Cutting The Curve Podcast: Reduce Phosphorus Without Losing Yield
22 Jan 2428:45

Johnny Verell performed a phosphorous application reduction trial on corn. He re-apportioned part of the money he saved into an application of Source from SoundAg. The results: less phosphorous applied, money saved even after using Source, and increased yields. The trial was overseen by Brewer Blessit of Blythe Bayou Research and Consulting. Brewer and Johnny discuss a future of reduced “P” applications - for reasons of economics and environmental regulation.

00:00 Are your phosphorus levels higher than they need to be? In this episode, we're gonna talk about why you should lower your P levels and how you can go about effectively doing it. 00:10 Welcome to Extreme ags Cutting the Curve podcast, where you get a guaranteed return on investment of your time as we cut your learning curve 00:20 with the information you can apply to your farming operation immediately. Extreme ag, we've already made the mistakes 00:27 so you don't have to. Managing your farm's water resources is a critical component to a successful and sustainable farming operation. 00:37 Advanced drainage systems helps farmers just like you increase their yields up to 30% with their technologically advanced water 00:45 management products. Visit ad s to see how they can keep your business flowing. Now, here's your host, Damien Mason. Hey there. 00:55 Welcome to another fantastic episode of Extreme Acts. Cutting the Curve. I've got Brewer blessed, an independent agronomist who works with Johnny Rell, 01:03 Matt Miles, and maybe even a couple of other Extre ag guys. And I've got Johnny Rell, Western central, 01:08 west Central Tennessee Farm guy, and probably, let's just admit it, probably my favorite of all the extreme ag people to record with. 01:15 And I don't just say that because he's on here, um, why you should lower your phosphorus levels and how to do it. 01:22 That's the topic we're addressing. And I like this topic because first off, there's gonna be environmental 01:27 and regulatory reasons why we're probably gonna have no choice but to do this. Frankly, there's the economics part of it used 01:33 to be fertilizer was cheap. You went out there and flinged it everywhere, what the heck don't cost much? 01:37 And now we're realizing we now only can get the same yield. We can maybe even get more if we 01:43 more effectively manage this. And before we hit the record button, Johnny said, I wanna make sure that we're sharing this is not, uh, 01:49 just about, uh, cutting back on something and then having a yield drag. We're getting the same or more yield, 01:55 and we're just essentially taking that money we used to invest in p and putting it somewhere else. So I guess give me the overlay here, uh, Johnny, 02:02 and then I want to get the agronomics. Yeah, so like for us, we're always looking at new products coming out, 02:07 and we're the right fit is for, so everybody's wanting to start reducing phosphorus levels across the farm, and we're trying to figure out what products help us do 02:16 that, or what products we can use that help us keep that yield going in the upper trend. So one thing we always look at is don't add more 02:24 cost to the inputs. Let's reallocate the funds. So that's kind of my big thing is, is not keep making the budget 02:30 go higher and higher on that crop. Let's reallocate those funds and make the products work. And, you know, working with somebody like Brewer really 02:36 helps me hone in on which products are actually working and getting the biggest bang for our buck Brewer. These guys spend 02:42 a lot of money, a lot of places, especially the extreme ag guys. They're not, they're not the call to co-op and just, uh, 02:49 and do, you know, do your prescription. They, they absolutely, and we talk about Reapportioning money 02:54 before we just talk about the aggro agronomics, let's talk about the money. There's a lot of places they could, could cut back, 03:00 but we chose p it seems like from my learning, talking to, you know, Chad talks about reapportioning, uh, budget 03:07 and allocating differently for fertility. It seems like with new products that are out there, it seems like phosphorus reduction is maybe the lower 03:17 hanging fruit to start with taking some money off the table and putting it elsewhere. Is phosphorus the first and easiest place to choose? 03:25 Uh, reallocation? You know, I mean, I would probably say that somewhere between nitrogen and phosphorus both, um, 03:32 are probably on the same rung of the ladder. Um, you know, from an agronomic perspective, uh, phosphorous fertilizers are only about 20% recovery. 03:42 Nitrogen's only about, uh, 40, 50% potassium's only about 30, 35%. So there's a lot of waste in general, um, in those products. 03:51 And so our understanding of how those things perform we're generally over applying what we need and, and 03:56 therefore some to some extent wasteful spending in my experience. Go ahead. Well, I wanna just hit those, those numbers are big enough 04:04 that the, the, I think, and I, I'm not in any way being insulting. I think the average person that works in agriculture doesn't 04:10 realize that our utilization rate is that low of something that we talk about macro applications 04:18 of every fall and spring. You said that we only really plant utilization of the phosphorus is around 20% of what we put out there. 04:27 That is correct. And then the nitrogen, gimme that number again. About 40%, 40, 45%, 04:32 40 to 45% that we actually get the benefit from. That's Correct. And Kay, Kay was darn close to 30 35. 04:40 Yeah, I Do you think, I wanna stop right there for a second, Johnny, did you know that five years ago? 04:49 I did not. Did you know it two years ago? Well, two years ago when fertilize started, gonna $900 a ton for daf, you learn it, you learn 04:57 what the cost really is in those products. Brewer, you deal with farmers all the time. You had it in your, before you, you know, when you worked 05:02 for corporate and now when you're working independently. When did this become common knowledge? 05:09 Um, and I don't know that it's really common knowledge today, Damien, it's in a textbook and it's been in a textbook textbook 05:16 for a long time as, uh, as industry has, has kind of began to, um, create things that improve the utilization 05:23 of your mixed fertilizers, um, or, or even fixed nitrogen. I think it's getting a bit of, uh, 05:28 a more common talking point. But I mean, it's it's very valid. It, it, it's extremely valid. 05:33 Um, but just as you just said, those are macronutrients applied on a macro scale and everybody that farms has had a situation which they felt 05:42 like they ran short and it was a massive, oh my gosh. You know, and so, so the, the guttural reaction when you talk 05:49 to somebody about cutting back on fertilizer is absolutely not. Uh, you, you mentioned Matt earlier, I fought 05:56 with Matt Miles all day, all spring trying to reign that back just a little bit on him because he's had that react. 06:05 He's had that experience where it was a little short. Um, and, and so what what stimulates some of these trials on Johnny is, I'm gonna be proponent 06:13 of evaluating new products. Don't go crazy, but some of these products that allow us to scale back on that fertilizer. 06:20 Um, and, and just even if you go apples to apples and cut the, the cost of the product at the mixed fertilizer application, um, 06:26 and then run those products and, and see how it works. Um, but, but I do the first try, we cut this year, Damien, where we cut phosphate back by 25 pounds of P 2 0 5. 06:38 Uh, the first trial was a 12 bushel increase in corn yields by cutting. That one was triple super out of the VRF um, blocks. 06:47 Uh, it, I I was like, man, this has gotta be a fluke. And I went back and checked the application maps. Well the, the next trial that came out was actually Johnny's 06:55 and it was a plus 15 on average. And I'm not talking small blocks, I'm talking, you know, a 30 or 40 acre, uh, rep stuck out in 120 acre field. 07:04 Um, but, but it, it, it was eye-opening, not just to me in every location where we had it, it was a, a net gain and yield just from the reduction piece, which 07:13 to me is a wonderful thing because I can use this to help convince people to start trying to scale back. 07:19 I want to get into the results, but I wanna revisit because you did such a good job and obviously you touched this every day, even a farm that 07:29 this, this is worth revisiting because it's, it's a hard one. You just talked about Matt Miles. 07:34 Matt Miles is pretty forward thinking. Uh, he's not like a 90-year-old that's completely fixed in his ways. 07:41 And it took you, what you say, you talk to him every day, all spring to get him to even consider, 07:45 and then he finally did a reduction because it seems Johnny counterintuitive if I'm only utilizing 20% of the phosphorus 07:54 that I put out there and now you want me to cut back, it seems like whoa, I'm already not getting much bang for it. 08:00 It's very counterintuitive to think that somehow that's where we should cut back. If it's only utilizing 20% of what's out here, you think, 08:08 well, you gotta put more out. And that's kind of where we got to us to where we are today. Yeah, exactly. 08:14 And, and actually this trial is talking about, we had it all planned out. We did the upfront fertility in front of the planters 08:21 and then we accidentally sprayed the whole field. And when we did, we didn't know what that was going to do because it was a different trial we were going for, 08:28 we just left it, took it to harvest. And that's when he started realizing the results that we were seeing is actually in reduced zones. 08:35 We just accidentally treated the whole field with the, the phosphorus peak later on entirely instead in zones too. So it really actually gave us a lot more data 08:44 than what we intended to get. Alright. So, uh, how hard, how hard was it to get Johnny to go along with this idea brewer 08:51 of cutting back on phosphorus? Well, we, we briefly talked about it and I wrote the VF scripts and sent to his machine. 08:58 So he may have done it without even knowing it, to be honest with you. He slipped. He slipped. It is like, like 09:05 Did Like slip slipping the vitamin in the kids' candy bar or something, is that what you're saying? Yeah, that's right. 09:10 Yeah. He didn't trust me writing home prescriptions anymore either. I've been writing prescriptions for 22 years 09:16 and this is the first year I let somebody else do it. But he knew, he knew what was gonna work and he showed me on paper how it was gonna work. 09:22 So it was an easy thing for us to transition to. I wanna get to the results. We titled this Why You Should Lower Phosphorus Levels and then How to Do It. 09:28 So the how to do it will come when we go through the results, then how to do it. Let's talk about why you should lower it. 09:34 First off, there's the economics. Um, how much are we talking about pulling off the table in close numbers that you could then use 09:43 to reapportion somewhere else? So it's 25 p and that would be just dependent on source, whether it's oh 40 or oh 45 09:53 or, uh, I mean, uh, 1846 oh or 45. Oh, it really just depends on the source you're using Damien. 10:00 And, and and you're, you're saying the phosphorus levels? I I still believe levels in the field matter. 10:07 We're talking about the application piece, the fertilizer. There We go. Let's call, let's, let's 10:11 call We just, you just changed the title, why you should lower phosphorus Input application, input application, 10:17 lower phosphorus applications. Yeah, I wasn't talking about levels by any means. You're right about that. Um, application rate, 10:24 why you should lower phosphorus application rates and, and what we're really talking about. I know you just like you did a politician thing there 10:31 and you told me it depends on the source. What's the rough dollar amount that you're talking about, Johnny? 10:35 30 bucks an acre, 20 bucks an acre, 50 bucks an acre. It just depends. I mean years like twenties. Yeah. And this year it's in the twenties that you're reducing, 10:42 but you get back up to 900 from $500. Doubt too. Makes a big difference. But yeah. Okay. So we're 10:49 Reducing the cost of the, the additives that we're having. Okay. So one of the reasons is you can save 20 10:54 or 30 bucks an acre. That's, that's gonna lead with that number. Another reason is, um, is there, is there 11:01 a regulatory, is there a regulatory environment brewer that's going to force this? Yeah, they're so, so Damian, 11:10 probably the most commonplace is where we have a lot of litter production and manu applications and they're, they're already under strict nutrient 11:16 management plans that they have to submit and, and adhere to. Um, and, and then, to be honest with you, probably a, 11:22 a good fit for this too is we have, we have, um, so I was in West Texas two days ago, high pH high phosphate levels in certain places 11:31 because what's in the soil is not available. Um, and, and so what they normally do is still continue to put fertilizer out there, try 11:38 and have some plant available. Um, and I think this whole biological space and the ability to move that way is really about 11:45 accessing what's in the soil, not what you're applying. And we have historically done a poor job of accessing what we're, uh, what is in the soil in a lot, lot 11:53 of regions, whether it's um, the high, high P levels, uh, excuse me, high pH levels across the Midwest 12:00 or Midwest, Texas, east coast mineral organic soils, things like that. The other piece to it, um, is, is not just a phosphorus, 12:08 but the fact that that phosphorus has antagonizing micronutrient uptake, which is super critical on the high yield environments. 12:14 And that's really where I think we get a lot of this benefit. Okay, I wanna talk about this in like Ohio. 12:20 They talked about too much phosphorus was in the soils. Northern Ohio is bleeding into leaching into Lake Erie. They had an allergy problem. 12:27 That's something I was familiar with. She 20 years ago because of where my farm is in northeast Indiana, I don't sense that Johnny has this problem. 12:35 So I don't think that there's, there's a regulatory environment coming for him or is there because of a history of chicken litter? 12:41 I don't know. You know, temple talks about it. Are you under the gun for managing phosphorus? Yeah. If we're not under the gun now, 12:49 they're already looking at us. So when they start honing in on these other states, it's gonna trickle down. 12:53 All of our water goes to the Gulf. So we know we have issues in the Gulf, so we see it coming. And then, you know, another piece 12:59 for us is the stratification. We've been no-tilling so long, it's hard for us to get the nutrients down. 13:04 So it's a lot easier for us to use products to help them make the nutrients more available to the plant in general. So, 13:11 Okay. Um, when you go about ratcheting this back, you've gotta then make sure you're not taking a yield bump. So let's talk about the trials 13:20 and then how you manage Brewer to make sure that you're not taking a yield hit by cutting back. It's neat to talk about saving $25 an acre on phosphorus 13:31 or being able to put somewhere else, but it's gotta make sense. Johnny has a business to run. 13:34 So talk about the trial you did and managing to not lose yield. So in terms of the confidence in not taking a yield hit, 13:43 um, um, Damien, the, the, the broadcast type application of phosphorus, we know we overly, 13:51 'cause we know we have such a low recovery rate, so 25 pounds out is not that significant. Um, even though as a farmer, 13:58 most times people are reluctant to do that. It's not that big. So I felt pretty confident that even in the absence of it, 14:03 we weren't gonna take a yield hit. Um, and then the other piece is there, there are products out there, like you mentioned, uh, 14:09 in the, in the trailer. There, there are products out there that improve phosphorus utilization. 14:15 I feel very confident I've looked at those things long enough that I feel confident that they will increase the recovery rate of what we apply as well 14:22 as help us tap into what's in the soil bank. And that's, that was really the, the, the, the gist of the trial is overlapping those things. 14:30 And, and, and this is replicated beans and corn, uh, across my, my base if you will. Um, and, and we tracked some of this with, uh, early season, 14:40 um, you know, tissue samples and things like that. Um, and then, you know, part of our program actually ensured that we did put a little bit at a critical timing, um, part 14:50 of his standard program on other acres. We know we're hitting that, that that gap, that seedling uh, seed to seedling base. 14:56 So I wasn't worried about that. And then the final piece, I guess I would say is I have had experience where I improved the kind 15:03 of phosphorus I applied and had a net increase in the, in the micronutrient uptake, which I think at, at that critical time has more impact, uh, 15:11 than a, than a than a p reduction, if you'll, so I had some confidence of what it was gonna look like. Maybe not to the extreme that it came back. 15:20 Uh, Johnny, are you afraid of using banked phosphorus? I mean, generally we talk about, uh, you, you know, you can get by with something for a year or two 15:33 or three doing something like this. Is there a concern that you're now depleting reserves of phosphorus or No, 15:43 No, not, not in this case here at all. 'cause we're, we're utilizing what we're putting out as such a much higher efficiency. 15:48 So, and then we've been putting out fertilizer the same for a hundred plus years. Yeah. And we know it's not the most efficient, 15:56 so we're just having to figure out how to get to that efficient level. And, and, and we're still soil testing 16:01 so you can go three years before you affect that. Well, we're gonna soil sample at that point anyway, so we'll, we'll have an understanding of that point. 16:08 We've got products and we work with some of the companies that have these products. 16:12 I'm thinking of, uh, you know, proven, uh, is it proven 40 I think it is. And, and some of these other ones 16:18 that talk about your ability to reduce phosphorus and not take a yield hit with doing that in your trials, did you use these kinds of products? 16:28 Yes, we did. And, and we Use the product from Sound Ag on this specific trial through Sound Ag. 16:34 Okay. This product's called And what's the product called? Source. Okay. 16:37 You just used source on this and does, is it just trading money? Did you take $25 out of phosphorus 16:44 and put it into $25 a source? Yes. Well It wasn't $25 a source. It was 15. Oh yeah, 15. 16:49 It was ac. Yeah, so it was actually a net savings for sure on That. Okay. So a net savings, 16:54 call it 10 bucks. And then tell me about the yield. Yeah, so Yeah, so, so on average, um, I think Johnny's was 18. 17:02 Um, the, the combination of source and the reduction, Damien, I think it was, I think we can attribute about 15 17:08 to the fertilizer reduction, another plus three or plus four on that, on that field due to the source. Um, Those numbers you just gave me, are those bushels? Yes, 17:17 Bushels. Okay. Alright. Okay. Sorry. No, that's Bush. Yeah. Um, And, and that is, that is a, 17:25 like I said, I think it's a hundred. How, how big is that road hundred five acres, something like that. 17:31 And, and that is across good and bad zones. So in some zones, the yield response was much greater, closer to 26. 17:37 And now the other end was closer to 12, but it was somewhere around plus, plus 15 plus 18, uh, 15 from the fertilizer reduction. 17:45 And, and then another three on top of that. And the highest yielding stuff average across, like I said, I had this one more places than Johnny, 17:52 but on average, um, the high, excuse me, average across everything, pooled across everything. The highest yielding corn treatments were 18:00 phosphorus reduction with that product applied Is it only is, can I do this on any, you did it on corn. Your trials were all with corn. 18:09 Is that the only place that I can do this or can I use it on Johnny grows wheat, he grows wheat and double crop soybeans. 18:15 Can he use it soybeans? Yeah, we had the trials on soybeans too, and it was the same type of results. 18:20 Well, not in soybeans. We, we actually don't need one year date on soybeans, but we don't need to pull that phosphorus out on soybeans. 18:29 We lost a couple of bushels there. Um, which for beans can have a real hard time getting phosphorus. 18:34 Anyway, um, I I I I'm not sold on cutting back. Now the application source on top of it still performed whether you used it or not, 18:42 but I want another year of data before I recommend pulling phosphorous out my, outta my beans. Now, 18:48 I was talking about the source, we did get the trial results outta the source on the soybeans, not the reduction of the, 18:54 And it performed whether we reduced or not. And honestly, I, I'd have to go back and look. I can't tell you that reducing p 19:00 and adding source wasn't the exact same thing as the the standard P application. I I, I'd have to go back and look at that. 19:07 So John, when the person asked, um, we said, and how you can go about reducing your phosphorus application rates, the how is you do it. 19:17 First off, maybe you let somebody like brewer sneak it in on you because you were reluctant 19:21 or even a little bit, um, uh, in trepidation might've been the word. You, you said, uh, I'm not sure I'm gonna do this much. 19:28 Sure. And the same with thing with Matt. And then to do it, can you, it would, I'm guessing it'd be silly to do it without the product, 19:36 like source, like in other words, don't, don't do this blind, do it with the accompaniment, right? That's right. That's right. 19:43 And we started off small scale then this year we went to a larger farm or larger field sizes to do more replication. 19:49 So this will be more of a standard farm and practice forces coming here. And we're, we're a year behind on, on phosphorus. 19:55 We started doing this with nitrogen. He as, as, as progressive as he is, I had to fight with him on cutting back on nitrogen too. 20:01 I mean whole farm now he's whole farmer used nitrogen from a similar type uh, setup. 20:06 We're just, just now getting into the phosphorus Brewer. You know what the, what's the thing you can take the boy 20:10 outta the country, you can take these farmers. They all are bullheaded. They all, they, they can't, you know, let's just face it. 20:18 So of course you had to fight with him. Even Johnny who we like, and, and he normally listens to, you know, 20:23 important people like you. He, he still, you know, you gotta you gotta push morale a bit sometimes. That's how I, that's how I've worked with him 20:29 and it's worked out magically. Anyway. Let's, uh, let's go another one here. Um, you peeled back a certain amount. 20:38 Does next year rate get pulled back even more? In other words, are you, are you gonna keep testing this on how much p how much, how much p application to cut 20:48 until you've gone too far? Yes. Um, that, that kind of thing can get, get difficult I guess particularly on large scale stuff. 20:57 Yes. We'll, we'll increase in rates, um, and, and, and do that. The other, the other kind of, I guess you'd say concept, 21:04 the way we're thinking about it is how does that equate to convenience at the farm gate? Is that something where we can take a entire farm 21:12 of Johnny's and put out all of our pea for the corn and bean crop that's coming before the beans and not put any out in front of the corn, 21:20 but using products like this. And then the the flip side on the potassium piece. Can we put all of our p uh, our k out in front 21:27 of the corn crop or the corn, which should then be in the residue dump right back out into the bean rotation? 21:33 So, so it as, as much as rates. Yeah, to some extent. But I we're, we're looking at this maybe a, a whole farm. A little, a little differently. 21:41 Yeah. And, and we talked about, uh, the other two, you know, dangling low hanging fruits. You said n and maybe even k uh, 21:50 do we have a product like a source to do that with? We don't yet. Right? Well, I, I'll touch on two things. 21:57 I think in this residue management space, you, you mentioned extract earlier, um, corn does not remove that much potassium. 22:04 It requires a lot to make a crop, but in terms of removing with grain, it's not that much. It is bound in that organic matter. 22:11 And so residue management can help free that up and get that into the plant. And then some of these products, Damian, 22:17 by cutting other nutrients like phosphorus, you get better uptake of what's out there. Potassium included. 22:23 And, and they're, they're like the the source piece I, I've got, I've got, uh, tissue sample data where applications a source, while they don't claim it, 22:31 we actually end up with greater uptake of potassium in that sense too. Johnny, the person that's a little bit, uh, of a naysayer, 22:39 and I was joking when I was picking, well I was only kind of joking because let's face it, 22:43 farmers need a little picking on once in a while there, there's sometimes they are reluctant and I understand because you don't want to have a yield drag. 22:50 You're sometimes reluctant because it's making a change and it could involve a little bit of work. But in this case it wasn't any, it was no more work. 22:57 It was just a matter of um, a little risk, um, to the person that's like you, what do you tell 'em? Yeah, they wanna do this. 23:06 Uh, I, my advice would be, I think this is coming. I think you're gonna have no choice but to cut back on your p applications. 23:13 Probably. That's my thought. Yours. Yeah. So yeah, it's coming. We know it is the biggest thing is 23:18 to just start off small farm, do some trials, move it into larger field sizes, then figure out really what works for you. 23:25 'cause there's a lot of different products out there and some of 'em may work different in our area versus somewhere else in the country too. 23:31 So we kind of look at it working with Brewer, he is kind of scattered all over the south, so you kind 23:36 of get data points from all across the south and we can learn real fast. Kind of speeds up our process probably two 23:41 or three years on which products are really giving us the response Brewer. Um, 23:45 the person that's also saying, because this is another one that we always hear, well, that'd work in Jackson, Tennessee, 23:53 but that wouldn't work where I farm farmers love to do that thing. It would never work here. You couldn't do that here. 23:59 Anything climatologically anything, um, uh, soil wise, uh, north, south, cold, hot, uh, cropping systems. 24:11 What's your thought here on, on the, the viability of this across different regions? You know, that will tie back to, you know, 24:19 that 20% I said on phosphorus kind of varies by biological activity of the soil, the nature of the soil, CC type, um, issues there. 24:27 And, and another thing is what is the factor that's holding that back? Whether it's, you know, application 24:32 and it's, it's your, your original soil test is low and so the soil's gob limit up. Is it high pH and 24:37 therefore you get, you know, calcium phosphate formin, you can't access it. I don't think that the result of, I, 24:44 I still think there's room for reduction, Damien, but the products that we might use to improve the efficiency, the recovery rate of 24:51 that may be different in different areas. And that's why I view this mainly as here's some data to support you cutting fertilizer 25:00 and let's evaluate this product. It makes sense. The, the data, well, yes, it's important on, on the economics, 25:06 but to give some sense of security to these guys that are reluctant to cut back on fertilizers where I'm using this stuff currently. 25:13 Yeah. Well you didn't, you didn't tell me though. I got all that. Is there, is there a case be made that it, it will work in Jackson, Tennessee. 25:21 It will work at Miles Farms, but it won't work in North Dakota. I don't, I don't. I I can't imagine. 25:27 But I I'm just You're the one that's the, the guy that's the soil guy. No, I, I think, I think these things will work everywhere, 25:33 but pairing it with a product, the product may vary by region that helps improve that recovery rate. Yeah. So, and, and Johnny's point, 25:41 you will not do this without, uh, a ni what do we call it? It's a phosphorus replacement or you know, the, the source. 25:49 What, what does, what, what would we call that type of product? I love all this stuff into biological space, 25:54 improving nutrient use efficiency. And Johnny says do it, experiment with it, but do not do it blind. Do it with one of these. 26:04 That's right. That's right. Don't go, don't go naked. Do it with a, a product that helps replace that says that's, that, that that's their, that that reason 26:12 for being it replace helping you cut back on phosphorus. That's right. That's right. 26:16 And I mean, finding a network to work with also helps to just speeds that process up, narrows the products down in a hurry. 26:23 And so did I hear we're heading, we're recording this in December of 23 when I looked at 2024. 26:29 Is every acre gonna have a phosphorus reduction or are we, how, how, how broad acre are we going with now? We, how broad we taking this new methodology 26:37 and practice, uh, on Vare Farms? Yeah, we're probably about to half this year off of what we've seen. 26:43 And then if it continues to trend the same way, we'll be, uh, whole farm Adaptive next year. 26:48 Right. So half, half the acres next year are gonna get it. All right. Brewer, if somebody wants 26:53 to go a little deeper on this, uh, how do they find you? Uh, David, 27:00 you can look me up on why I can give you my email address, but my Southern accent trying 27:05 to say my email address doesn't go across audio very well. Alright. His name is Brewer. Bless it. 27:10 If you, uh, if you wanna find out because uh, the guys work with him and, and speak highly of him and, and uh, 27:16 and I think that, uh, he's got some good stuff to share. Johnny Rell one of our extreme ag guys 27:21 and, uh, and he's awesome. Jackson, Tennessee. Uh, lots of good stuff out here. If you want to hear more about all this stuff, you know 27:29 what, we got a library essentially of content, hundreds of these podcasts that I've produced with them and also the videos that they shoot in the field. 27:37 Share this with somebody that can benefit from it. If you wanna take your farming game to the next level for 750 bucks a year, you can become an extreme ag member. 27:45 You get exclusive content, you get access to guys like Johnny, like question and answer format where we can go a little deeper on stuff. 27:50 You also get special offers. Like for instance, you could go to Commodity Classic for free. 27:54 That's right. Our friends over at Nature's are gonna help make that happen. If you're an Extreme Ag member, you go to Commodity Classic, 28:01 your admission is free. So you know what, you're getting a whole bunch of your seven 50 back. 28:05 It's a small price to pay for a whole bunch of helpful information to take your farming game. Next level. Till next time, that's Brewer. Bless it. 28:10 That's Johnny Burrell. My name's Damian Mason. Thanks for joining us here on extreme Ag Cutting the Curve. That's a wrap for this episode of Cutting the Curve, 28:18 but there's plenty more. Check out Extreme Ag Farm where you can find past episodes, instructional videos 28:25 and articles to help you squeeze more profit outta your farm. Cutting the curve is brought to you 28:31 by Advanced Drainage Systems, the leader in agriculture, water management solutions.

Growers In This Video

See All Growers