Democrat cacus!
     
  5. twomancrew

    twomancrew LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 940

    Great link, 30 sec ad is worth it.
     
  6. larryinalabama

    larryinalabama LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 16,776

    You just made it political, proves my point.

    You and I both know putting fertilizer on lawns is a wonderful thing.

    So like I say if Scotts/true green lines the pockets of the government the practice will contuniue.
     
  7. Kawizx62003

    Kawizx62003 LawnSite Silver Member
    Posts: 2,416

    This is why I don't think I am even exploring the idea of adding this as a service. Not sure if that's a dumb idea or not.
    Posted via Mobile Device
     
  8. Jimslawncareservice

    Jimslawncareservice LawnSite Platinum Member
    from mn
    Posts: 4,134

    we farm in mn. dad heard a report today that farmer should apply as much fert and fungisides as possible. maybe they all should get on the same page
     
  9. Skipster

    Skipster LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,074

    This idea doesn't make much sense. All it does is make less food and make each piece much more expensive. Government's role here could be to incentivize proper stewardship, not to make it harder to produce food.

    My concern is that the bad actors who don't practice good stewardship in our industry (don't regularly calibrate, don't rotate pesticide MOAs, blanket apply POST herbicides, etc) are going to encourage harsh regulations that will make it harder for all of us to earn a living.
     
  10. twomancrew

    twomancrew LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 940

    Well if a sample is looked at N cation is used to determine the maximum amount of N the soil can handle. Any more than that is a waste. In turf we don't go anywhere near 200# per acre annually so we don't use those values. A crop will devour nutrients and minerals like turf folks don't know. We don't go anywhere near that rate because turf doesn't need it. A sample can tell if there is a problem affecting nutrient uptake and if there is a problem it needs corrected before nutrient is added to turf.

    Yes, as far as nutrient is concerned a farmer is justified to look at what maximum inputs are and what ROI can be.

    IPM is another conv. for smarter folks than me in another thread somewhere. Can't say what is being promoted as far as general pesticide use is concerned. There are economic thresholds that can be used to make informed decisions if needed.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2014

Share This Page