116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
Home / Opinion / Letters to the Editor
Voluntary nutrient reduction a better fit
The Gazette Opinion Staff
Aug. 10, 2013 12:01 pm
Voluntary nutrient reduction strategy from a producer viewpoint. If you look back 40 years, most of the crop land was plowed. A good job of plowing was if all the previous crop was buried. We did it for weed control.
Now we use more chemicals, such as Roundup, to help kill the weeds. This makes no-tillage planting possible. This leaves the crop residue on the surface so less soil and nutrients end up in the rivers. We also are starting to use cover crops to help hold the soil and nutrients.
There are some people who would like to make nutrient reduction mandatory. Regulations are a fixed solution to deal with a variable situation. The weather is variable as are the soils, slopes, crops, etc. Phosphorus ties to the soil, so if you can hold the soil, it's not a big problem. Nitrogen moves with the water.
Some would say the farmers are using too much fertilizer. Nitrogen cost 50 cents a pound and it is a big expense for growing corn. If you use too little, the yield goes down; too much, you wasted money. The correct amount to use can vary by the field, soil, crop, weather, etc.
It is best to keep nutrient reduction voluntary. One size does not fit all.
Robert Ritscher
Keystone
Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com