Brian Arnall

We've been quite successful using variable rate technologies.

 

David Royal

What we've been focusing on is working with the farmers to be better nutrient managers of their programs.

 

Curt Blades

This isn’t choose environment or choose yield. This is where you get the opportunity to do both.

 

Dusty Weis

Welcome to the FARMSMART Podcast, presented by Nutrien Ag Solutions, where every month we're talking to sustainable agriculture experts from throughout the industry.

As the leading source of insight for growers on evolving their sustainability practices while staying grounded in agronomic proof, FARMSMART is where sustainability meets opportunity.

 

Ryan Adams

We don't just talk change. We're out in the field helping you identify products, practices and technologies that bring the future to your fields faster. I'm Ryan Adams, Director of Sustainable Ag Systems.

 

Sally Flis

And I'm Dr. Sally Flis, Director of Sustainable Ag Programs, and Ryan… when I look back at all the episodes we've had in the podcast and the work we've done on the ground with our FARMSMART programs, one of the things I'm proudest of is how we cut through the noise around sustainability.

A lot of people talk about growers' sustainability footprint, but most of them have never talked to a grower or been out in the field to look at what's actually happening. And until we recognize that every field is different, and that there are lots of different ways to measure sustainability and the impacts on the ground, we're never really going to be able to make the claims that want to be made in the market.

And we're not really helping anybody make progress.

 

Ryan Adams

That's one of the things that really got me excited about joining this podcast is an opportunity to frame these conversations in a way that puts the grower front and center.

So in this episode, we want to look back at three conversations that we've had that did a great job of cutting through that noise. And we’re going to start with Curt Blades, the Senior Vice President of Industry Sectors and Product Leadership at the Association of Equipment Manufacturers.

AEM is the trade association that represents the companies that make ag equipment… and that means Curt has been leading the effort to put the farmer back in the conversation about sustainable farm practices.

 

Curt Blades

Well, I'll tell you, eight years ago when I started AEM, I remember having conversations around sustainability and introducing that idea. This was about, about the time that the UN SDGs were starting to get some headlines. We all know that there are some, you know, those can be a little bit politically charged. We even know that the topic of sustainability can be charged in agriculture.

But if you think back eight years ago, it was almost forbidden to talk about. But I think what we quickly realized is that when, sometime in the last five years, the ag community pivoted, the attitudes in the ag community pivoted. We recognized that we could be part of the solution rather than just being defensive. And when we opened up a hand out to some of the environmental groups rather than a fist, it changed the conversation sharply.

And that's been something I've really been proud of, of the entire ag industry. When we look to all of the discussions around sustainability, we've been doing it for years, but instead of us being defensive and saying, “You don't know anything about agriculture,” we have a conversation with those that don't know about agriculture and say, “Here's what we're doing today. Here's what we could be doing in the future that's even better.”

And it's really changed the dialogue. And frankly, it's changed things like regulatory work. And even the Farm Bill as we're having those discussions. And it's just really a change in the attitude among the farmers and the ag community in general in being proactive about our sustainability messaging.

 

Sally Flis

Curt, one of the big parts of what you guys do and what equipment manufacturers do and what some of your members that you mentioned around the digital data side do is providing that information to growers to be able to make decisions on any practice in the field, which is going to drive sustainability as we get more and more efficient with all the inputs and products and practices we're applying.

So what are you seeing coming down the road as new stuff that might be coming from some of these organizations that's just going to help continue to make growers and organizations like us, like Nutrien, that do custom application more and more efficient with everything that we apply to the acre?

 

Curt Blades

It's all about data. And you think about the data is collected oftentimes from machines. I remember when my family first got into precision ag, we would get pretty maps and we had pretty maps and they're great. You can look at pretty maps. What does a pretty map do for you. Well, it's pretty. When you start turning that into data and using it as insights, that makes a really big difference.

And I think, you know, 20 years ago when precision ag was just first being adopted or even looking at a yield monitor as kind of like a fuel gauge. It's like that was good, but that was very tied to the person that was seeing that information in real time, and it was up to them to use that information and remember it and make those changes next year.

What we're seeing now, because those data layers are becoming very rich, because it's constant collecting of data every time there's a pass over the field or using satellite data or whatever it might be, because those levels of data are getting so rich.

Couple that with, you know, the computing power that's available and artificial intelligence piled on top of that, that institutional knowledge that’s generated for, you know, over decades within farmers quickly can be augmented with artificial intelligence and data where the decisions are made much better, much more efficient, allowing a farmer to make the most out of their possible acre than they possibly can.

And the cool thing about that is that you've got the machines that have the ability to act on it right away, and the great products that are able to be formulated in a way to not just do a broad acre application, but treat not just the individual section of the field, but in some cases, the individual plant. That's remarkable.

And those are not products that are pipe dreams. Those are products that are either commercialized today on a limited basis or just on the verge of being commercialized in the next day or two.

 

Sally Flis

For sure. You know, one of the things that we have, our sort of flagship program at Nutrien Ag Solutions for growers in the field around sustainability and carbon is called Sustainable Nitrogen Outcomes, where we're working with growers to reduce their nitrogen rate using enhanced efficiency fertilizers in order to reduce those emissions associated with using the nitrogen fertilizer that we need in the field.

A few years ago, AEM did a study around the environmental impacts, positive impacts from using variable rate technologies. What were some of the highlights from that story? Because it's definitely a practice that our growers are using to achieve participation in our programs.

 

Curt Blades

So thank you for the call out of the environmental benefits of precision ag study. That was a high point, frankly, of my career and being able to tell that story. But really what we found is that we recognize that a, you know, a farmer or anyone in agriculture knows just by logic, a tractor that can drive itself in a straight line and a piece of application equipment that is using variable rate technology, logically, it just makes sense that it's doing better.

It's either using less fuel or it's using less active ingredient, but there's nothing quantifiable that pointed to that. So we tried to pull all of the data together that we could to sort of put some stakes in the ground of what that actually meant. So one of the things that came out, you know, loud and clear, first of all, the fuel savings and the water savings and active ingredient savings were better than we ever expected them to be, which is pretty cool.

And what's really even better about this is that farmers don't adopt precision ag technology because of the environmental benefits. That just happens to be a nice little ride along. So this isn’t a choose environment or choose yield. This is where you get the opportunity to do both. So that was one thing that was particularly interesting.

Another thing that was particularly interesting, I think you guys at Nutrien would absolutely agree with us that, in the case of fertility. Sometimes it's not less fertilizer being applied, but it's just better fertilizer being applied.

And that's part of the story as well. It's very quick to get into a conversation when you talk to an environmentalist is they want to use less. And we were really, now we're armed with the facts to say no. The answer might be less, the answer might be more. But more importantly, the answer is better. And so that, you know, goes to the Four R’s responsibility we talk about.

But it's really is like now we have the tools with the data and the application technology to make sure that the fertility is being applied exactly where it needs to go and that there's no runoff, that the environmental impact is minimal, and we're getting the most possible yield we can out of every individual acre.

 

Dusty Weis

I mean, Curt, we talked about it a lot when I worked at AEM and this was more than five years ago now. But we were talking about these things at that point too, and we certainly put it out there into the world that these are practices that are better for the environment. So do it for the environment, but do it for your bottom line, too.

And at the end of the day, these practices benefit both the environment and growers. But as we've seen greater adaptation of some of these sustainability practices, how have your members then changed their product offerings and business practices to support increased grower interest in sustainability?

 

Curt Blades

Well, I mean, I think you kind of hit on it with the first piece is like, what's the killer app? Why does a farmer choose to adopt precision agriculture? Or any of these? Make any of these changes? And, you know, just like my family and all of the customers that we're talking about here, they are all businesspeople as well.

Part of that message is you want to be able to leave a legacy for your family farming operations. So the soil's got to be maintained for, in my family's case, for over 100 years or for the next generation, for sure. In order to be able to do that, you also got to make money and you got to make money for the next five years.

The first answer we've got to solve is that economic answer or find that killer app. In the case of precision agriculture, that killer app was oftentimes autosteer. A tractor that drives itself. A farmer immediately gets that. Even if there's not an immediate economic payoff, they get that from an emotional standpoint, from an ease of use standpoint, and then quickly from a fuel saving standpoint. They get that right away.

That killer app is what gets them in the door. Then you start to pile things on top of it. That's what sort of leads to the next thing. So yeah, a tractor drives itself. That's great. Oh, and while it’s driving itself I collect this great data, and that great data is telling me that I can reduce the amount of active ingredient and get more yield and perhaps save some operational efficiency.

So it's sort of you got to start somewhere. But if you say, you know, do this because it's better for the environment, that's good. And that will get some farmers excited. But it certainly has got to pay off economically for them to begin with.

 

Ryan Adams

Curt there touches on the importance of quantifying our sustainability footprint with data, both as an industry and as individual growers.

That's one of the things that excites me most about this area and it's near and dear to my heart. Over the past number of years, we've seen many advancements and enhancements in the ability to collect good, clean on-farm data that enables our sustainability footprints to be measured and show what the growers are actually doing on their farm every day.

 

Sally Flis

Having that data about sustainable practices is so important because we know those practices look different in different geographies from field to field and as we look at different crops.

Nowhere is that more evident than in Florida, the state that produces lots of specialty crops, regular row crops, in often very challenging ecologies and soils.

But when we talked to David Royal, the Florida Nutrient Stewardship Project Manager at the Nature Conservancy, he said all the best practices still tie back to the 4 Rs.

 

David Royal

The Nature Conservancy is a worldwide conservation organization with the whole goal of helping to improve and protect water quality. My role in Florida is I work with farmers on their nutrient programs, educating and promoting the Four R Nutrient Stewardship Program.

You've got to remember one thing. Florida's a little different than anybody else. We're growing over 300 different crops in Florida. You've also got to remember that Florida is basically the winter vegetable basket for the whole Eastern United States.

One of the other differences that we have is we have a lot of acres that will be growing up to four crops in a year on that one acre, depending on what they're growing. So what we've been focusing on is working with the farmers to be better nutrient managers of their programs. We are seeing a lot of farmers with up to a 30% reduction in fertilizer.

 

Dusty Weis

This isn't news when I say it out loud, but Florida definitely has a different ecology, I think, than a lot of the growers that they work with here as well. What can you tell us about the type of soil and some of the special challenges that growers face there?

 

David Royal

Well, one thing about Florida, and the way I look at it is it's broke up into basically five different growing regions. You've got south Florida, which has got the real rich muck soil, which is totally different than central Florida, which is totally different than southwest Florida. Then when you get up into north Florida, you get into the pure sand. And then you've got northwest Florida, which is a whole different region. So you've got to manage your programs to your farm and to the dirt that we're working with.

 

Sally Flis

David, you mentioned that the sustainability projects and through the Four Rs working with growers in Florida, you've got some pretty significant fertilizer rate reductions overall. So I remember when you took me out, we visited tomatoes, we visited oranges. What are some of the tools and technologies? I remember in the orange grove some pretty cool stuff and ways they've changed nitrogen management in oranges, not just to combat nitrogen loss but also to combat some of the disease challenges like citrus greening.

 

David Royal

Correct. Years ago, citrus growers basically put out two to three applications of fertilizer and they were putting out a large amount at one time. And really since citrus greening has started, they've come to the conclusion that we need to be spoon feeding these trees all year long and just giving them a little bit. We've got growers that are putting out anywhere from eight to 16 applications a year on their citrus now. And with precision ag, and I think precision ag is going to be a great tool for the industry, in the citrus industry they have a mechanism called the seeing eye, and it actually reads the canopy of the tree and it tells the spreader to slow down or speed up, so it's only putting out the fertilizer that that tree needs, whereas years ago, everything got the same rate across the board. So we've really come a long way and believe me, the farmers want to only put out what they need to put, especially when you look at today's times.

 

Sally Flis

So to follow on that, I know all growers talk a lot about soil health. But given the unique climate in Florida, I know you've been involved with some of the really early soil health testing in orange groves, I believe you guys did some soil health testing.

 

David Royal

Yes, we did orange groves, and then we started doing a project that's up in the Suwanee. It's a 16-year sod-based rotation project. So I was excited about that.

But we're learning more and more. And as we teach the growers new production practices, soil health has become a big, big topic along with nutrient management. And we know that we've got to have healthy soils, especially with us growing so many crops on the same acres. It really does make a difference. And we're educating the farmers about that. And I think we're making headway.

The way I look at this, this has all got to be a team effort. We've all got to work together. I mean, we all know that the Four Rs are the right source, the right rate, the right time and the right place. I'm going to be honest with you. I totally rely on the fertilizer reps to do the rate and the source. That's their expertise. But if I can work with them to work on getting it in the right place and at the right time with the farmer, as a team effort, it's amazing the headway that we have made because people see us coming in there, joined together to help them, and they want to do it. They really do.

And Sally's been to it. We've got a cabbage grower that we worked with, and Nutrien supplies all of his fertilizer. And the fertilizer rep wasn't making headways. But when we came in together, we started slow, but we've made tremendous amount of headway with that one grower over the last several years.

 

Sally Flis

So David, another thing that's a little bit unique in Florida is you guys have a lot of regulatory and social pressure around ag practices in order to limit nutrient losses because of fresh water and salt water quality concerns. I know you had some research projects that you guys were trying to get implemented around nitrogen management in corn silage, I think, in north Florida. How are those projects coming?

 

David Royal

They're moving along really well. We're working with the growers. So many of them were putting their fertilizer out through their pivots, and we're working with them to side dress the applications. And we're seeing a tremendous reduction.

Matter of fact, this year, the Four R Advocate Award winner, he's reduced his nitrogen by 50 pounds per acre by changing his production practices. There again, it was a team effort. It was the fertilizer rep, the University of Florida IFAS people and us working together as a group. I think that's one way that we're making headway.

One of the things that really is important in Florida is irrigation management is such a key to nutrient management. We're working with the farmers about not pushing the nutrients out and beyond the root zones and keeping it right there where it can be fully utilized by the plant.

 

Dusty Weis

Sally alluded to the social and regulatory pressure in Florida as far as water management goes. I don't think that people that haven't lived in Florida really realize just how big a deal that is in Florida, the amount of state bureaucracy that goes into that and just the degree to which the state invests in maintaining its water. Can you tell us a little bit more background on that and how Florida's water management is such a unique setup?

 

David Royal:

Yes, sir. Florida is broken up into five different water management districts, and one of their goals is the water quality. But one of the biggest challenges that we're facing now is that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection has what they call BMAPs, which are Basin Management Action Plans. And there has to be a reduction in the nitrogen in these BMAPs, and they have to be met over a certain period of time.

Last year we came out with Senate Bill 712, and our farmers now have to turn over their nitrogen and phosphorus records yearly based on their crops. Now, they are protected. The Department of Ag will combine those into a watershed, and then that watershed amount will be turned over to the Department of Environmental Protection.

But we are getting more and more, I don't really want to say regulated. But the other thing people have got to understand. The Florida farmers, most of them for the most part are multi-generation farms. They understand that they've got to take care of the land in order for that land to take care of them. So they want to do what is right. One of the things that I've been able to share with so many people is agriculture is always going to be a work in progress. As new technology and new precision ag comes along, they want to get on board with it because they see the benefits of it. So it's just us all working as a team, going out and working with them and making this difference.

 

Dusty Weis

How important is it for you then and the growers that you work with to be able to demonstrate these success stories like you mentioned, reducing nitrogen inputs by 50 pounds an acre? Do you have a venue to highlight those success stories? And how receptive are regulators and lawmakers to that?

 

David Royal

We're spending more and more time with the regulators, and we are also working very hard to get them on the farm and let them visually see what's happening. Hopefully we're going to have some tours set up with some key legislators as soon as session is over with. But I can recall back when they were doing the BMAPs, DEP, we actually got that whole team out to a farm. And every one of them were saying, "We didn't realize the farmers were doing this."

But yet they're the ones writing the rules and the regulations. So I think it's just an education, education, education piece.

 

Dusty Weis

It can be really intimidating to make the kind of input reductions that David discussed there, particularly for a grower who’s making practice changes for the first time. 

So how do we make sure that we’re doing it right? One approach is to conduct soil sampling to prescribe the right fertilizer application plan.  

We talk to an expert on that, coming up in a minute, here on the FARMSMART Podcast.

 

Dusty Weis

This is the FARMSMART Podcast, and I’m Dusty Weis, along with Sally Flis and Ryan Adams.

And Ryan, a lot of folks who make a decision that they want to improve their sustainability footprint, they've never really done anything like this before and they might not really know what the first steps are. So what's the first thing that somebody ought to do if they're thinking about making these big practice changes?

 

Ryan Adams

Yeah, Dusty, think one of the first things that comes to mind when looking at improving your sustainability footprint is to look at your fertility management plans. That often starts with talking to an agronomist who you trust and basing everything on a soil sample and what you think and have experienced a reasonable yield to be for your general area.

 

Sally Flis

Variable rate is an additional practice on top of that fertility management plan that can help improve your sustainability footprint by putting the right amount of fertilizer in the right place based on all the data that we're collecting in order to make these decisions.

And as we learned from Brian Arnall, Precision Nutrient Management Extension Specialist at Oklahoma State University, one of the best ways to supplement those data is with soil sampling.

 

Brian Arnall

So, about 11 years ago, I started looking for grid soil sample data from consultants. And that didn't pan out, so farmers started sending it to me. So, I now have over 800 fields of grid soil sample data that just farmers send me their PDFs. We've got about 80,000 soil samples in that data set. It stretches from central Texas up into Nebraska. And so, it's a fun data set.

And the one thing I say is that it's variable regardless of the state. It doesn't really matter if we're in irrigated circles in the panhandle of Nebraska or if we're in south Texas black soils, we have such high variability in so many of our things.

And so, when it comes to the sampling scheme, you know, when I'm working with a producer, it's often, "What can you afford? Get as many points as you can to represent."

And when I'm talking to anybody, really, my story a lot is to more so understand the error of not sampling enough and see if you are okay with that kind of error.

So, if your P and K recommendations are a little conservative, meaning that you have a pretty high replacement recommendation, you're actually able to sample with fewer points because your ability to err and not hurt the crop is a lot higher. So, you can get away with fewer.

If you were to, say, use just sufficiency, meaning just putting on what the crop needs as far as P and K goes, then you have to be much more intensive about your soil sampling. You need more cores. You need a higher resolution because your potential to be wrong starts going up.

Lucas Haag at Kansas State has some really interesting data, where he looks at variable rate or error around the number of samples based upon P and K prices. And ideally, what the universities tell you, we want 15 to 20. And that's because of the level of error we have when we make a sufficiency rec.

Nice thing about most corn growers and a lot of our higher yield is when you add in the replacement, meaning whatever the crop's taken off, that removal portion, it kind of buffers against any potential yield loss due to underfertilization. And you can see that instead of having 15 or 20, now a consultant or a private company might pull 8 or 9 because the error that's induced into that data set, it's kind of covered with some wiggle room due to the replacement.

We had a carbon market around about 10 years ago. And OSU pulled tens of thousands of samples, looking at carbon spatial distribution. And that's going to be a challenge is the timing of those samplings, the depth of those samplings, the methodology of those samplings, the variance that we can have within carbon alone.

We've had fun looking at... we've got four trials in Oklahoma that are over 50 years old that are continuous, long-term fertility trials. They've been no-till for the last 13 years. And we've been stratifying those trials looking at every inch of soil. And it's pretty impressive to see how everything normalizes after about three inches of soil. That top three is where everything occurs.

 

Sally Flis

That's interesting, Brian. You talk about your comments on variable rate and soil sampling, really around phosphorus and potassium, but when we think about our carbon programs that we'll be working with, we're really looking at nitrogen. So, what have you found as you've looked at using variable rate applications of nitrogen for a tool to improve that nitrogen use efficiency or reduced application rates in the field?

 

Brian Arnall

We've been quite successful at Oklahoma State using variable rate technologies. Oklahoma's not known for rainfall. Oklahoma's not known for great soils. And so, our producers are pretty adaptive when it comes to willing to do in-season. So, moving from a heavy pre-plant to in-season management makes sense when your average corn yield is 180, but the range is 220 to zero. And so, it's the in-season capability of variable rate.

Variable rate up front, to me, I've had success for, if you start talking high plains where you have consistent rainfall, meaning you irrigate, that's your only rainfall, and you can use soil texture and organic matter to tie in some pre-plant because you're also not losing it.

As we move further east, I have a bigger challenge with pre-plant variable rate because we don't get the opportunity to let the environment tell us what's occurring. It's hard for us to predict mineralization because we can't predict weather. It's hard for us to predict losses because we can't predict weather.

Years ago, I said, "I can get nitrogen 110% accurate if you give me an accurate 365 weather prediction. If I know rainfall and temperature all year long, I'll tell you exactly what you need." It's that lack of knowledge.

And so, moving to variable rate in season and letting the crop, letting the soil give you cues, letting you have an opportunity to take advantage of mineralization, and even take advantage of losses, knowing that there's losses that have occurred and you can recover from that.

One of the things we're using in a lot of our corn that's helped out greatly is zero N checks. And so, those producers that are going to put on nitrogen fertilizer. We have them shut off the rig two or three times in a field and know where that's at. We're talking a second or two. So, we're not losing more than an acre.

And it's fun to see a producer to walk out at V11 or V12, big ol’ corn, and cannot find that zero N check.

And they're wondering the value of their 250 pounds of pre-plant when at VT you can't find that check, even at the lower leaves.

Versus if that check shows up somewhere around V4 or V5, then you know the demand. And so, we're utilizing these in-field checks to kind of give us not just mineralization key, we're finding rooting. Maybe the crop has had a really good season to root. We see the years that our springs are getting consistent light rains that we have poor rooting and we need more fertilizer, and so it lets the crop tell you what it's seeing in the soil with those zero N checks.

I think that's really the biggest key for improving NUE is delaying it to closer to crop demand times so we can take in more factors. I mean, that's what precision ag is. Precision ag is utilizing data to make better decisions. And when we're using all data that's modeled, it's more challenging because it's predictive than trying to use data that we've already collected, say, you know, "This is what's happened in the first 45 days of growth."

 

Sally Flis

So, something I've always wondered about a little bit is as we start to merge these technologies, so we've got variable rate application of nitrogen, we've got nitrification inhibitor in there maybe, depending on the timing and all those environmental factors you're talking about.

How do we potentially lose some of those technological advances or gain as we start to stack these technologies in the field? Or what have you guys seen as you've maybe looked at stacking technologies in the field?

 

Brian Arnall

One of the challenges that I see when we start looking at technology and nitrogen is that we have some really good technologies on the marketplace that can improve efficiencies, that can improve a lot of stuff. But if we use those technologies and never lower the nitrogen rate, are we really gaining anything?

Same thing as researchers. If we're looking at a nitrification inhibitor, if we're looking at something to improve our efficiencies, if all my tests is applied at 100% yield gold nitrogen rate, I'm never going to see anything. And so, if we want to take advantage of something that maybe we're getting microbial creation of nitrogen or we're getting better root exploration, whatever it is, to see the benefit, we better pull back on our traditional nitrogen rate, otherwise we're just spending money on product and nitrogen.

Well, what we see is what I've liked is that as we move in and start doing variable rate, let's say I'm utilizing our GreenSeeker sensor and our reference strips and I'm building models. One thing I've enjoyed is I'm building kind of customer-specific models. We can tweak the old predictions, we can tweak all kinds of things, but one of the easiest things to do is say, "All right, you are going to be spreading, broadcasting urea without anything. This is the efficiency I'm giving that. But okay. This pass, you're going to use a culture injection. You might have an inhibitor applied with a culture injection."

Instead of running a 50% efficiency, now we can move that recommendation to say you're getting 75% or 80% efficiency. And so, as we start stacking these in, we shouldn't be looking out. If you want to go back to the 1.2 pounds per bushel, we should be at 0.8, 0.7. We should be tweaking that number based upon those stacked traits that we're putting in there and are in-season.

If I’m pre-plant corn, anhydrous in the fall, 1.2 is about the best I can... maybe nitrification inhibitor will get me 1.1. If I move that into everything at V3 and I run a culture injection at UAN or a V6, where I'm really putting it where I want, maybe that's a 0.9. If I'm doing multiple shots with fertigation and I'm using crop models to look at growth and soil models to look at mineralization, I should be dropping that down to a 0.8 or a 0.7.

And so, as we stack these, that's one number. If we look at the Stanford Equation, where we have the old rule of thumb from nitrogen, which is nitrogen rate is equal to crop uptake, minus soil nitrogen, divided by efficiency factor, we've been messing with the crop part: how do we do crop yield; and then the soil part: how do we predict mineralization and losses.

The one that's often just left by the wayside is that adjustment of efficiency. And that's that third key that as we do better at predicting yield, we do better at predicting soil, we might as well do better at getting more efficient and adjusting that efficiency factor based upon environment, product, and method of application, going back to the four Rs.

 

Dusty Weis

That is going to conclude this episode of The FARMSMART Podcast. New episodes arrive every month, so make sure you subscribe to The FARMSMART Podcast in your favorite app and visit (nutrienagsolutions.com/FARMSMART) to learn more.

The FARMSMART Podcast is brought to you by Nutrien Ag Solutions.

And the FARMSMART Podcast is produced by Podcamp Media, branded podcast production for businesses. podcampmedia.com. I’m Dusty Weis. For Nutrien Ag Solutions, thanks for listening.