ABSTRACT:
Yields per hectare and whole-farm returns were evaluated under seven fertilization treatments. Five treatments used swine manure; the other two used a commercial fertilizer application and a check treatment. The 112.2-kl (12,000-gallon) surface manure application achieved the highest average yield per hectare. The commercial fertilizer treatment produced the third highest average yield, significantly below that of the 112.2-kl treatment. Average yield on the check treatment was significantly lower than the yields of all other treatments. Given a 100-sow herd and 101.3-ha (250-acre) farm, the 112.2-kl application rate would cover only 14.8 ha (37 acres). The remaining 865 ha (213 acres) would need commercial fertilization. Because of the required manure coverage, the 18.7-kl and 37.4-kl (2,000– and 4,000-gallon) injected treatments received the highest economic returns per hectare. Moreover, the 18.7-kl and 37.4-kl injected treatments produced the highest returns per hectare over a range of hectares and prices. Thus, there is an economic advantage for injecting versus surface application given comparable application rates. Moreover, a more efficient use of manure at lower rates (18.7 or 37.4 kl/ha) was both economical and labor-saving compared to disposal methods (112.2-kl/ha).
Footnotes
Craig Chase is an extension associate and Michael Duffy an associate professor in the Department of Economics, Iowa State University, Ames 50011; William Lotz is an extension agriculturalist/director in Buchanan County, Independence, Iowa 50644. Data analysis was supported, in part, by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources through the Big Spring Basin Demonstration Project. Funds were provided through the Iowa Groundwater Protection Act and Petroleum violation Escrow Accounts, and other sponsoring agencies: the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region VII, Kansas City. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Energy. Journal Paper No. J-14367 of the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics-Experiment Station, Ames, Iowa. Project No. 2502.
- Copyright 1991 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.