The Rural Voice, 1980-02, Page 30Spreader patterns studied
Mike Miller, Associate Agricultural
Representative, Huron County
This past spring we checked two
fertilizer spreaders for evenness of spread.
A representative from the spreader
company helped us set a number of tests at
different rates. We collected the fertilizer
in a set of pans set at eight foot intervals
across the spread pattern.
The results - you can probably guess.
There was a wide variation in the spread
pattern. For example, when we tried to
apply 400 pounds per ac -e, we applied 580
pounds to some areas of the field and 190
pounds to other areas. This variation was
by weight. The analysis variation would
probably have been greater.
I discussed our results with a manager of
a fertilizer plant. He said he wasn't
surprised. Fertilizer spreaders have been
doing this for years and we still get good
crops. He said phosphorus and potash tend
to give a more uneven pattern than
nitrogen. This unevenness of phosphorus
and potash tends to balance out over the
years. He also said our present spreaders
are a lot better than the ones we used to
have.
Fertilizer spread patterns will change if
you change the rate being applied, ground
speed or analysis of the fertilizer. Some
fertilizer mixes tend to separate more than
other mixes.
Bulk fertilizer spreaders are here to stay
so we have to live with the errors in their
spread pattern. If you have to apply a large
amount of fertilizer bulk spread, then you
will get a more even spread by spreading at
half rate and covering the field twice. Also.
if you are using the same spreader year
after year, there are a number of ways of
cancelling out poor spread patterns. If
possible, never drive in the same tracks. In
fact, you will get the most uniform spread
by spreading at right angles to the last
application. If you can't spread at right
angles, then start at the opposite side of
the field or drive at an angle.
Mailbox of the month
qqt
(Located in Colborne twp.
Huron County)
Pay your spouse?
It looks as though the officials have
heard the word - that farmers and small
business operators should be able to pay
their spouses wage for work, done for the
business. The most recent proposed
budget had that provision. We'll have to
wait until after the next election to see if -
this concept surfaces again.
Otherwise, it is necessary to form a
corporation or spousal partnership to
achieve this end. An Income Tax Bulletin
indicates that a spousal partnership exists
whenever both spouses have made a
contribution of capital and -or labor and
management. If you form a spousal
partnership, it is wise to keep a file to
answer questions such as what were the
original and continuing contributions of
capital by each spouse? What is the
registered ownership of assets? Who can
write cheques on the farm bank account?
How much labor does each spouse
contribute to the farm business?
Don Pullen
Ag. Rep.
Huron County
And now
the bad news
The annual Agricultural Outlook Confer-
ence held at Ottawa forecasts a rather
gloomy picture for 1980. Net farm income
in Ontario may be 40 per cent lower than
1979 and 12 per cent lower for all of
Canada.
Grains should remain steady to stronger
in price. Beef is predicted to be 10 to 15 per
cent higher while hoe, prices will average
lower than 1979.
The big news is that costs will be sharply
higher with petroleum based products
leading the way. Overall, interest rates will
be slightly higher but the average prime
rate will likely decrease in 1980.
Forward selling
is big business
BY DONALD SHAUGHNESSY, CA
Farmers can sell their crops before
they're grown.
It's called commodity hedging or tor -
ward selling. Before the seeds are even in
the ground, the crop : can be sold to a
speculator who is willing to gamble that the
price he pays is below the price for which
he can sell it.
The advantages are obvious. If a tarmer
has a pretty good ideaof what it will cost
him to grow his crop he can usually sell it in
advance at a known profit, and be sure that
he is going to earn that profit.
He is protected if prices fall. But if prices
rise, it is the speculator, not the farmer,
who makes big money.
Farmers who forward sold their corn
crop at S2.45 a bushel this year made a fair
profit. But the United Co-operatives of
Ontario, which agreed to pay in advance,
won on the gamble when prices rose to
53.15.
Naturally, a lot of farmers who sold in
PO. 28 THE RURAL VOICE/FEBRUARY 1980
Air
advance were bitter about not sharing in
the big gain. That's all part of the gamble,
however, and if a farmer wants to protect
himself against big losses, he also has to
sacrifice the opportunity for big gains.
Forward selling can bring a degree of
stability to agriculture that has otherwise
been missing.
The farmer has been the victim, and
sometimes the beneficiary, of market
fluctuations. By hedging, he can com-
pletely eliminate many of the unknowns.
Once the farmer sells a contract,
however, he must be prepared to ante up
cash to the brokerage company, when the
price of the commodity rises above the
contract price.
It is money he gets back but which he
must nevertheless borrow from the bank,
and most Canadian banks have been
reluctant to lend the margin money.
Things are changing, however, and more
banks are willing to lend margin money,
since it is a sure thing.
Suppose, now, that there is a crop failure
that the farmer can only deliver three-
quarters of the crop that he promised.
Well, he would lose a pile of money but he
would have lost it anyway.
To guard against this eventuality,
though, banks usually require that only
half a crop is forward sold, and it is
probably a good idea. A forward contract
on half the crop reduces the risk of a
sudden plummet in prices, and enhances
the farm profit if there is an unexpected
price rise.