Hands in the Dirt Precision Nutrient Management, with Brian Arnall from Oklahoma State University

Brian Arnall spends his days drilling out soil samples from Texas to Nebraska, and everywhere in between.

As the Precision Nutrient Management Extension Specialist at Oklahoma State University, he knows that every acre of every farm field is unique. And without a precision plan for the variable rate application of fertilizers that accounts for that uniqueness, growers could be missing out on opportunities to improve their margins and their sustainability metrics.

In this episode, Brian discusses the true "cost" of soil sampling, why growers need to back up their sustainability efforts with solid data reporting, and some of the extreme soil conditions he's encountering in the southern Great Plains.

Plus, Tom and Sally discuss a new USDA supplemental crop insurance program for growers looking at improving their Nitrogen use efficiency. The Post Application Coverage Endorsement (PACE) program provides supplemental coverage when a producer is prevented from post/split applying nitrogen in the 2-3 week V3-V10 corn growth stages due to wet weather and field conditions.

PACE is available for non-irrigated corn in select counties in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. The deadline to apply is March 15. Learn more from these resources:

·      Frequently Asked Questions

·      Crop Criteria  

·      New Supplemental Insurance

·      Topics / Conversation

Episode Transcript

Brian Arnall:

The biggest key for improving NUE is delaying it to closer to crop demand times so we can take in more factors. 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."

Dusty Weis:

Welcome to the Future. Faster, a sustainable agriculture podcast by Nutrien Ag Solutions, with our very own Tom Daniel, director of retail sustainable ag, and Dr. Sally Flis, senior manager sustainability field. This is your opportunity about the next horizon in sustainable agriculture for growers, for partners, for the planet. To us, it's not about changing what's always worked; it's about continuing to do the little things that make a big impact.

Dusty Weis:

On this week's episode, Brian Arnall, precision nutrient management extension specialist at Oklahoma State University, joins us to discuss the true cost of soil sampling, why growers need to back up their sustainability efforts with solid data reporting, and some of the extreme soil conditions he's encountering in the Southern Great Plains.

Dusty Weis:

But if you haven't yet, make sure you've subscribed to this podcast in your favorite app. Also, make sure to follow Nutrien Ag Solutions on Facebook and Instagram.

Dusty Weis:

I'm Dusty Weis. And it's time once again to introduce Tom Daniel and Sally Flis. And Sally, you just recently attended a meeting with our friends at the National Corn Growers Association, big players in the ag space. They represent about 300,000 growers in the US. So, what'd you hear from corn? What were the big subjects that were being discussed?

Sally Flis:

National Corn Growers Association has announced some of their own sustainability goals and metrics that they're trying to meet. And so, we've been visiting with them and their Sustainability Action Committee a couple of times now about the programs that we're rolling out, and how can we help them meet those goals. The most recent meeting I was at, we talked about our carbon program and how we plan to roll that out for 2022. Really trying to just help provide them information of what we're going to be measuring, how we can help and possibly partner on bringing back information for sustainability metrics for them so they can help meet some of their sustainability goals that they've announced over the last couple years.

Sally Flis:

So, Tom, one of the things they saw come out this week from some of our policy associates that we work with is this new announcement by USDA for a supplemental crop insurance program for growers that are looking at improving their nitrogen use efficiency by applying split nitrogen applications in corn in 2022. In your previous life, you held a crop insurance agent's license. So, have you got any details about this new crop insurance supplement? And more specifically, how will this new supplement work with hopefully the 2022 programs that we're rolling out around nitrogen management?

Tom Daniel:

So, one of the key things... and by the way, I'll point out, Illinois Corn Growers actually had a valuable part in getting this introduced and through the USDA. So, yes, Sally. There is a new program that has just been introduced by the USDA. It's called PACE. P-A-C-E. And it stands for Post-Application Coverage Endorsement. And it's really focusing on driving sustainability changes on the farm. And this one specifically is around split application nitrogen on corn.

Tom Daniel:

So, a lot of growers today feel risk associated when they go to split nitrogen because they usually don't have any trouble getting their upfront nitrogen put on before planning, but that in-season application in many cases can be hindered by weather-related incidents during the season. And when that happens, your crop insurance creates a problem because you failed to apply nitrogen to maximize your yield. So, they have put together a supplemental policy that goes with your regular crop insurance piece. And, like I said, it's the Post-Application Endorsement. And basically, it will help the grower cover his risk from split-applied nitrogen, if something happens weather-related that keeps him from getting that application in season on.

Tom Daniel:

So, it's called a Post-coverage Endorsement. And I'm just going to read this. It provides supplemental coverage when a producer is prevented from post split applying nitrogen. It's in the two to three week interval, basically from V3 to V10 corn growth stages. And really, wet weather is the reason that you could actually make this claim.

Tom Daniel:

Now, it's only currently available in 11 states. And I want to read those states because it's relative to guys who want to check with their insurance agents about signing up for this. But it's Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Michigan, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. And within each one of those states, there's only certain counties that are eligible. So, you really have to go to your crop insurance agent within those states and ask the question, "Am I eligible to sign up for this?"

Tom Daniel:

It is a supplemental plan, so you have to have a regular crop insurance policy with a crop insurance agent. And the deadline for signup, and I want to stress this, the deadline for sign up is March the 15th. If you've not signed up by that date, there's no way to add it later on through the whole process.

Tom Daniel:

So, like I said, I'll say it again, it covers the risk of missing that second application of nitrogen due to a weather-related event. It will pay you up to 100% of the overall value of the crop if you were to miss that second application. So, it does give you some real coverage.

Tom Daniel:

But one of the key things that's part of this program is, I keep calling it the four-letter word, but it's called data. So, data's required to run this program. So, what are some of the things that a grower might have to engage in or at least have to be willing to supply to be able to engage in this program?

Sally Flis:

Yeah. And none of these programs are light on data. That's for sure, Tom. So, here, we're looking for total nitrogen applied, pre and post-applications; the number of acres that they want to enroll; on split applications or where split applications were used; actual planting dates, not expected planting dates, so there'll be a reasonably heavy data lift after the grower finishes the cropping season; historical records for that piece of land where they're going to do the crop and apply for the supplemental coverage.

Tom Daniel:

And Sally, I believe they're all field-specific. So, the growers have to sign up. If he's got individual fields of corn on a farm, he can pick, depending on the units that he's managing. How he's applied for his crop insurance will depend on what acres are included, what acres could be excluded. But for the most part, he has to sign up all the fields of corn within a farm enterprise, for instance.

Tom Daniel:

But Sally, I'll ask this that there's everything here that he has to look at. He's got to have records for purchased fertilizer, and the brand name of the fertilizer, the percentage of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, the total amount of... all that data's got to be entered for the calculation to be made. So, Sally, I'll just ask you the question: what would be a good place to store the data, and then have a source and be able to transfer it over to your insurance agent?

Sally Flis:

I think Agrible would be a great place where you'd be able to store a lot of this data. I think it's good information for us to pass along to our digital teams, as they're in the midst of making some changes to Agrible of other things that we might want to be able to include so that we can make this an easy add-on because, Tom, did you see anything in the literature on this program that would exclude a grower who signs up in, say, our sustainable nitrogen outcomes program from doing both of these? So, not only taking advantage of potentially generating that credit through our carbon programs, but also being able to ensure whether or not they're going to get the results they hope to see with advanced nitrogen management practices?

Tom Daniel:

No, there's absolutely nothing on here. And really, if a person wants to participate in a nitrogen management program, a carbon program like what we're offering in the NMPP piece, he could participate in this also.

Tom Daniel:

Really, one of the key components of this is obviously managing the nitrogen rate, Sally. And we know that when we go to a split application of nitrogen, we're spoon-feeding now, right? So, we're spoon feeding the corn crop. So, that allows us to manage that nitrogen reduction that we're trying to get to for the NMPP extremely well.

Tom Daniel:

And this particular program will pay you accordingly on how much you manage your nitrogen rate. So, if you're able to put down a smaller amount pre and apply more of it in season, then there is an actual better premium or a better coverage that will be available to you for that. So, growers will be paid not to put down as much pre-nitrogen, and put most of it in season.

Tom Daniel:

And you asked the question, "Well, why would the crop insurance groups get involved with that?" Because this program is about reducing the amount of runoff nitrogen that we have in the system. So, if we have a corn crop growing and standing in the field that's got a strong root system, that's demanding nitrogen, and we put that nitrogen on in season, then there's much better chance that's going to get captured by the root system and not find a way to leach out or find a way into the waterways and then the rivers and streams. So, that's really what this whole thing is about. It's about driving change on the farm through giving you risk coverage for taking on the risk of maybe doing a variable rate application.

Dusty Weis:

Well, Tom, this is certainly another great example of one of these programs that growers can benefit from, but only if they've got their data in order, and so, certainly a great reminder of that as well. But are there any key dates that we need to keep in mind here with the PACE program?

Sally Flis:

Yeah, Dusty. As Tom mentioned earlier, March 15th is the closing date for enrolling or signing up for this supplemental coverage. So, be sure that you're asking your crop insurance agent about it, as you're out talking to them about policies for 2022. And keep in mind that we can combine this with some of the program offerings we have in our nitrogen management projects around carbon this year too.

Dusty Weis:

Well, Tom, Sally, Post-Application Coverage Endorsement, PACE. Sounds like an important program for our growers to consider. We'll put more links and some sign-up information in the show notes. You can find those in the podcast app that you are using right now to listen to this episode.

Dusty Weis:

And as long as we're on the topic of nutrient management, coming up after the break, we're going to talk to a nationally-recognized expert: Brian Arnall from Oklahoma State University. That's in a moment here on the Future. Faster.

Dusty Weis:

This is the Future. Faster, a sustainable agriculture podcast by Nutrien Ag Solutions. I'm Dusty Weis, along with Tom Daniel and Sally Flis. And we're joined now by Brian Arnall, precision nutrient management extension specialist at Oklahoma State University. So, Brian, thanks for joining us.

Brian Arnall:

Thank you, Dusty. It's a great pleasure to be here.

Dusty Weis:

Absolutely. And Brian, to get us started, can you tell us a little bit more about your background, how you made your way to your current role as the precision nutrient management extension specialist? And kind of describe what your current roles and responsibilities look like at OSU.

Brian Arnall:

Absolutely. Just a kid in Oklahoma that went to FFA. And I was really horrible at livestock judging. So, the ag teacher threw me into land judging. Started getting into soil pits. And from that point on, I've been kind of hooked into soil.

Brian Arnall:

So, have a degree in soil fertility, actually from Oklahoma State. I tried to leave this location several times and it just kept pulling me back in. I've been with OSU since 2008. I started as extension and teaching only, so extension primary. Now, I have a three-way appointment. So, I'm extension, teaching, and research. So, I get to do all the great things with the land grant: get to do research, work with students, and extend it to the farmers of Oklahoma and everywhere else.

Sally Flis:

Thanks, Brian. One of the projects that Nutrien Ag Solutions is working on in 2022 is with the Climate Action Reserve's Nitrogen Management Project Protocol to generate emission reduction credits. And part of that is the minimum or the additionality for that program is a 5% rate reduction. The other thing that growers can get some benefit for using is either a nitrification inhibitor or a slow, controlled-release fertilizer, where they get a boost in that emission reduction if they're using one of those products. What are some other practices that you've looked at through your extension and research career that crop consultants can consider as they're looking to enroll growers in programs where rate reductions or adjustments are required?

Brian Arnall:

Yeah. All those have been quite successful. I've been working in all those since the beginning, with caveats that every product and all these applications have their place, environment, and time. And so, that's one of the things we work on right now is looking at, what works at what time. Are we talking fall application? Spring? Products? No-till? Conventional till? Everything really plays in, but as the consultants are working with their farmers and making sure that they get the biggest bang out of their buck and reduce nitrogen as they need to, it's tying those inhibitors or slow release to the proper environment. So, for those injecting anhydrous in the fall, urease inhibitors, or not. So, it's really timing it in.

Brian Arnall:

And right now, in Oklahoma, we've gone a good 70 days without measurable rainfall. And so, we're looking at extremely dry soil surfaces. We're looking at very low humidity. Making the adjustments of what and how we apply is kind of an on-the-go game when it comes to really getting the most out of it.

Dusty Weis:

And Brian, you told us before that those dry conditions are kind of even making your life difficult as far as collecting soil samples go.

Brian Arnall:

Absolutely. I've got a couple of large research projects where I'm supposed to be taking deep soil cores. In fact, that's one of my recommendations for farmers with current nitrogen prices: take a gander down at depth and see what's down deep. And I've been shearing bolts all winter long on my deep core rig, trying to get to 3-foot deep. And I'm hitting 18 and 20 inches out in our high planes. It's pretty rough.

Brian Arnall:

And even what we call downstate, in the middle of Oklahoma, we're sitting at day 66 without a quarter of an inch. And this time of year, that's not a really a bad deal. We've just been so warm, we haven't really shut down. And so, it's 60 degrees today. We've been flirting with 50s and 60s all winter long. So, we've got temperatures pulling moisture out of the ground. The wheat's trying to grow. And it's kind of going backwards right now.

Dusty Weis:

With your position, how much time do you get to spend out in the farm fields, taking samples, talking to the growers and that kind of stuff? Versus how much time are you back at the university?

Brian Arnall:

Never enough because that's the favorite part of my job. But really, when it comes to visiting with producers, whether it's one on one or in meeting, I'm at least out there 33% of my time. Right now, as Sally knows, this is meeting time-heavy. So, I'm running through meetings all over the US. I'm doing a lot of on-site visits, taking care of the wheat crop and prepping for our summer crop. So, at least a third of my time is with our producers of Oklahoma.

Brian Arnall:

And then field time, once spring starts rolling and we're topdressing wheat and we're doing corn, I'm not in the office. So, I only teach in the fall so I can put my entire spring and summer efforts into growers and field work.

Tom Daniel:

Brian, one of the questions I've got right now, you're talking about soil sampling. And we've got a soil science team at Nutrien Ag Solutions that's been doing a lot of soil organic carbon studies, doing a lot of intensive soil sampling on some of the acres that we're working with with growers. One of the things we see a lot of is variation in some of these soil samples. What do you see as some of the considerations you have toward... are you seeing a lot of variation in some of your soil sampling that you're doing? And what do you consider to be the correct soil sample that we should be pulling?

Brian Arnall:

Tom, that's some really good questions. And the last one's a little bit of one that can get me in a sticking point, depending on who's listening to this, but I'll tell you this. 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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

We had a carbon market around about 10 years ago. And OSU pull 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 end-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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

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?

Brian Arnall:

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.

Brian Arnall:

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 yield 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 – now, 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 our in-season.

Brian Arnall:

If I 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.

Brian Arnall:

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.

Tom Daniel:

So, Brian, one of the things I would ask, we do talk about carbon a little bit on this podcast occasionally. And curiosity from where you are and where you sit today. What are you hearing from growers and crop consultants concerning carbon programs and things in your area?

Brian Arnall:

Confusion, just be honest. They don't know what's straight and what's going. You got to remember too, I'm in the Plain states. So, my daily farmer interactions with Oklahoma, Kansas, they're not getting hit as hard as some of the corn belt. So, more of my carbon market stuff I'm getting when I interact. I'll be in Illinois - Peoria next week. I'm sure I'm going to hear a whole lot about it when I go into Peoria for the CCA Conference. And so, there's so much skepticism on how much trust to put it in. One of the best things is that I heard a farmer tell me that he's willing to enter the carbon market, but he's going to pay his lawyer double to make sure that paperwork is right. And so, most are well-aware of reading that fine print. So, it's interesting.

Brian Arnall:

They're all watching though. I mean, from the coffee shop to Twitter, they're paying very close eyes on who's doing what and where. And if a neighbor does it, they're asking a lot of questions.

Sally Flis:

Brian, with your experience and background in precision ag and technologies and data collection, and as you've looked at these different practices and tools, what do you see as some of those top challenge in making these carbon markets really work and be effective or sustainability reporting even? What's a really big hurdle you still see in the field?

Brian Arnall:

I would go back to my soil scientist answer is documentation, and then making sure that those who are collecting the samples are doing it in the methodology recommended. Shoot, coming up with a consensus upon methodology of which we should be sampling would be a great start, in some cases: consistency of timing, consistency of depth.

Brian Arnall:

The more we look at this carbon market as the soil scientist go, we've always known the carbon is variable over time. Now, we're seeing the spatial, both 3D, so depth and along a horizon and temporal. And what happens if we sample after a rain, or if we sample after 10 days of dry? And what's the microclimate going to do to influence some of our sampling? And so, the documentation of these. And on our side, what happens if a producer or a farmer signs on to do carbon, and it's a no-till, and so they're paid for it, and then it's a wet harvest and they ruts up the field horribly? What does that mean? Is there corrective measures that can be taken to clear the ruts? And is that going to be going back to, how is that document written that they're signing?

Brian Arnall:

We know often that the carbon in our region fluctuates based upon rainfall. So, extended periods of dry versus extended periods of wet highly fluctuate our organic carbon. So, it that's our gold standard that we're looking at carbon change, a single-year drought could really mess up. And what does that mean for the producer that signed that contract and done everything right, but went through three years of drought?

Brian Arnall:

We had blackouts a couple months ago. And so, I was actually driving to Colorado a week after our windstorm. So, we had 110, 120 mile sustained winds in the Kansas, Texas, and Oklahoma Panhandles. I saw a field I'd been on a dozen times. No-till. 10 years of no-till. Had a corn residue a month prior. No-till wheat coming up looking great. It got stripped down three inches. It lost every bit of topsoil. Was that because of farming practices? No. It was a no-till field that everything had been done right, but 95-mile-per-hour sustained winds just tore it off.

Dusty Weis:

Yeah. Well, and certainly making sure that those metrics for assessing a proper successful sustainable operation are well-defined, that's one of the big challenges that we face, and it's certainly a peril of working in a developing science, but the fun part of working in a developing sciences is, of course, we get to talk to folks like you who are on the cutting edge of it. So, Brian Arnall from Oklahoma State University, thank you so much for joining us on this episode of the Future. Faster.

Dusty Weis:

That is going to conclude this edition of the Future. Faster, the pursuit of sustainable success with Nutrien Ag Solutions. New episodes arrive every other week, so make sure you subscribe in your favorite app and join us again soon. Visit futurefaster.com to learn more.

Dusty Weis:

The Future. Faster podcast is brought to you by Nutrien Ag Solutions, with executive producer, Connor Erwin and editing by Larry Kilgore III. And it's produced by Podcamp Media. Branded podcast production for businesses, Podcampmedia.com. For Nutrien Ag Solutions, thanks for listening. I'm Dusty Weis.