From MSU News Service

Nitrogen is important for optimal crop production, but it can be lost to leaching as nitrate. High amounts of nitrate in drinking water can be harmful to people, especially infants and pregnant women. While most groundwater in Montana has nitrate levels below the drinking water standard, the Montana Department of Agriculture has found high nitrate levels in certain areas of the state including parts of northeastern and central Montana.

Fortunately, “there are management practices that can help keep the nitrogen in the soil and out of the water,” said Clain Jones, Extension soil fertility specialist in the Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences (LRES) at Montana State University.

In Montana, nitrate leaching from dryland agriculture is thought to be insignificant during the growing season because plant uptake of water generally greatly exceeds precipitation, preventing downward movement of water. However, in fall and winter the opposite is true, resulting in increased potential for nitrate leaching. In addition, overwinter organic matter decomposition can add soluble nitrogen to the soil, increasing the amount of soil nitrate available to be leached. This is not only a health concern, but a direct financial loss to the producer.

Shallow or sandy soils or those with cracks that connect the surface to below the root zone have high leaching potential. High precipitation can exacerbate the problem. Jones and Chengci Chen, associate professor at the Central Agricultural Research Center in Moccasin, found that in a wet winter, soil nitrate levels decreased by up to 25 pounds of nitrogen per acre from fall to spring. Actual nitrogen lost to leaching was likely higher because soils at this site can gain up to 40 pounds of nitrate per acre from organic matter decomposition over the winter. This suggests a total of up to 65 pounds of nitrogen per acre could leach into groundwater from shallow soils.

Annual soil testing and realistic yield goals should both help producers calculate fertilizer rates and reduce nitrate leaching, since unused available nitrogen is subject to overwinter loss. In the study at Moccasin, there was no change in nitrate from fall to spring on fields that received 40 pounds of nitrogen per acre the previous year, while fields that received 120 pounds per acre lost more than 25 pounds of nitrogen per acre. The higher fertilization rate left more residual nitrogen in the soil, which was lost most likely to leaching over the winter. This illustrates that either the crops use it, or you can lose it.

“Recropping, rather than fallow, and reduced tillage both help reduce nitrogen losses,” said Jones.

Upendra Sainju and associates with the USDA-Agricultural Research Service compared the estimated initial soil nitrogen level in 1983 to the 2004 level from a plot study near Culbertson, in eastern Montana. The spring-tilled wheat-fallow rotation lost an average 26 pounds more nitrogen per acre each year than spring-tilled continuous wheat. The twice-tilled (fall and spring) continuous wheat rotation lost an average 14 pounds more nitrogen per acre per year than the no-tilled continuous wheat, which had the lowest average annual nitrogen loss of 8 pounds nitrogen per acre. While it is not known what fraction of that nitrogen was lost to leaching rather than erosion or volatilization, leaching loss is likely, given the coarse soils at that study site.

Planting a diversity of crops, including perennials and deep rooted crops, such as alfalfa, sunflower and wheat, or a winter crop, helps ensure readily available nitrogen is used and harvested or held on site as plant biomass.

Jones suggested planting annual legumes for seed or forage because “they are good scavengers of available nitrogen and they do not need nitrogen fertilizer as long as sufficient phosphorus, potassium, sulfur and the correct inoculants are available for nitrogen fixation.”

Jones also noted “spacing crops for optimal density and yields will optimize resource use, and decrease potential for nitrogen leaching.”  For example, Chen found spring wheat had a higher efficiency of nitrogen fertilizer use at 6 inch row spacing than at 12 inch spacing.

Ideally, conventional nitrogen fertilizer is applied right before the plants need it most, which is from seedling to tillering stages in cereal grains and seedling to early branching in oilseeds.

“This can be followed by in-crop fertilizer topdress applications based on plant demand or growth stage, rather than calendar date,” said Jones. “By using such split applications, there is less potential for over fertilizing during a dry year, because nitrogen applied is based on the current year’s growing conditions. That leaves less unused nitrogen in the soil to be subject to leaching.

“There are also advances in fertilizer and application technology that help increase the amount of applied fertilizer actually used by the crop, which decreases the amount of fertilizer susceptible to leaching,” said Jones.

Enhanced efficiency fertilizers slowly release their nutrients over time. Recovery of nitrogen fertilizer by wheat has been found to be 4 to 14 percent higher with one of these slow release products than conventional urea.

“These deserve consideration, especially as the price difference compared to conventional urea fertilizers decreases,” said Jones. “But, timing of application is a little different than with conventional fertilizer,” he cautioned.

Variable rate application is another tool to help ensure nitrogen is applied where it is needed most and not in places where it will be lost. By identifying areas in the field that are limited by factors other than nitrogen, the producer can limit nitrogen leaching loss by applying just enough nitrogen to meet that area’s production potential. By using available technology and management practices, producers can make sure their fertilizer dollars are spent feeding a crop, rather than lost to leaching, and can help reduce the potential for nitrate contamination of ground water.

 

By Andrea Sarchet
Madison-Jefferson County Extension Agent

The economic and ecological impact of noxious weeds in Montana is tremendous and can reduce forage production significantly.  In an effort to help hay producers and hay consumers mitigate expanding noxious weed infestation; the Montana Department of Agriculture initiated the Noxious Weed Seed Free Forage (NWSFF) Program.    

Anyone who has purchased hay contaminated with noxious weeds is well aware of the costs associated with weed control on feed grounds and in hay fields.  The most effective method of weed control is taking preventative measures to reduce their spread.  The purpose of the NWSFF Program is to provide forage products, such as hay, cubes, pellets, or straw that are free of noxious weed seeds. In addition to the law requiring NWSFF on public lands, volunteer use of weed-free products on private land also is encouraged.

The Montana NWSFF Program began in 1989 as a voluntary program by several county extension agents, weed supervisors and producers.  At that time, the program was partially supported by a grant from the Noxious Weed Trust Fund. In 1995, the Montana Legislature passed the Montana Noxious Weed Seed Free Forage Act and delegated the administration of the program to the Montana Department of Agriculture.

How does a hay producer get their forage certified?

Contact your local County Extension Office to enroll in the NWSFF Program and get registration information; for Madison and Jefferson Counties, call 287-3282.  After a producer has enrolled in the program, they will need to notify the inspector of their approximate cut date and schedule an inspection no more than seven days prior to cutting their hay.  A certified inspector (usually the County Extension Agent or Weed District Supervisor) will make a visual inspection by walking through the field prior to harvest.  If the forage meets the standards of the NWSFF Program, it is certified and marked as noxious weed seed free.  The certification fee this year is $2.50 per acre (or $25.00 minimum). 

How does a person looking to purchase NWSFF find it?

Someone looking to purchase NWSFF can go to the Department of Agriculture’s website at: http://agr.mt.gov/weedpest/nwsff.asp and click on “NWSFF Producer List” to find producers selling NWSFF locally.  Certified forage will have either a red identification tag or be baled with blue and orange twine.  Both of these markers along with the transportation certificates that accompany the forage serve as the official Montana NWSFF identification which also allows the Department of Agriculture to track any forage back to the producer.

MSU News Service

A new publication to identify many tick varieties is available from Montana State University Extension.  "Ticks of Veterinary and Public Health Importance in Montana" gives an introduction to ticks and helps readers identify six species common to Montana, and learn about tick transmitted diseases and tick management and control.

Author Gregory Johnson, Veterinary Entomologist in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences, included photos and diagrams in the 16-page ticks guide that show hard- and soft-bodied ticks and how to properly remove an attached tick. The ticks guide describes life cycles and preferred hosts of all the different species, as well as the diseases transmitted by each species of tick.

Another Extension publication, Montana's Noxious Weeds, was recently updated to include the new noxious weed curly leaf pondweed and the regulated plants hydrilla and cheatgrass from the state noxious weed list. The publication was also updated to reflect changes to the classification of noxious weeds from three categories into five priorities (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, and 3).

Montana's Noxious Weeds is an 84-page, full-color guide designed to help identify state classified noxious weeds. The guide was edited by Jane Mangold, MSU Extension Invasive Plant specialist, and Monica Pokorny, former MSU Extension research associate.
The guide includes full-color images of all the listed noxious weeds in different stages of growth for easier identification and a list of options for management. 

The Ticks Guide is available for $2 and Montana's Noxious Weeds cost is $4. The booklets can be ordered from Montana State University Extension Publications at (406) 994-3273, or at orderpubs@montana.edu, Alice Schaefer, Publications Coordinator, (406) 994-3273 or publications@montana.edu

USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine Funding appears to be imminent for 2010 USDA APHIS PPQ Rangeland Grasshopper Suppression Program Cost Share Treatments.

In order to best serve the ranchers throughout Montana, PPQ needs to know about possible requests for PPQ Grasshopper Suppression Programs ASAP. Large-scale treatments will require PPQ to utilize staffing from other states, resulting in early planning to fulfill all requests. The preferred treatment product, Dimilin (growth inhibitor) has a small window of effectiveness prior to the grasshoppers reaching the adult stage. Therefore, PPQ needs to have completed project proposals by May 27, 2010 at COB. A complete project proposal will include:

• A formal letter of request in writing stating that a rancher or group of ranchers is requested USDA APHIS PPQ assistance in managing economically damaging populations of grasshoppers in 2010. All ranchers must sign this letter and date the letter.
• A project proposal must be 10,000 acres or more of contiguous rangeland. A map for each project must be completed and a complete map will clearly show the township, range and section. The map also needs to show the property boundary lines for the proposed project. Environmentally sensitive sites such as water and endangered species habitat must be placed on the map. Areas that need to be excluded also need to be placed on the map. Please see the attached Proposed Treatment Area Questionnaire. This document must also be filled out and submitted to PPQ.
• Private funds for the cost share need to be secured in a bank account prior to treatment.
• A cooperative agreement with USDA APHIS PPQ must be completed to conduct a cost share suppression program. PPQ plans to use Reduced Agent Area Treatments (RAATs) on all projects and PPQ will consider using a 13 oz total formulation or a 31 oz total formulation depending on the land owner request and rangeland conditions. Using RAATs, approximately 50-60 percent of the projected treatment area will be treated.
• The estimated cost for treatments will be $6.00 per treated acre and PPQ will only be charging for acres that are actually sprayed. When looking at the entire project and the total acres in the project that will be protected, PPQ figures that it will cost approximately $3.00 per protected acre.
• For requests to use Dimilin, requests must be received no later than May 27 or other treatment options (Sevin XLR Plus or Malathion) may need to be considered.
• In order to justify a suppression program, nymphal grasshopper surveys will be conducted before treatments. If the grasshopper population is not above 15 per square yard, there will not be a suppression program conducted.
  
• Funding for projects will be on a first come, first served basis that is based on available funding throughout the Western United States. Many other states are facing similar problems with grasshoppers and the grasshoppers hatch earlier in other states, thus making it urgent for Montana ranchers to sign up early. Please contact Andrea Sarchet at the Extension Office, 287-3282 for more information about these proposals and the contact to send completed proposals to.

MSU News Service

On May 14, a free webinar "Livestock and Poultry Mortality Composting: A Natural Rendering Process" will be presented at 12:30 p.m. The webinar will feature four of the top national experts in livestock and poultry composting including MSU Extension livestock environment associate specialist Tommy Bass. This webcast is part of the Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Center webcast series.

The webinar topics will include: routine and emergency carcass composting; composting large carcasses with different types of feed-stock (straw, saw dust, manure, etc.); considerations for composting in cold semi-arid environments, such as the high plains and mountain states; and composting catastrophic poultry mortalities.

Even in ordinary day-to-day operations, feed yards, poultry farms and other livestock operations will have to deal with dead animals. There are many issues, including regulatory ones, with letting the carcass decay naturally in the field. In most states the legal options are burying, incinerating, conventional rendering and composting. Most of these options have drawbacks.

If done properly, composting dead animals poses few if any of the problems of incinerating, burying or transporting long distances.

"Not only is it more economical, it may be more environmentally sound as well," said Bass. "Plus, in a relatively short time - less than 45 days for chickens and about six months for an average-sized cow -- the carcasses can be recycled into carbon rich compost with no sign of soft tissues and minimal residual bones, which can be screened out."

The webinar will be moderated by Dr. Saqib Mukhtar, Texas AgriLife Extension Service engineer. In addition to Bass, webinar speakers will be: Jean Bonhotal, Senior Extension Associate with the Cornell Waste Management Institute, Cornell University; George (Bud) Malone, former Extension Poultry Specialist with the University of Delaware for 34 years, who now runs a private poultry consulting service; and Josh Payne, Area Animal Waste Management Specialist for the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service.