Farmers' use of nutrient management: lessons from watershed case studies.

Nutrient enrichment of water resources has degraded coastal waters throughout the world, including in the United States (e.g., Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, and Neuse Estuary). Agricultural nonpoint sources have significant impacts on water resources. As a result, nutrient management planning is the primary tool recommended to reduce nutrient losses from agricultural fields. Its effectiveness requires nutrient management plans be used by farmers. There is little literature describing nutrient management decision-making. Here, two case studies are described that address this gap: (i) a synthesis of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the Conservation Effects Assessment Project, and (ii) field surveys from three nutrient-impaired river basins/watersheds in North Carolina (Neuse, Tar-Pamlico, and Jordan Lake drainage areas). Results indicate farmers generally did not fully apply nutrient management plans or follow basic soil test recommendations even when they had them. Farmers were found to be hesitant to apply N at university-recommended rates because they did not trust the recommendations, viewed abundant N as insurance, or used recommendations made by fertilizer dealers. Exceptions were noted when watershed education, technical support, and funding resources focused on nutrient management that included easing management demands, actively and consistently working directly with a small group of farmers, and providing significant resource allocations to fund agency personnel and cost-share funds to farmers. Without better dialogue with farmers and meaningful investment in strategies that reward farmers for taking what they perceive as risks relative to nutrient reduction, little progress in true adoption of nutrient management will be made.

Abatement costs of soil conservation in China's Loess Plateau: balancing income with conservation in an agricultural system.

This study proposes the use of marginal abatement cost curves to calculate environmental damages of agricultural systems in China's Loess Plateau. Total system costs and revenues, management characteristics and pollution attributes are imputed into a directional output distance function, which is then used to determine shadow prices and abatement cost curves for soil and nitrogen loss. Marginal abatement costs curves are an effective way to compare economic and conservation tradeoffs when field-specific data are scarce. The results show that sustainable agricultural practices can balance soil conservation and agricultural production; land need not be retired, as is current policy.

Factors affecting economics of using sexed semen in dairy cattle.

The use of sexed semen in the dairy industry has grown rapidly. However, high costs and low fertility have limited the use of this potentially valuable tool. This study used simulation to evaluate 160,000 combinations of key variables in 3 spheres of influence related to profit feasibility: (1) market (e.g., milk and calf prices), (2) dairy farm management (e.g., conception rates), and (3) technology (e.g., accuracy of sexing). These influential variables were used to determine the most favorable circumstances in which managers or technicians can effect change. Three distinct scenarios were created to model 3 initiatives that a producer might take with sexed semen: (1) using sexed semen on heifers, (2) using sexed semen on heifers and a fraction of the genetically superior cows, and (3) using sexed semen on heifers and a fraction of the genetically superior cows, and breeding all other cows with beef semen. Due to the large number of management, market, and technology combinations, a response surface and interpretive graphs were created to map the scope of influence for the key variables. Technology variables such as the added cost of sexed semen had relatively little effect on profitability, defined as net present value gain per cow, whereas management variables such as conception rate had a significant effect. Milk price had relatively little effect within each scenario, but was important across scenarios. Profitability was very sensitive to the price of dairy heifer calves, relative to beef and dairy bull calves. Scenarios 1 and 2 added about $50 to $75 per cow in net present value, which ranged from $0 to $200 and from $100 to $300, respectively. Scenario 3 usually was not profitable, primarily because fewer excess dairy replacement heifers were available for sale. Dairy heifer price proved to be the most influential variable, regardless of scenario.