|
| dloc - 10/29/2010 23:34
From your comments, it is clear that you only think that you know the answers. p>
No, it's just that I have a pragmatic approach to problem solving. You seem to be more of an idealist. It's my opinion that your perceived idealistic style is getting in the way of your ability to be able to give reasonable solutions to problems. I've attended enough nutrient management seminars to realize that a lot of the presenters (mostly gov't or university employees) seem to mired by the same idealistic way of thinking.
To be able to give an answer about animal densities per acre, you really only need to know what the N,P,K, etc. etc. levels are of the manure and how many tons are produced annually. Maryland already has a formula for pastured animals. My animals are housed. So discharge wouldn't be an issue until the manure leaves the barn. Of course, currently manure cannot be applied to soils which are tested to have what Maryland considers to have an excess level of phosphorous (>100 FIV). I wonder if Kip is growing record setting bean yields on soils that test less than in 100 FIV of phos? As I already indicated, none of the manure samples that I've seen tested have varied more than 10%. If it varied wildly, then I guess you might be onto something, but it doesn't....I feel this is going nowhere, so I'll probably just let this die. lol.
Because I plant corn on varying soil types (on different farms) my six year average (realistic yield goal) ranges from 120 to 165 bpa. I have raised 200 bpa corn on a .5 lb of N per bu, but not consistently. I have also had spots in fields exceed 300 bpa. I also just went through one of the toughest droughts and heat spells "I" have ever seen.
Edited by Jon S 10/30/2010 07:28
| |
|
Shame on you Chesapeake Bay farmers
