Category Archives: on-farm research

JenREES 6/5/22

This past week was beautiful! We saw more recovery on frost-damaged plants and it allowed for a lot of post-herbicide spraying. A question I kept receiving was how long to wait to spray crops that were frost damaged. Some labels will say to wait 48-72 hours before applying a herbicide while others don’t give a time, they just mention that injury to the crop can occur under specific temperatures or when plants are under stress. How I answered based on what we have recommended in the past is for any type of adverse weather event impacting crops (hail, frost, etc.), wait at least 3-5 days based on the label or until one starts to see plant regrowth of both the crop and the weeds. We would say the same for anyone who unfortunately experienced hail damage this weekend.

Interseeded Cover Crops: This past week was also a busy one for our team interseeding cover crops into V3-V4 corn. We are currently in the third year of a partnership between our farmer cooperators, The Nature Conservancy, Nebraska Extension, UBBNRD, and Kellogg’s. A couple cooperators are in the 4th year. The goals for planting cover crops into early season corn and soybean include reducing nitrogen inputs, weed control, improving soil health, increasing diversity, and providing forage for livestock. We’ve successfully achieved cover crop establishment and season long growth, covers that survived after harvest and survived into the spring to various extents in all years of the study. In the on-farm research locations from 2019-2021, the interseeded cover crop yielded less in 5 of the 12 site-years but yield was not impacted in the others. In 2021, there was no yield difference between the interseeded cover crop and check strips when seeded into soybean at two locations. Yields in 2020 and 2021 were impacted in some fields due to the July 9th windstorm in both years which opened up the canopy producing greater cover crop biomass.

Biomass samples taken in late September pre-harvest and pre-frost has ranged from 97 lb/ac to 2192 lb/ac. These are field averages as individual reps were over 4000 lb/ac in severely wind damaged fields. Additional growth was achieved after harvest but not collected. Biomass samples for nitrogen content taken in 2021 ranged from 5-200 lb N /ac. Beginning soil health assessments were taken the first year of the study and will be completed in September of 2022 for comparison.

We’ve also learned a lot about herbicide interactions with cover crops; they are fairly resilient. For the corn locations, we’ve went with a full PRE herbicide (generic Lexar, Callisto, Acuron…have not used Resicore) and then for POST, within 3 days either direction of interseeding using Roundup, Liberty, and sometimes dicamba with no impacts to the covers that we interseed. We have also had success using ½ rate of Lexar or Callisto at least 1.5 weeks prior to interseeding. The covers were scraggly, but they did come through it. We have never used a residual on the corn we interseed, but using a Group 15 was an option once the covers emerged and got up about an inch to provide residual if the guys wanted it.

For the soybeans, if a full PRE was applied at least 3 weeks prior to interseeding, we didn’t worry about it (which was the case in 2021). For POST, we just used Roundup and either Liberty or Dicamba within 3 days either direction of interseeding with again, the thought of a Group 15 if needed for residual once the covers were 1″ tall. In soybean, we interseeded 10 lb/ac red clover with 20 lb/ac of wheat. The field we interseeded at emergence had red clover survive the entire growing season, through harvest, and was growing this spring for the successive corn crop. It was unexpected and gave us insight into another way of potentially establishing a perennial crop for nitrogen. It ended up being killed out by the corn herbicide, but is something we’re repeating in different ways in 2022.

Regarding species that we feel are most successful in the corn, we like buckwheat, iron and clay cowpeas, clovers (red and sweet), brassicas such as collards and radishes, forage soybean, annual and Italian ryegrass. We’ve consistently seen sweetclover and the ryegrasses survive the winter into the spring. Depending on the year, we’ve also seen red clover and hairy vetch survive the winter. We’ve learned much more that I don’t have room for here. If you’re interested in learning more, be watching for our articles at cropwatch.unl.edu. Also, save June 30th for a potential Interseeding Cover Crop Driving Tour.

JenREES 3/27/22

Grateful for a little moisture last week! Lots to share based on questions. For those with poultry, the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) has impacted a fourth Nebraska farm. Farms impacted thus far have been in Merrick, Butler, and Holt counties. All were under quarantine with birds being humanely depopulated and disposed of in an approved manner. HPAI is a highly contagious virus that spreads easily among birds through nasal and eye secretions, as well as manure. The virus can be spread in various ways from flock to flock, including by wild birds, through contact with infected poultry, by equipment, and on the clothing and shoes of caretakers. Wild birds can carry the virus without becoming sick, while domesticated birds can become very sick. Symptoms of HPAI in poultry include: a decrease in water consumption; lack of energy and appetite; decreased egg production or soft-shelled, misshapen eggs; nasal discharge, coughing, sneezing; incoordination; and diarrhea. HPAI can also cause sudden death in birds even if they aren’t showing any other symptoms. Poultry owners should restrict access to your property and poultry and report unusual poultry bird deaths or sick birds to NDA at 402-471-2351, or through USDA at 866-536-7593. More info: https://nda.nebraska.gov/animal/avian/index.html

Preliminary farm real estate numbers were released this week at: https://cap.unl.edu/realestate.

Weed Guides: We didn’t receive 2022 weed guides. I do have some flash drives with PDF copies for those interested. Otherwise, print copies can be purchased at: https://marketplace.unl.edu/default/ec130.html.

CropWatch at cropwatch.unl.edu covers a variety of topics including drought outlook and BT trait table.

On-Farm Research Results Book: PDF version can be viewed at: https://go.unl.edu/vfi4.

Nutrient Management: If you’re applying fertilizer this spring or in-season, it may be an opportunity to cut back on fertilizer rates in some strips. Protocols for consideration that can be adjusted at: https://jenreesources.com/2022/02/06/jenrees-2-6-22/.

Also received questions regarding starter fertilizer. Javed Iqbal and Laura Thompson shared the following in this week’s CropWatch, “From 1995 to 2019, farmers working with the Nebraska On-Farm Research Network conducted 35 studies looking at starter fertilizer on corn. The results of these studies can be found in the Results Finder database at http://resultsfinder.unl.edu/. Some were in the same field for a number of years, others moved around. Various starter materials were evaluated, and not all studies reported soil test Phosphorus (P) levels.” UNL’s critical soil test levels for P are when Bray-P is less than 20 ppm for corn after corn (C/C) or 15 ppm for corn after soybean (C/S). The information below is focused on studies comparing 10-34-0 to no starter.

“Eighteen of the studies compared a 10-34-0 starter fertilizer in the range of 4-6 gal/ac to a no starter check. Soil P levels were between 4 and 35 ppm. The crop yield response across range of soil P levels:

  • For soils with P soil tests at or below 10 ppm, there was an average yield increase of 14.3 bu/ac due to the starter (four sites).
  • For soils with P soil tests of 10-20 ppm, there was an average increase of 2.6 bu/ac (five sites).
  • For soils with P soil tests of 20-35 ppm, there was an average increase of 0.3 bu/ac (nine sites).
  • When all the data were combined, regardless of soil test values, there was an average increase of 4 bu/ac.

In spite of this analysis, of the 18 studies, only five had statistically significant differences. Of these five, the average yield increase was 12 bu/acre and the average soil test P level was 9 ppm.

To summarize, when fertilizer is used as a starter (as defined above with soil test levels above the critical value), the data shows that it is largely not effective in terms of yield or economical response (even though plants with starter applied will be greener early on); however, if the fertilizer is added to a soil that tests low for soil test P (less than the critical value), a yield response to that fertilizer is expected.

A similar analysis of the soybean on-farm research found six starter studies between 1992 and 2015, with only three sites reporting soil test P, all of which were greater than 17 ppm. Average yields for the no-starter studies were 61.2 bu/ac and for soybeans with starter, 61.3 bu/ac.” If you’re interested in trying this for yourself in corn or soy, consider this simple protocol

JenREES 2/20/22

I’ve so greatly appreciated the discussions and learning opportunities at meetings this past winter! We have one final cover crop meeting this Friday, Feb. 25 from 10-Noon at the 4-H Building in York. The topic is discussing the economics of cover crops. I’m often asked about this and have ideas, but don’t have answers, so am seeking a discussion around it. We know grazing often is the one way (not always, but often) where cover crops will pay. Looking forward to a deeper discussion on additional ways to look at economics of cover crops, such as assigning a dollar value to any soil changes over time. Please join us if you’re interested!

Estate Planning Workshop March 8: We’re excited to offer an estate planning workshop for farmers and ranchers from 1:30-4:00 p.m. on March 8 at the Seward County Extension Office (322 S. 14th St. in Seward). My colleague, Allan Vyhnalek, an extension educator for farm and ranch transition and succession, will offer tools and strategies to effectively plan, start and complete estate plans, offer background on common mistakes during the process, and highlight essential considerations for creating and carrying out estate and succession plans.

He also asked Tom Fehringer, an attorney based in Columbus, to present during the workshop. Fehringer specializes in estate planning, business planning and trust administration, among other areas of practice. It’s just a great opportunity to learn more and ask questions (especially of an attorney) for free! Please RSVP by March 7th at 402-643-2981.

K-Junction Solar Project Public Meeting Feb. 24: EDF Renewables is inviting the public to a meeting to learn more about the K-Junction Solar Project on Thursday, Feb. 24 from 5:00-7:30 p.m. at the Stone Creek Event Center in McCool Junction. Food and beverages will be provided.

Results of Xyway™ LFR® Fungicide in Furrow: Last week at the on-farm research update, three area farmers and I presented the results of our on-farm research Xyway™ LFR® studies. This fungicide, applied at planting, translocates within the plant providing disease protection for a period of time. In 2021, Xyway™ LFR® was tested at 8 on-farm locations in Buffalo, Hall, York, and Seward counties. Emergence counts taken at 4 locations in Buffalo/Hall counties showed better emergence with Xyway in one of the locations and slower emergence with Xyway in the other three locations. Early season stand counts were taken at all 8 locations. Of these, one location showed better stand with Xyway compared to the check, two showed less stand with Xyway, and the others showed no differences. Three of the 8 locations showed a yield reduction with Xyway compared to the check while the other five locations showed no difference. Half of the locations showed reduced profitability while there was no difference in the other half. At the two York locations, I also did disease ratings. In spite of it being a low-disease year, in one of the two locations, Xyway reduced gray leaf spot pressure on the plants compared to the check. At neither location was there a difference in overall southern rust severity. In general, the growers who tried this felt it was helpful from the standpoint their fields are near towns or powerlines where it’s difficult for arial applications. FMC recommended during the meeting to move the Xyway™ LFR® product away from the seed for those trying it in 2022.

CSI youth and parents visit with Jerry Stahr about his field for the Xyway on-farm research study.

Our Crop Science Investigation Youth (CSI) group worked with Jerry and Brian Stahr on their Xyway study as part of the Nebraska Corn Board’s Innovative Youth Challenge. It was a great way for youth to utilize the scientific method while learning about crop scouting and participating in on-farm research! The youth won first place and share their results in the following video: https://youtu.be/B87xqr0pWMk. If you know of youth interested in science and plants who may want to join us for CSI, please let me know! We meet monthly throughout the year. Next meeting is Mar. 15.



JenREES 1/30/22

It’s been so great to see people at winter programs again and January just flew by! Last winter was different teaching via zoom and I’ve appreciated the interaction and discussions at meetings this year. This week sharing a few answers to questions I received and also a few additional February programs.

Weed Guides: For those who needed private applicator recertification, you were mailed a sheet of paper which shared how you can purchase a weed guide. On the paper it says that shipping is free, but I was told that’s not the case if you order it via Marketplace. In order to have free shipping, you need to mail the piece of paper with your $25 to the Pesticide Office via the address on the paper. For anyone who doesn’t need the 2022 Guide but would be ok with a 2021 Guide, please let me or your local Extension educator know and we can arrange for you to get a copy of last year’s for free.

Extension Meeting Updates: Just a note to please RSVP when attending Extension events as not everyone is as flexible as I’ve been! This helps for meals and also any covid requirements.

Update on Soil Health Conference Feb. 2: There’s now a virtual option. They are not allowing walk-ins, so regardless if you plan to attend in person or virtually, you can register at: https://go.unl.edu/vn85.

Reminder of Ag Update at Fairgrounds in Aurora this week on Feb. 2 which also qualifies for UBBNRD nitrogen certification credits. Registration at 9 a.m. with program from 9:30-4 p.m. RSVP: 402-694-6174.

Also reminder of my first of a series of meetings on Practical Cover Crop Management on Feb. 4th from 10 a.m.-Noon at the 4-H building in York. This week we will hear from Keith Berns on basics of how to get started with cover crops. We will also hear from additional farmers in how they started using cover crops in their operations. RSVP to 402-362-5508.

Feb. 8 Building Farm and Ranch Resiliency in the Age of Financial Uncertainty is the last of the Farmers and Ranchers College meetings this winter. It will be held at the Fairgrounds in Geneva with registration at 8:45 a.m. and program from 9 a.m.-Noon. The workshop will cover cash rental rates, land values, leasing strategies, landlord/tenant communication, farm and ranch succession planning and an overview of farm programs for landowners. There’s no charge and please RSVP to 402-759-3712.

Feb. 17 On-Farm Research Updates for our area will be held at the Cornerstone Event Center at the Fairgrounds in York from 9 a.m.-3:30 p.m. (registration at 8:30). Meetings like this, to me, are the most powerful as they provide an opportunity to hear directly from the growers who conducted on-farm research. Replicated, field-scale comparisons were completed in growers’ fields, using their equipment. If it wasn’t for these growers, often, I wouldn’t have the information I do to share on the various questions asked of me. Attendees will receive a complimentary copy of the 2021 Research Results Update book, which contains results from on-farm research studies, including studies on products such as Xyway in-furrow fungicide, Pivot Bio PROVEN, nitrification inhibitors, and non-traditional products. Production and technology studies include ones on hydraulic downforce, soybean practices, starter fertilizer, nitrogen rates and timing, crop models for N management, and cover crop and soil health. The Nebraska On-Farm Research Network is a statewide, on-farm research program that addresses critical farmer production, profitability and natural resources questions. Growers take an active role in the on-farm research project sponsored by Nebraska Extension in partnership with the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, the Nebraska Corn Board, the Nebraska Soybean Checkoff and the Nebraska Dry Bean Commission. Please RSVP at: GO.UNL.EDU/2022ONFARMRESEARCH. This meeting also qualifies for UBBNRD nitrogen recertification credits.



JenREES 5/9/21

Hopefully the rains were a blessing in helping the crops where crusting was a concern, adding moisture to the seedbed, and in activating herbicide. This article reaches people throughout the State, so with some experiencing frost potential as I write this, if rhubarb leaves are not damaged too much by frost and the stalks remain firm, it is still safe to eat. If the leaves are severely damaged or the stalks become soft or mushy, do not eat these stalks. Remove and discard them. New stalks can be harvested and eaten.  Rhubarb often develops seedheads following cold temperatures, but this also does not affect eating quality of the stalks. Remove rhubarb seedheads and discard.

This week will share on the results we obtained from on-farm research studies where cover crops were interseeded into corn. In 2019, there were two locations in York and Seward counties (interseeded at V5-V6). In 2020, 6 of 11 locations were conducted via on-farm research in York, Seward, Clay, and Hamilton counties (interseeded at V4). Four of the six locations compared an interseeded cover crop to a check treatment of no cover crop. One location compared two corn populations (27,000 vs. 31,000 seeds/ac) to determine corn yield and cover crop biomass impacts. One location compared using only the middle drill unit to interseed the cover crop vs. using all three drill units between the rows to determine any differences in cover crop biomass.

2019 Results: In 2019, the cover crop at the Seward county location emerged and then died, we hypothesize, due to reactivation of Group 27 herbicide. Thus, no biomass samples were taken. At the York county location, cover crop biomass sampled prior to the first hard freeze ranged from 97-220 lbs/ac. It was good to see successful establishment at both locations and that cover crop growth occurred at one of them. In 2019, there were no yield differences between the corn in the check treatments (241 and 258 bu/ac) vs. cover crop interseeded treatments (241 (N mix), 243 (diversity mix), and 256 bu/ac) at the York and Seward locations respectively, which was also encouraging. Net return was less for the interseeded cover crop treatments vs. the check.

2020 Results: In 2020, cover crops emerged at all locations and grew throughout the season. Cover crop biomass varied by location with the most occurring in fields that were damaged by the July 9, 2020 windstorm (the location with the greatest biomass had 45% green snap). Thus, the open canopy resulted in greater weed and cover crop biomass. Biomass samples were collected in late September by taking three 30” X 30” or 36 X 36” squares for each treatment (dependent upon row spacing). The samples were sorted in the field into weeds, interseeded forbs/legumes, and interseeded grasses and placed in separate paper bags. Samples were weighed and dried. We wanted to compare any differences in weed biomass between the check and interseeded treatments, especially since no residual herbicides were used in 2020. There were no differences in weed biomass between the check and interseeded cover crop treatments. Total cover crop biomass accumulated varied by site and ranged from 277 lb/ac to 3818 lb/ac. It should be noted that the cover crops continued to grow after we sampled until the first hard freeze occurred. The cowpeas provided the greatest biomass and grew to the tops of the tassels. They also formed a ‘bridge’ between corn rows where the canopy broke open. Cowpeas, hairy vetch, sweetclover, and forage soybean were all fixing nitrogen during the 2020 growing season. The red clover and hairy vetch that survived the winter were fixing nitrogen in the spring of 2021.

The windstorm greatly impacted yields as well. Across all the sites, corn yield for the check averaged 214 bu/ac while corn yield for the interseeded treatment yielded 209 bu/ac. At four of the six sites, yield was significantly lower where the cover crop was interseeded. At the remaining two sites yield was not different between treatments. Net return for the corn where the cover crop was interseeded was less at five of the six locations. Net return includes the yield and price of the corn crop and cost of cover crop seed and application. Other than the York county location (two years), all the location data is based on one year of research. These studies will continue in the same fields and strips for at least three years, so it will be interesting to watch for any changes in soil biological and physical properties over time as well. Visually, in the field where the center drill unit vs. 3 was used, it appeared that the 1 drill unit had more biomass. Statistically, it ended up the same as the three drill units for total cover crop biomass. At the York location where cover crops were interseeded into two corn populations, there were no yield differences between the corn populations; however, both yielded less than the check treatment. A special thanks to all the growers working with us on these interseeding cover crop studies and to The Nature Conservancy, Upper Big Blue NRD, NRCS, and Kellogg’s for their partnership with Nebraska Extension on this effort. If you’d like more information, I’ve provided tables of data and links to videos we produced at my blog site jenreesources.com.


2019: York County (left), the grower built his own interseeder and tested a nitrogen mix (4 lb/ac crimson clover, 3 lb/ac red clover, 2 lb/ac yellow sweet clover, 4 lb/ac Winterhawk annual ryegrass, 1.5 lb/ac impact forage collards, 1.5 lb/ac Trophy rapeseed) vs. diversity mix (2 lb/ac red clover, 2.5 lb/ac Hubam white seed clover, 4 lb/ac Winterhawk annual ryegrass, 1 lb/ac purple top turnip, 3 lb/ac golden flax, 0.5 lb/ac phacelia Angelia,
0.5 lb/ac chicory) interseeded at V5-V6 corn vs. check treatment.
Seward County (right), a Hagie was used to broadcast interseed 10 lb/ac red clover and 5 lb/ac buckwheat into V6 corn vs. check treatment.
2020 location information.
Summarized data for the 6 on-farm research interseeded cover crop locations in 2020.
* denotes statistically significant at 90% confidence level.

Cover crop biomass as a result of interseeding using three drill units (left) vs. only the center drill unit (middle). Close up of Penn State Interseeder drill units (right).

In 2020, the York Co. grower rebuilt his interseeder.

Nebraska On-Farm Research Virtual Field Day Interseeding Videos:

JenREES 3/7/21

Farm Bill ARC-IC: Unless one has a field that tends to get hit with lower yields compared to county average every year, I’m unsure that ARC-IC is a fit for many farmers in this part of the State. For the 2021 decision, one would need to expect 2021 yield to be significantly less than county average yields. So if your field(s) are typically near or above county average yields, it’s perhaps not the wisest decision.

Lawn Care: The beautiful weather is a great opportunity to rake lawns, remove leaves from lawns, and dormant overseed grass in thin spots. Dormant seeding provides an opportunity for seed to grow when soil temperatures warm and spring rains come. Prepare areas to overseed by hand raking small areas to remove dead growth and loosen the soil surface. Large areas can be heavily aerated. It’s best to only power rake if there’s a thatch layer of ½” or more present. Overseed Kentucky bluegrass at 1-2 lbs/1000 square feet and tall fescue at 4-6 lbs/1000 square feet. Also, it’s too early to apply fertilizer and herbicides to lawns.

Solar Electric Questions: Will share more regarding a free webinar series next week to be held from Mar. 30-Apr. 8. If you have specific solar-related questions right now, please direct them to John Hay, Nebraska Extension Educator at 402-472-0408 or jhay2@unl.edu.

Nitrogen Rate and Timing Studies: An article written by Dr. Charlie Wortmann and colleagues shared, “Partial Factor Productivity (PFP) is commonly expressed as yield per unit input, e.g. bushels of corn per pound of fertilizer N applied (bu/lb N). PFP can be adapted to units of nutrient removed in grain harvest to units of nutrient applied, such as corn N harvested relative to fertilizer N applied (PFPN, lb/lb).” Advances in corn genetics and changes in farmers’ management practices have resulted in more pounds of grain produced for every pound of nitrogen applied. Dr. Richard Ferguson shared, “The average PFP of fertilizer N for corn in Nebraska was estimated to average 1.16 bu/lb N in 2012 compared to 0.57 bu/lb N in 1965. This represents a doubling in PFP for fertilizer N applied to corn. The trend of increase was linear from 1965 to 2012. Assuming a grain N concentration of 1.2% at 84.5% dry wt. or 0.67 lb N/bu, the PFPN converts to 0.79 lb of grain N per lb of fertilizer N applied in 2012 compared with 0.38 lb/lb in 1965.” That’s quite an increase in nitrogen use efficiency!

Another way farmers have been looking to increase nitrogen use efficiency is to compare nitrogen rates and timing of the fertilizer applications. We’ve had some on-farm research studies recently look at sidedress applications using either the UNL equation/Maize N model or industry models such as Climate Field View and Granular. In all these studies, the recommended rate was compared to rates that were at least 30 or 50 pounds over and under the recommended rate. In 2020, there were two nitrogen rate and timing studies in the area partially sponsored by the UBBNRD. A York County study found no yield differences between applications of spring anhydrous of 135, 185, and 235 lbs/ac. The same farmer also did a nitrogen rate X timing study in Hamilton County. He compared Fall vs. Spring vs. Split application rates of anhydrous + UAN of 205 vs. 255 lb/ac for each timing. There were no yield differences with any of the timings and rates. Take homes: In none of the studies did the addition of 30-50 lbs N/ac above the recommended rate increase the yield statistically. A few of these studies also compared side-dress applications vs. pre-plant alone. One situation resulted in a statistically lower yield with pre-plant alone while the others resulted in no yield differences. I’ve compiled these results in a table at http://jenreesources.com.

These nitrogen rate and timing studies could provide farmers a way to assess for their own operations. I’ve mentioned the precision nutrient management studies (https://go.unl.edu/4rvw) for several months. If you weren’t sure if it could apply to your situation, I was told that those don’t have to be precision nutrient applied. So, if you’re interested, please let me know and we can work out the details. There is a $1300 stipend for that specific study. There’s also up to $300 reimbursement from UBBNRD for water quality related studies. I’m currently working through on-farm research protocols for 2021. If you have a production and/or product-related question you want to test on your own farm, please contact me or your local Extension educator and we’d be happy to help you set up a study!

*Note: End of column for newspapers.*
*For mobile devices, please scroll left-right to read the first table below.*


YearCounty/
Irrigation
Pre-PlantIn-Season Rate/
Yield
In-Season Rate/
Yield
In-Season Rate/
Yield
In-Season Rate/
Yield
Other
2015Dodge
(Maize N model)
12 lb N/ac MAP (fall)
80 lb N/ac 32% UAN at plant
70 lb N/ac
222 bu/ac
100 lb N/ac
220 bu/ac
2015Dodge
(Maize N model)
12 lb N/ac MAP (fall)
80 lb N/ac 32% UAN at plant
70 lb N/ac
221 bu/ac
100 lb N/ac
221 bu/ac
2016Dodge
Rainfed
(Climate Field View)
78 lb N as 32% UAN in April30 lb N/ac as 32%+10%ATS (SD)
224 bu/ac
60 lb N/ac as 32%+10%ATS (SD)
226 bu/ac
90 lb N/ac as 32%+10% ATS (SD)
239 bu/ac
2016Dodge
Non-irrigated
(Climate Field View)
78 lb N as 32% UAN in April35 lb N/ac as 32%+10%ATS (SD)
196 bu/ac
65 lb N/ac as 32%+10% ATS (SD)
201 bu/ac
95 lb N/ac as 32%+10%ATS (SD)
201 bu/ac
2016Dodge Pivot70 lb N/ac as NH3110 lb N/ac
247 bu/ac
140 lb N/ac
250 bu/ac
170 lb N/ac
249 bu/ac
2017Dodge
Pivot (4″)
70 lb N as 32% UAN Spring110 lb N/ac 32% (SD)
239 bu/ac
140 lb N/ac 32%
(SD)
243 bu/ac
170 lb N/ac 32% (SD)
251 bu/ac
210 lb N/ac 32% Spring Pre-plant
216 bu/ac*
2017Saunders
Non-irrigated
100 lb N/ac as 32% UAN Spring40 lb N/ac 32% (SD)

195 bu/ac
40 lb N/ac 32%+Humic acid (SD)
199 bu/ac
75 lb N/ac 32% (SD)

200 bu/ac
140 lb N/ac 32% Spring Pre-Plant
193 bu/ac
2017Saunders
Non-irrigated
100 lb N/ac as 32% UAN Spring40 lb N/ac 32% (SD)

183 bu/ac
40 lb N/ac 32%+Humic acid (SD)
183 bu/ac
75 lb N/ac 32% (SD)

185 bu/ac
140 lb N/ac 32% Spring Pre-Plant
185 bu/ac
2018Gage
Non-irrigated
150 lb N as 32% UAN in April. Rye cover crop.0 lb N/ac as AMS (SD)
137 bu/ac*
50 lb N/ac as AMS (SD)
161 bu/ac
100lb N/ac as AMS (SD)
151 bu/ac
2018Franklin
Pivot (4″)
None. Cover crop mix0 lb N/ac as Urea broadcast

210 bu/ac*
100 lb N/ac as Urea broadcast

254 bu/ac
175 lb N/ac as Urea broadcast

272 bu/ac
250 lb N/ac as Urea broadcast
275 bu/ac
*Denotes that yield for the treatment was statistically different from others for a given year and location at the 90% confidence level. (SD)=Sidedress application.

2020 York Spring Anhydrous Nitrogen Rate on Corn
This study essentially showed what the previous studies had: that less nitrogen can be applied without hurting yield or net return. This study is sponsored in part by the UBBNRD.

Pre-PlantIn-seasonlbs N/bu grainYieldMarginal Net Return
110 lb N/ac spring NH3 (March)25 lb N/ac as UAN May0.73 C184 A$599.14 A
160 lb N/ac spring NH3 (March)25 lb N/ac as UAN May0.98 B189 A$600.38 A
210 lb N/ac spring NH3 (March)25 lb N/ac as UAN May1.23 A191 A$594.88 A
*Values with the same letter are not statistically different at a 90% confidence level. Marginal net return based on $3.51/bu corn, $8/ac for the anhydrous application cost, $0.28/lb N as anhydrous, and $0.35/lb N as UAN.

2020 Hamilton County Evaluating Nitrogen Rate and Timing on Corn
This study showed no difference in nitrogen timing nor rate on yield and showed less nitrogen can be applied without impacting yield. For reference, the UNL economical N recommendation for this field was 232 lb/ac N if applied in the fall, 190 lb/ac N if applied in the spring, and 156 lb/ac N if split applied. With a lbs N/bu grain of 1.0 or greater, it would be interesting to see this study conducted again using lower nitrogen rates. Soil samples down to 6 feet were taken by the farmer and the results did not find leaching in any treatments in this study. This study is sponsored in part by the UBBNRD.

Pre-PlantIn-seasonlbs N/bu grainYieldMarginal Net Return
180 lb N/ac Fall NH325 lb N/ac as UAN May1.03 B199 A$629.85 A
230 lb N/ac Fall NH325 lb N/ac as UAN May1.27 A201 A$625.49 A
180 lb N/ac Spring NH325 lb N/ac as UAN May1.02 B201 A$638.30 A
230 lb N/ac Spring NH325 lb N/ac as UAN May1.24 A206 A$641.70 A
120 lb/ac N Spring NH325 lb N/ac as UAN May
60 lb N/ac side-dress V8
1.00 B205 A$645.69 A
170 lb/ac N Spring NH325 lb N/ac as UAN May
60 lb N/ac side-dress V8
1.24 A206 A$633.50 A
Values with the same letter are not significantly different at a 90% confidence level. Marginal net return based on $3.51 bu corn, $0.28/lb N as anhydrous ammonia, $8.00/ac for anhdryous application, $0.35/lb for UAN applied with herbicide or as a sidedress, and $3/ac for sidedress UAN application.

JenREES 2-21-21

On-Farm Research Updates: This week brings my favorite winter meetings, the on-farm research updates on Feb. 25 and 26! I’m passionate about on-farm research as it’s such a practical, inexpensive way to address the research questions growers have! These meetings are more meaningful to me because we get to hear from the farmers themselves who conducted the studies and have more discussion around the topics. They do look different this year with a huge number of people registered virtually vs. in-person. They’re also only a half day and we won’t cover the entire book of studies that were conducted. However, whether you participate virtually or in-person, you will hopefully hear from farmers who conducted on-farm research studies. And, this ‘in-person’ meeting does have people at most local sites also presenting in person. I realize that’s been a point of confusion/frustration as we’ve hosted many zoom meetings as ‘in-person’ watch events where no one presented live at the location. Register for virtual or in-person at: https://go.unl.edu/h83j.

I enjoy hearing from the farmers themselves regarding why they conduct on-farm research. The following YouTube video produced in 2020 highlights area farmers David and Doug Cast of Beaver Crossing and Ken Herz of Lawrence: https://youtu.be/tEy-I43CT0E.

Succession/Estate Planning opportunities are upcoming with a two-part webinar event held Feb. 25 and Mar. 4 at Noon. You can register for those at: https://farm.unl.edu/webinars . There’s also an in-person event at Central City at the Fairgrounds on March 2 at 9:30 a.m. and please RSVP to 308-946-3843 if you’d like to attend.

Tree and Houseplant Webinars: A webinar focused on trees will be Feb. 26 from 9 a.m.-Noon with registration here: Go.unl.edu/ProHort. A houseplant webinar series will occur on Feb. 27 and Mar. 6 from 10-noon with registration here: https://go.unl.edu/houseplants101.

Nitrogen Studies: With spring nitrogen applications around the corner, perhaps you are interested in testing different rates, timing, or inhibitors on your farm? On-farm research is a great option to consider! For some specific precision nitrogen studies (including inhibitors), there are stipends of $1300 available to producers interested in those studies. More info: https://cropwatch.unl.edu/precision-nitrogen-management-farm-research-project. There’s also a partnership with the Upper Big Blue NRD where those interested in conducting nutrient management or cover crop studies may receive $300 in reimbursement costs. If you’re interested in a study like this, please let me know. Next week I’ll share on nitrogen rate and timing results.

Farm Bill: Another tool that may be more visual in helping you make these decisions is the K-State tool at: https://www.agmanager.info/ag-policy/2018-farm-bill/tradeoff-between-20212022-arc-and-plc and I added it to my Farm Bill Decision Tools blog post. It shows you in one chart what happens with potential ARC-CO or PLC triggers by crop depending on what market year average price does or what county yield does. It doesn’t allow you to put in a historical irrigated percentage (HIP), so you need to consider that when selecting ‘irrigated’ or ‘nonirrigated’ in the tool. With it being in one chart, visually, perhaps that would help some of you more? It honestly doesn’t change what I’ve shared with you before, but it seems people are really struggling with this decision, so if you need another way to visualize what to do, it may help. Ultimately, no matter what tool is used, PLC is favored most often in corn, milo, and wheat. Soybeans often could go either way, and likely there may be no payment for soy or corn unless something substantial happens with MYA price or county yields. If you’re really on the fence, it may be helpful/wise to just split decisions between the two programs for different farms? For counties where there’s split irrigated/non-irrigated payments, particularly in areas that are drought-prone, look at what county average yield will trigger ARC-CO for your specific county using the tool. Crop insurance and marketing are ultimately a huge chunk of risk management too. Ultimately, the decision is up to you and no one can predict prices/yields. This information is just shared as a way to hopefully help with your decision making.

I still haven’t heard/seen that 2020 county average yields have been released for me to help anyone with looking at ARC-IC. From the past, we needed around 20% farm level yield loss compared to county average yield for ARC-IC to trigger. So, for those with significant yield loss from wind events, depending on how your farms are grouped, it still may be something to look at. Hopefully county average yields will be available soon.


Quick way to view how county average yields and MYA price can impact ARC-CO or PLC decisions. With Olympic average county corn yield of 234.24 for York County, for this irrigated farm, at the PLC reference price of $3.70 for a MYA price, it would take county average yields falling to 190 before ARC-CO could trigger. The MYA price (based at this county yield of 234.24) would need to be $3.18 before ARC-CO would trigger.
For this Seward county non-irrigated corn field example, it shows Olympic county-average yield is 175.07 bu/ac. At the $3.70 PLC reference price as the MYA price, it would take a county average yield loss of around 30 bu/ac in order for ARC-CO to trigger. It would take a MYA price of $3.18 (based on county-average yield of 175.07 bu/ac) for ARC-CO to trigger.
For this York Co. irrigated soybean example, the decision can go either way. Olympic county average yield is 72.33 bu/ac. At PLC reference price of $8.40, county average yields would have to drop to around 65 bu/ac for ARC-CO to trigger. MYA price would have to drop to $7.70 for ARC-CO to trigger. Reality is that most likely, barring no major yield or price changes, neither program may trigger for soybeans.

JenREES 2/14/21

Cold Weather and Livestock: This week I found gratitude time and again for a warm home. Thinking of those who haven’t been as fortunate. Have also thought about our livestock producers taking care of animals. In the unfortunate event of livestock losses, please document/take photos in the event of any disaster declarations for livestock indemnity payments (LIP).

Crop/Livestock Systems On-Farm Research Study: At last week’s cover crop and soil health conference, Ken Herz shared on his family’s on-farm research study. I’m so proud of and grateful to the entire Herz family for their partnership in this study and for the focus on the economics of an entire system! This study was designed with a system’s perspective incorporating crops, cattle, cover crops in a way that fit many operations in a non-irrigated setting. Their goals were to increase soil organic matter and ultimately determine yield and economics of the entire system. The crop rotation is Wheat (with cover crop planted into stubble after harvest), Corn, Soybean. Cattle graze the cover crop in the winter and also graze the corn residue. No-till wheat prior to corn for increased moisture saving and yield is common in this part of the State as is planting a cover crop into wheat stubble for grazing. The questions I hear include:

1-What moisture and potential yield am I giving up to the successive corn crop if I plant a cover crop into my wheat stubble?
2-If there’s a yield loss in the successive corn crop, do the economics of grazing the cover crop offset that loss?

We had three treatments and two locations (Location 1 had a cool-season cover crop and Location 2 had a warm-season one). The treatments are: ungrazed wheat stubble, ungrazed cover crop, and grazed cover crop. We’ve collected soil property, moisture, nutrient, and health data; yield and moisture of each crop; cover crop biomass; grazing days; and economics.

Location 1 in Nuckolls county began in 2016 with a cool season cover crop planted after wheat was harvested and manure applied. Three-year analysis showed no difference in soil physical properties (bulk density and compaction) amongst treatments. There was greater total microbial and fungal biomass in the grazed cover crop treatment (indicators of improved soil health). Interestingly, the ungrazed wheat stubble is the most economical treatment at this location. Reasons: cost of hauling water for grazing, numerically higher yields in the ungrazed wheat stubble, variable biomass in cool season cover, and a large yield hit to the 2018 soybeans in the grazed cover crop treatment during a dry year. In 2018, to the line there was a stress difference in the soybeans and that treatment read drier via soil moisture sensors. They’ve been conservative with grazing so at the time we couldn’t explain it. In taking soil health tests in year 3, we realized how greatly the microbial biomass had increased where cattle grazed. Our hypothesis is microbes broke down the remaining residue exposing soil to more evaporative losses resulting in less soil moisture and less yield for soybeans in the grazed treatment during a dry year. It’s now on our radar when grazing occurs to get cattle off even sooner to account for feeding the microbes too.

Location 2 in Webster county began in 2018 with a warm season cover crop. Over 4 tons of biomass allowing for 91 grazing days, not hauling water, and no successive crop yield differences all led to the grazed cover crop being the most economical treatment at this location.

Take home points: it’s important to add all the components when looking at economics. Grazed cover crop treatment at Location 1 would look better if we didn’t include the large cost of hauling water and if there was more cool season biomass allowing for more grazing days. The differing results at the two locations showed the influence of cover crop biomass and importance of including value of grazing; fencing/water/labor costs for livestock; cover crop costs; and successive crop yields in system economics. It’s easy to make assumptions that a certain practice is profitable! Location 1 will hopefully continue another 6 years switching the cool season cover crop to a warm season one to compare economics on the same field. We’re curious if the warm season cover will increase biomass and grazing days enough to outweigh the water hauling costs and show a benefit to the grazed cover crop treatment, or if the ungrazed wheat stubble will remain the most economical for this field location.

Regarding cover crop economics, it could be helpful to determine a consistent way for assessing a dollar value for potential benefits such as aiding in weed and erosion control, nutrient uptake, etc. This may aid conversations with landlords and lenders for those desirous to try them. Without livestock value, currently on paper, there’s really only costs.

(End of news column. Photos below are additional information.)


2016 Cover Crop: Cost for spraying wheat stubble was $18/ac. Costs for the non-grazed cover crop treatments were $46.64/ac ($28.64/ac for seed and $18/ac for drilling). Costs for grazed cover crop treatments were $61.94/ac ($46.64/ac for the cover crop seed and planting, $5/ac for fencing, and $10.30/ac for water). Water cost was calculated assuming hauling water (1,000 gal) 15 miles every two days at $2 per loaded mile and $6 per $1,000 gal. Costs for the grazed cover crop treatments equaled $30.97/AUM (animal unit months). Value of the forage is estimated to be $84.80/ac (based on rental rates of $53/pair/month [1.25 AUMs] or $42.40 AUM).
2017 Corn: The economic analysis had no input differences for any of the treatments for corn production. UNL Corn Budget 21 (EC872, 2017 Nebraska Crop Budgets, revised Nov. 2016) was the closest that fit this operation, so a total cost/ac of $459.60/ac and a market year average price of $3.15/bu was used. In the previously established grazed cover crop treatment, cattle grazed on the corn stalks. A $5/ac cornstalk rental rate value was assessed to this 9.6 acre area. This rate assumes water, fencing, and the care of the animals.
2018 Soybean: The inputs were the same for the soybeans planted into all the previous treatments. UNL Budget 56 (EC872, 2018 Nebraska Crop Budgets, revised Nov. 2017) was used, which stated a $315.82/ac total cost. A market year average price of $7.40/bu was used.
2019 Wheat: The inputs were the same for the wheat planted into all the previous treatments. UNL Budget 70 (EC872, 2019 Nebraska Crop Budgets, revised Nov. 2018) was used which stated a $247.04/ac total cost. A market year average price of $3.65/bu was used. 2019 Cover Crop: Cost for spraying the wheat stubble was $18 ($9/ac application and $9/ac herbicide cost). Costs for the non-grazed cover crop treatments were $49.42/ac ($31.42/ac for seed and $18/ac for drilling). Costs for grazed cover crop treatments were $64.00/ac ($49.42/ac for the cover crop seed and planting, $5/ac for fencing, and $9.58/ac for water). Water cost was calculated based on hauling water (5.75 water trips at $16/trip which included cost of water). Costs for the grazed cover crop treatments equaled $54.78/AUM (49.42*9.6=474.43/8.66AUM from what was grazed=54.78). Value of the forage is estimated to be $84.80/ac (based on rental rates of $53/pair/month (1.25 AUMs) or $42.40 AUM). Forage production was limited in fall of 2019 compared to 2016 due to wet summer that delayed wheat harvest which delayed cover crop planting. Cool fall led to less growth. Only 8.66 AUM was achieved with the 2019 cover crop compared to 19.03 AUM with the 2016 cover crop.
2020 Corn: The economic analysis had no input differences for any of the treatments for corn production. UNL Corn Budget 23 (EC872, 2020 Nebraska Crop Budgets, revised Nov. 2019) was the closest that fit this operation, so a total cost/ac of $452.10 and a market year average price of $3.51 was used. In the previously established grazed cover crop treatment, cattle grazed on the corn stalks. A $5/ac cornstalk rental rate value was assessed to this 9.6 acre area. This rate assumes water, fencing, and the care of the animals.
2018 Cover Crop: Costs to spray the wheat stubble for weed control were $18/ac. Costs for the non-grazed
cover crop treatments were $41.82/ac for cover crop seed and drilling. Costs for the grazed cover crop
treatments were $47.74 ($41.82/ac for cover crop seed and drilling, $5/ac for fencing, and $0.92/ac water).
Grazing benefit is $6370 (using a value of $2.00/head/day) for the 52.3 acres grazed. The resulting net
benefit is $74.06/acre.
2019 Corn: The economic analysis had no input differences for any of the treatments for corn production.
UNL Corn Budget 23 (EC872, 2019 Nebraska Crop Budgets, revised Nov. 2018) was the closest that fit this
operation, so a total cost/ac of $438.08/ac and a market year average price of $3.83/bu was used. In the
previously established grazed cover crop treatment, cattle grazed on the corn stalks. A $5/ac cornstalk
rental rate value was assessed to this 52.3 acre area. This rate assumes water, fencing, and the care of the
animals.
2020 Soybean: The economic analysis had no input differences for any of the treatments for soybean
production. UNL Soybean Budget 58 (EC872, 2020 Nebraska Crop Budgets, revised Nov. 2019) was used
which states a $392.90/ac total cost. A market year average price of $9.50 was used.

JenREES 2-7-21

Nitrification Inhibitors: For the next several weeks I will share data from on-farm research studies. Nitrification Inhibitors are best thought of as an insurance policy against loss of applied ammonium-based fertilizer due to excess rain in the first month or so after fertilization. For spring applications, some active ingredients have been proven by research to slow the conversion of ammonium to nitrate for at least two weeks, with a range of 1-6 weeks, depending on soil temperature. They are one tool (not a silver bullet), when used at right place and time, for aiding in nitrogen management. To summarize the research below, nitrification inhibitors are less likely to have a significant impact on increasing yield and reducing nitrate leaching in silt loam and silty clay loam soils as compared to sandy soils.

An ongoing study at UNL’s South Central Ag Lab (SCAL) near Clay Center is conducted on silt loam soils, common in the UBBNRD. The majority of the study at SCAL compared Spring pre-plant anhydrous vs. side-dress application with and without the use of nitrification inhibitor N-Serve® (nitrapyrin). A yield increase due to nitrapyrin applied pre-plant was observed in 6 of 28 years with a mean yield change of 2 bu/ac/year. Only 1 of 28 years was a yield increase observed when nitrapyrin was applied in season during side-dress application with a mean yield change of 0 bu/ac/year. In this study, they found delayed side-dress N with nitrapyrin could reduce plant N uptake and release N too late, thus it is not recommended to add an inhibitor to nitrogen applied in-season.

In 2019, two York Co. farmers compared spring anhydrous ammonia applications with and without the nitrification inhibitor (N-Serve®). At York location 1, 180 lbs N as anhydrous was applied on April 10, 2019 in ridge-till, silt-loam soil. At York location 2, 160 lbs N as anhydrous was applied on April 8, 2019 in no-till, silt-loam soil. These locations were around 4 miles apart and the previous crop in both was soybean. Soil samples were taken 2” off the anhydrous band down to three feet for both ammonium and nitrate concentrations at V7 growth stage. The results showed the nitrification inhibitor was still slowing the conversion of ammonium to nitrate in 1st foot at York 1 location (longer than would be anticipated for a spring-applied inhibitor treatment), but not at York 2. At both study locations, no yield difference occurred between the check and inhibitor treatments respectively (250 vs. 251 bu/ac at York 1 and 264 vs. 264 bu/ac at York 2).

In 2020, four farmers (3 in York Co. and one in Fillmore Co.) conducted on-farm research inhibitor studies. These studies were in partnership with the UBBNRD. Soil samples for ammonium and nitrate concentration were taken around 6 and 9 weeks post-application based on the protocol provided. Note: with these being inhibitor focused studies, future protocols will have soil tests taken closer to application. With farmers interested in what nitrogen distribution in the profile looks like in the late season, we will also sample then.

At York location 1, 150 lbs N as anhydrous was applied in the fall and spring with and without Centuro®. Soil tests in early May showed less total nitrogen in the third foot for the Spring anhydrous with Centuro® compared to Fall anhydrous with no inhibitor. There were no yield differences between treatments in 2020 (Fall and Spring check yielded 269 bu/ac, Fall with Centuro® 267 bu/ac, Spring with Centuro® 270 bu/ac). This study will continue. The other three locations had yields impacted by the July 9, 2020 wind event. At the Fillmore Co. location, 115 lbs spring applied 32% UAN with and without Instinct® II was compared. There was less nitrate and total nitrogen in the Instinct® II treatment at 2nd and 3rd foot vs. the check and there were no yield differences (both yielded 213 bu/ac). At the York 2 location, four products were compared (44 gal. spring applied 32% UAN as a check compared to the check plus either ammonium thiosulfate (ATS), Biovante™, or Instinct® II. The UAN+ Instinct® II had less nitrate and total nitrogen in the 3rd foot than the UAN+ Biovante™. The UAN+ATS treatment yielded significantly more than the check (215 bu/ac vs. 209 bu/ac) with no differences amongst the other treatments (212 bu/ac each). At the York 3 location, 45 gal spring applied 32% UAN was compared to a producer-developed concoction containing humic acid, sugar, and ATS. There was more nitrate, ammonium, and total nitrate in the inhibitor concoction than the check at the 3rd foot with no yield differences (220 bu/ac check vs. 221 bu/ac inhibitor concoction). These and other Nebraska on-farm research studies will be presented Feb. 25-26 both virtually and in-person. You can learn more and register here: https://go.unl.edu/h83j.


JenREES 10-18-20

This week I don’t have a crop update, just grateful for how well harvest continues to progress and how many farmers have shared they finished this week or are near the finishing mark. It’s also heartwarming to see so many friends and neighbors rally around farmers in need across the country.

Picture taken from June 2020 soil sampling of 1′, 2′, 3′ depths in on-farm research nitrification inhibitor studies.

I’m also grateful to all the farmers who worked with me in on-farm research studies and plots this year! We had 20 and will share the results when the data is compiled. Six of the on-farm research studies were on nitrogen management in partnership with the UBBNRD. As harvest finishes and you turn your attention to planning for next season, one topic on your mind may be nitrogen management. There was a recent CropWatch article written with some considerations here: https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2020/planning-2021-fertilizer-n-application-following-dry-2020

Are you interested in how agricultural technologies can improve nitrogen management on your farm? Nebraska Extension received a $1.2 million On-Farm Conservation Innovation grant from USDA – Natural Resource Conservation Service which connects corn and wheat producers across Nebraska with access to cutting-edge technologies through on-farm research. The goal is for producers to get hands-on experience with new technologies to manage nitrogen more efficiently and evaluate how these technologies will work on their operations. Interested producers will be able to select from several project options. They include:

  • Nitrification Inhibitors for Corn
  • Crop Canopy Sensing for Corn N Management
  • Crop Model Based Tools for Corn N Management and Split-Applications
  • Crop Sensing for Wheat N Management.

Producers and consultants will work closely with Nebraska Extension to accomplish the project. Eligible producers who complete these studies will receive $1,300 for recognition of their time and resource commitments and to mitigate risk of potential yield (and therefore potential profit) loss. Cooperating producers will also be eligible to receive up to $1,200 for eligible technology costs associated with these studies.

Interested growers should contact me at jrees2@unl.edu, your local Extension Educator, or Laura Thompson, Director, Nebraska On-Farm Research Network at laura.thompson@unl.edu. Additional information regarding the project can be found at https://cropwatch.unl.edu/precision-nitrogen-management-farm-research-project.

Women Managing Ag Land Conference on Dec. 2nd from 11:30 a.m.-2:30 p.m. will offer learning opportunities for female farmland owners and tenants looking to improve their business management skills and navigate the challenges of owning and renting agricultural land. Attendees will have the opportunity to attend either in person or virtually via Zoom. The closest in-person event locations near Eastern Nebraska R&E Center near Mead and Holiday Inn at Kearney will have limited attendance and health measures will be implemented. The keynote address, “Finding Happiness in the Craziness of Life,” will be delivered by Kathy Peterson, a farmer from Storm Lake, Iowa, and founder of PeopleWorks, Inc. Additional topics include: “Improve your Ag Lease by Improving the Landlord/Tenant Relationship” by Extension Educator Allan Vyhnalek, “NextGen A Win-Win for Beginning Farmers & Asset Owners” by Karla Bahm with NDA, “Navigating Uncertainty in 2021: Nebraska Land Values & Cash Rental Rates” with Ag Economist Jim Jansen, and more!

Registration on or before Nov. 18, is $25. Registration on or after Nov. 19 is $30. Registrations for in-person locations will close Nov. 29. Lunch will be included at each in-person site. This conference is hosted by Nebraska Extension and inspired by Annie’s Project. More information and registration at: https://wia.unl.edu/WMAL.

%d bloggers like this: