Transcript Slide 1
GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IN PRECISION AGRICULTURE ============================================================= Daniel E. Edmonds ============================================ Precision Agriculture SOIL/BAE 4213 Purpose of Government • Protectorate of its citizens • Provides an environment for economic trade and development • Unifies a people Precision Agriculture Defined • Defined By Government – “… a management strategy that uses information technologies to bring data from multiple sources to bear on decisions associated with crop production.” • Defined by OSU Scientists (BAE/SOIL 4213) – “Variable rate application of fertilizers, pesticides, or other materials based on the sensed needs of the crop within the following constraints: • • • • Available technology Agronomic principles Economic principles Environmental stewardship” Precision Agriculture The Beginning • Initiated in the 1980’s – Improve application of fertilizers • Vary rates and blends as needed within fields – Adoption by producers slow • Socio-economical – Principal Costs – Lack of Skills • Agronomical – – – – – Lack of basic information Inadequate sampling and scouting procedures Absence of site-specific fertilizer recommendations Misuse of information Lack of qualified agronomic services • Technological – Machinery, sensors, GPS, software, and remote sensing Precision Agriculture Early Adopters • Early Adopters – Younger Farmers • Average age of Adopter = 44.5 – Average age of the Farmer = 53.5 – More Farming Experience • Average farming Experience of Adopter = 21.8 years – Average farmer Experience = 18 years – Farmed acres • Average adopter farmed 2,584 acres – Average Farmer farms 635 acres – Education • Early adopters had some form of higher education at the college level Precision Agriculture Why or Why not Adopt • Adoption – Improve management abilities – Increase net returns – Improve cost efficiency of production – Address environmental concerns – Address government regulations • Non Adoption – Lack of information regarding impact of technology – Reluctance of farmers to change production practices – Cost of technology Government’s Role EQIP Program • Promote Adoption – Incentives Programs • Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) – Provides financial assistance for structural, vegetative, and management practices » Financial incentives for nutrient management – Incentive Payments Are a Flat Rate per Acre Government’s Role EQIP Payments • Incentive Payments – Nutrient Management - Calibration Strip • This is an incentive payment for the application of nutrients in a manner that minimizes the risk of leaving the field. It includes the use of nitrogen rich or ramped calibration strips in crop fields to determine split application rates for nitrogen. It includes the use of precision tools (i.e. GreenSeeker) to determine nitrogen needs as well as application tools to establish nitrogen rich strips or ramped calibration strips. – – – – Rate: $5.00 / acre Acre Cap: 640 Dollar Cap: $3,200.00 / year Time Limit: Up to 3 years Government’s Role EQIP Payments • Incentive Payments – Nutrient Management - Precision Sensor • This is an incentive payment to use advanced technology for nutrient management applications to crops and grasses. Includes the costs of application of nutrients (labor and equipment) using precision sensor technology (i.e. GreenSeeker) to deliver prescribed fertilizer through spray systems at variable rates across a crop or grass field, resulting in more efficient use of fertilizers according to the actual plant needs which are variable across the field. – – – – Rate: $12.00 / acre Acre Cap: 640 Dollar Cap: $7,680.00 / year Time Limit: Up to 3 years Precision Agriculture • • • • Benefits Increased crop quality Improved sustainability Lower management risk Food safety associated to product traceability • Environmental protection • Rural development Questions? References Bongiovanni, R., Lowenberg-Deboer, J. 2004. Precision agriculture and sustainability. Precision Agriculture 5; 359-387. Heimlich, R. 1998. Precision agriculture: information technology for improved resource use. Agricultural Outlook. Pg 19-23. Hudson, D., Hite, D. 2002. Producer willingness to pay for precision application technology: implications for government and the technology industry. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 51; 39-53. Kitchen, N., Snyder, C., Franzen, D., Wiebold, W. 2002. Educational needs of precision agriculture. Precision Agriculture 3; 341-351. McBratney, A., Whelan, B., Ancev, T., Bouma, J. 2005. Future directions of precision agriculture. Precision Agriculture 6; 7-23. Popp, J., Griffin, T., Pendergrass, E. 2002. How cooperation may lead to consensus assessing the realities and perceptions of precision farming in your state. Journal of the ASFMRA. Pg 26-31. Raun, W., Solie, J. 2007. Precision agriculture: an overview. Class notes. Slide 9. http://soil4213.okstate.edu/2007/Course_Intro.ppt#282,9,Oklahoma State University’s Definition of Precision Agriculture Robert, P. 2002. Precision agriculture: a challenge for crop nutrition management. Plant and Soil Science 247; 143-149.