This REALLY should be in the Boiler Room, but since you are posting here.... I am going to reply here. Many years back, the DHIA program in PA was associated with Penn State University. Somewhere along the way, someone decided that it should stand on its own two feet - that the University should NOT be in business running the DHIA program. So, the University pushed DHIA to become a stand-alone, self-supporting program. I agree with that philosophy. Along the way, there was a program developed in PA called the Crop Improvement Associations (later named to Crop Management). Initially developed with support by the local extension agent, initially they were stand-alone programs. However, along the way, they got wrapped up in the University system. I started as an employee of a local Crop Improvement/Crop Management Association. Along the way, I became increasingly convinced they needed to be stand-alone - apart from the University. So, that played a part in my decision to quit my job and start my own business. This is not about how much money North Carolina will or will not spend on soil testing costs. And this is not about how much PA or Md spends on its Nutrient Management programming costs. This IS about the philosophy that Universities should NOT be competing with private enterprise. In the case of the Crop Management programming, before the advent of the Crop Mgmt concept, there really was no private crop consulting business in PA to speak of (there was one private business that was rather new, and it was localized.) So the Crop Mgmt concept did help to spread the concept of crop consulting in a way that probably would have not otherwise happened. And the same is probably true of DHIA in its early years. However, for both programs, there needed to come a time where the Universities needed to say "our job is done. It's time to let private enterprise take over this role." I will say that Penn State still runs a soil testing program. the cost of those samples is on a comparable level to what it would cost to have samples run thru a private lab. And I do believe that Penn State uses its soil testing program for doing research as well. IF North Carolina wanted to assess a fee comparable to what private labs charge, I would not get too wound up about the idea of the University competing with private enterprise. But.... it sounds like that is not what they are doing...... As far as the cost of Nut Mgmt programming in PA, a large part of that is due to regulations; and no, it is not cost-effective. I will also say that I doubt if more intensive soil sampling and testing would have prevented the regulations from coming to PA. So, I don't think that is a fair charge to make. DO I think that cover crop payments should be eliminated in the Mid-Atlantic? Maybe you should be asking me if the government should get out of Agriculture? THAT would be a more appropriate question. Yes, cover crop payments should be eliminated in the mid-Atlantic. Cover cropping should be done, because it's the right management tool for that situation, not because someone is collecting government payments for doing so. BTW, I have a customer across the state line in MD. He is adament about signing up for the cover crop program in MD. He has a small beef herd - I would say his AEU/acre is less than 0.50. he has the cover crop bumper stickers on his vehicles. His cover crops look pale yellow, because they lack nitrogen to grow. But he thinks he is doing a good thing because he is cover-cropping - and getting paid well to do so. Me? I think the goverment is wasting money on cover crops for his farm. I doubt that much nitrogen is leaving his farm. the goverment would be better off changing their program, to spend those dollars on something that would give a better return. MY opinion. | 
Soil Test labs
