BULLETIN 320 JANUARY 1960 FERTILIZER USE and PRACTICES by ALABAMA FARMERS A GR I CU L TU RA L E X P ERIM EN T STATION Auburn, Alabama A U BU RN E. V. Smith, Director U N IV ERSI T Y In coo peration with D iv is io n of A gr ic u l tur al Re la t io ns T ENN ES S EE V A L LEY AU T HOR IT Y p NI f FIRST PRINTING 5M, JANUARY 1960 SUMMARY 1. In 1957, 463 farmers in a random sample from 16 Alabama counties purchased an average of 1,990 pounds of N, 2,306 pounds of P20 5, and 2,111 pounds of K20 per farm. This is the equivalent of 9.2 tons of 4-12-12 fertilizer plus 1.9 tons of ammonium nitrate. As an average, 56 per cent of the open land (cropland used plus open permanent pasture) was fertilized. 2. Farmers more nearly applied recommended rates of fertilizer to cotton than to other crops. In 1957, farmers reporting use of each nutrient on cotton applied an average of 51 pounds of N, 54 pounds of P20 5, and 50 pounds of K2 0 per acre. On corn the average was 40, 28, and 23 pounds per acre, respectively, for the three primary nutrients. Hay crops and pastures fertilized received an average of 17 pounds of N, 24 pounds of P20 5, and 24 pounds of K20 per acre in 1957. Farmers in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East) used an average of 14 pounds of N, 40 pounds of P20, and 52 pounds of K20 per acre on peanuts. 3. Seventeen per cent of the farmers interviewed had used a high analysis fertilizer (mixed grade containing 30 pounds or more of plant food per 100 pounds of material). Of these, 62 per cent said they preferred it over conventional grades. 4. There was little difference in the percentage of farmers who said they preferred ammonium nitrate and those who preferred nitrate of soda as a source of N. Ninety-four per cent of the 463 farmers said they had used nitrate of soda; 78 per cent had used ammonium nitrate. 5. Seventy-four per cent of all farmers indicated that bulk delivery and spreading of fertilizer were available, whereas 7 per cent said these services were not. Nineteen per cent did not know whether bulk delivery and spreading were available. Less than 1 per cent said they preferred bulk delivery and spreading over conventional methods of handling fertilizer. The average additional cost for bulk delivery and spreading above the cost of the same grade of fertilizer purchased in bags was $2.70 per ton. This additional cost varied from $1.50 to $3.90 per ton among farming areas. 6. Forty-two out of 463 farmers, or 9 per cent, reported having soil tested in 1957. According to the acreages in fields tested and acres of open land on farms included in the study, only 4.8 per cent of the open land was tested. However, based on open land on farms where soil was tested, almost 36 per cent of the acreage was tested. Eleven out of 42 farmers, or 26 per cent, said they did not follow the soil test recommendations. 7. About two out of every five farmers reported a problem in handling and applying fertilizer in 1957. The major problems were "clogging in hopper" and "caking in bag." Less than 1 per cent reported "breaking of bag" as a problem. 8. Fifty-eight per cent of the farmers used credit for fertilizer purchases in the spring of 1957. Only three farmers reported use of credit for fall purchases of fertilizer. Sixty-eight per cent of the farmers borrowed less than $1,000 primarily for fertilizer purchases. Commercial banks, fertilizer dealers, and landlords were the three most important sources of credit. Farmers who borrowed from landlords paid the highest average annual rate of interest, which was 11.1 per cent. Average annual rates of interest paid to all other sources of credit averaged between 4.9 and 7.3 per cent in 1957. 9. When farmers were asked 'if they considered cost of fertilizer in connection with decisions on grade and amount to use, 50 per cent replied in the affirmative. Sixty-four per cent of these farmers considered cost per ton, 27 per cent cost per pound of plant nutrients, 5 per cent cost per bag, and 4 per cent the additional cost in relation to expected additional return from use of added amounts of fertilizer. More than half the farmers checked fertilizer prices at more than one place before they purchased. 10. Tradition, habit, and past experience played a major part in the decisions farmers made relative to fertilizer use. When asked how they decided on the grade and in turn on the amount of fertilizer to use, the largest portion of farmers stated they decided on the basis of past grades and amounts used. The same was true with the source of credit from which they obtained funds. They replied that they used the present source because they had borrowed previously from that source. CONTENTS Page DESCRIPTION OF FARMS AND FARMERS __ FERTILIZER PURCHASES AND USE - 8 9 9---------9 10 11 12 12 Do most Alabama farmers use commercial fertilizer? How many tons of primary plant nutrients did Alabama farmers buy in 1957? What part of the total open land on farms was fertilized in 1957? What grades of mixed fertilizer and kinds of straight fertilizer materials have farmers used? What were the most common fertilizers purchased in 1957 and how much did farmers buy? What percentage of farmers reported use of liming materials in 1958? RATES OF FERTILIZATION _---- 183 13 At what rates did farmers use commercial fertilizers on cotton, corn, hay crops and pasture, and peanuts? Was there a relationship between pounds of plant nutrients used per acre and average yields of cotton and corn as reported by farmers? ACCEPTANCE OF CHANGES IN FERTILIZERS 15 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 19 20 20 20 20 21 What proportion of farmers used high analysis mixed fertilizers? Did farmers using high analysis fertilizers prefer them over conventional grades? Why did farmers prefer high analysis fertilizers? Did some farmers express preference for high analysis fertilizers on one crop but not on another? How many farmers had used -a granulated mixed fertilizer? From what sources did farmers get information about new fertilizers? What sources of N did farmers prefer? What reasons did farmers give for preference to source of N? In what kind and size of bag did farmers purchase mixed fertilizer in 1957? What kind and size of fertilizer bags did farmers prefer? To what extent were bulk delivery and spreading available to Alabama farmers? What was average distance that bulk fertilizer was hauled from source to farm?_ Did farmers prefer bulk delivery and spreading to conventional ways of buying fertilizer? Was it cheaper to buy fertilizer in bulk and have it spread or to buy in bags and spread? PRACTICES RELATED TO FERTILIZER AND ITS USE _.._ .......... What percentage of farmers reported ever having soil -21 tested on the farm they operated? How many farmers had soil tested in 1957? 21 On what portion of open land was soil tested in 1957? What crops were planted following soil test in 1957? Did farmers follow soil test recommendations? What were some reasons given by farmers for not following soil test recommendations? What methods were used to apply mixed fertilizer and N to cotton? What methods were used to apply mixed fertilizer and N to corn? What methods were used to apply fertilizer to permanent pastures? Did farmers report any problems in handling and applying fertilizer? .................... Did farmers store fertilizer on farm? In what kinds of buildings was fertilizer stored on farm? How much fertilizer storage space did farmers have? Was there a price incentive for off-season purchases to encourage farm storage? How many days prior to planting in spring and fall did farmers purchase and receive fertilizer delivery? USE OF CREDIT FOR FERTILIZER PURCHASEs Page 21 21 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 24 24 24 24 What proportion of farmers used credit to buy fertilizer in 1957? How much money did farmers borrow for fertilizer purchases in spring of 1957? From what sources did farmers obtain credit for fertilizer purchases? What other sources of fertilizer credit did farmers know and would consider using? Why did farmers use particular sources of credit? What annual interest rate did farmers pay on fertilizer loans? What security was used by farmers in obtaining fertilizer loans? Did terms of credit for fertilizer loans differ from those prevailing for other production items? What sources of income were used to repay fertilizer loans? -ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS --- 24 25 26 26 26 27 27 28 28 28 How do farmers decide on the grade and amount of fertilizer to use per acre? What costs do farmers consider when purchasing fertilizer? --Did farmers recognize the influence of changing prices received and costs on level of fertilizer used? On what crops did farmers report that higher rates of fertilization would pay? Did farmers check fertilizer prices at more than one place before buying? What difference was found in cash and credit prices for fertilizer in 1957? CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... "....30 28 28 29 30 30 30 FERTILIZER USE and PRACTICES by ALABAMA FARMERS J. H. YEAGER, AgriculturalEconomist O. D. BELCHER, Assistant in Agricultural Economics H. G. WALKUP, Agricultural Economist of commercial ALABAMA farmers bought almost 1 million tons lime, expendifertilizer during the 1957-58 season. Including tures by farmers for fertilizers amounted to nearly 50 million dollars in 1957. Before 1956 fertilizer and lime represented the greatest single cash expenditure by Alabama farmers. Since 1956, expenditures for feed have been somewhat greater than those for fertilizer. Expenditures for fertilizer normally amount to about 20 per cent, or $1 out of every $5, of total cash expenditures by Alabama farmers. In late 1957 a study was begun in cooperation with the Tennessee Valley Authority relative to fertilizer use and practices of Alabama farmers. It was the objective of this study to determine (1) use of credit for fertilizer purchases, (2) current fertilizer practices and amounts and kinds of fertilizer used, (3) acceptance of high analysis fertilizers, and (4) some of the characteristics of farms and farmers affecting fertilizer use and the use of credit for fertilizer purchases. During the summer of 1958, 463 farmers in 16 counties, Figure 1, were interviewed by trained enumerators. The sample of farmers1 interviewed was selected at random within farming areas. In addition, 41 fertilizer dealers and 41 credit agency representatives were interviewed. The following report is based primarily on data supplied by the 463 farmers. * This study was based on data obtained under a research project titled "Credit Effects on Farmers' Demands for Fertilizer in Alabama." The work was executed and financed under terms of a cooperative agreement with the Tennessee Valley Authority. The cooperation of all farmers and the helpful suggestions of members of the manuscript review committee are acknowledged. **Agricultural Economics Branch, Division of Agricultural Relations, Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. 1A farm was defined as an agricultural unit that had at least $200 income from farm sources in 1957. 8 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION JACKSON COUNTY HILLS TENNESSEE, 'VALLEY SAND MOUNTAIN LIMESTONE VALLEYS MOUNTAINS 'WEST BORDER / SAND MOUNTAIITLAE MINERAL AND INDUSTRIAL 1 UPPER COASTAL PLAINS BLACK PRAIRIE BELT SOUTHWESTERN PINEY WOODS: PLATEAU SOUTHEASTERN COASTAL PLAINS GULF COAST SOUTH CENTRAL COASTAL PLAINS County excluded from sample Sample areas and number of farms FIGURE 1. Sample of 463 farms by counties according to type of forming areas. DESCRIPTION of FARMS and FARMERS The average size of farms for the State sample was 202 acres, Table 1. Size varied from 80 acres in the Sand Mountain to 402 acres in the Black Belt Area. Out of the 202 acres, 105 were TABLE 1. DESCRIPTION OF FARMS AND FARMERS INCLUDED IN FERTILIZER STUDY, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Average size Farming area Farms Total land A. No. 66 120 80 -________ 66 60 160 Farm Operators Ae-pCom aver grades Tenage or more ants of ae school Pct. Pct. Yr. 27 73 48 16 51 67 49 60 25 Open land A. 87 46 79 Colored Pct. 4 0 2 Tennessee Valley Sand Mountain -________ - Limestone Valleys________ -_____ 63 Upper Coastal Plain 29 Piedmont_______________ Black Lower Coastal Plain (W est) (East) Belt ----------------------------- 121 214 402 60 71 250 52 52 52 63 76 37 18 28 75 30 10 85 59 Lower Coastal Plain -------------- 61 59 463 254 299 202 98 147 105 52 51 51 55 59 61 29 80 31 15 22 21 STATE._____________ FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 9 classified as open land. A breakdown of the average acreage of open land was as follows: 103 acres in field, hay, and pasture crops, 6 acres of which were double cropped; and 8 acres of idle cropland that included any allotted acreage of cotton and corn in Acreage Reserve under the Soil Bank program. There was an average of 94 acres in woods and 3 acres in miscellaneous areas such as lots and farmstead. Three-fourths of the farmers in the Black Belt Area were tenants, a large proportion of whom were colored. The average age of farm operators was fairly uniform among farming areas; the State average was 51 years. As an average 61 per cent of the farmers had completed seven or more grades of schooling. However, in the Black Belt Area only 37 per cent had finished seven or more grades. Only 4 per cent of all farm operators had gone beyond the 12th grade. FERTILIZER PURCHASES and USE Do most Alabama farmers use commercial fertilizer? Yes. Only 3 out of 463 farmers said that they had not used commercial fertilizer every year on the farms they operated. In 1957, more than 90 per cent of the farmers included in the study reported buying N, P2 0 5 , and K2O, the primary plant nutrients. 2 How many tons of primary plant nutrients did Alabama farmers buy in 1957? As an average, farmers in the sample bought about 1 ton of each of the three primary plant nutrients in 1957, Table 2. This was the equivalent of 9.2 tons of 4-12-12 fertilizer plus 1.9 tons of ammonium nitrate. Farmers in the Lower Coastal Plain Area purchased the greatest average amount per farm. Farmers in the Piedmont Area purchased the least amount per farm. The acreage of open land on which fertilizer could be applied varied among farms and farming areas. Therefore, purchases of N, P20 5 , and K2 0 were calculated per acre of open land (cropland used plus open permanent pasture). Farmers in the 2 The primary plant nutrients, as generally recognized, are nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) and are expressed on the fertilizer bag as N, P2O, and KO respectively. Thus, 100 pounds of 4-12-12 fertilizer contains 4 pounds 20, of N, 12 pounds of P 05, and 12 pounds of K20. 2 10 10 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 2. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS REPORTING PURCHASES AND AVERAGE AMOUNT OF N, P20 5, AND K2 0 PURCHASED PER FARM, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 N Farming area Farmers reporting Amount P20 5 Farmers reporting Amount purchases Tenn(essee Valley------Sand Mountain---------Lime,stone Valleys------Uppe] rCoastal Plain----. Piedniont -------------Black Belt------------Lower Coastal Plain (W est) --------Lower Coastal Plain purchases Pct. 86 100 89 Lb. 1,571 1,884 78 93 15,639 1,168 1,070 92 95 86 90 1,122 3,385 Pct. 86 91 100 79 93 95 95 88 Lb. 1,762 1,248 1,543 1,162 797 1,855 4,133 5,331 2,306 K20 Farmers reporting Amount purchases Pct. Lb. 1,571 86 1,080 89 100 1,336 79 910 93 583 95 1,330 95 88 90 3,867 5,596 2,111 (E ast)-------- -- 3,605 1,990 STATE--------- 91 TABLE 3. AVERAGE AMOUNT OF PRIMARY PLANT NUTRIENTS PURCHASED PER ACRE OF OPEN LAND, 463 FARMS, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Average amount purchased per acre of open land' Farming area N Lb. Tennessee P2 05 Lb. 19 28 K2 0 Lb. 17 24 Total Lb. 53 93 Sand Limestone Valleys----------------Upper Coastal Plain Valley -------Mountain ---------------- _ ---------------- 17 41 - Piedmont -13 ------- B lack Belt------------------------Lower Coastal Plain (West) Lower Coastal Plain (East)-------STATE--1 24 22 19 65 19 19 15 53 17------18-----9----39---9 39 4 7 5 16 35 42 40 117 23 18 -- -- -- --- -- -- ------- 35 22 36 20 94 60 Cropland used plus open permanent pasture. Sand Mountain Area purchased the greatest amount of N, whereas those in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (West) bought the greatest amount of P20 5 and K2 0 per acre of open land, Table 3. Purchases of K20 per acre of open land were second highest in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East) where' peanuts were an important crop. Whot port of the total open land on forms wos fertilized in 1957? For the State as a whole, 56 per cent of the open acres in the sample were fertilized. In the Piedmont and Black Belt areas, FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES ,I FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 1 less than 2 out of every 5 acres of open land were fertilized in 1957. Farmingarea Percentage land fertilized 46 60 9 81 80 of open Tennessee V alley----=---------------------------69 Sand Mountain ------------------------------------- -70 Lim estone Valleys ------------------------------------U pper C oastal Plain --------------------------------Piedmo nt --- -- --------- -- - -- -- -- --- -- -- -- - -- -- -37 B lack Belt - -- -- -- ---- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -2 Lower Coastal Plain (West) ---------------------Lower Coastal Plain (East) -----STATE --56------------------- What grades of mixed fertilizer and kinds of straight fertilizer materials have farmers used? Based on information supplied by the 463 farmers, more than 90 per cent had used 4-10-7 and nitrate of soda prior to 1958. In addition, 50 per cent or more had used 6-8-4, ammonium nitrate, 4-12-12, muriate of potash, or ordinary superphosphate. Forty-nine per cent of the farmers reported they had "home mixed" fertilizer prior to 1958. In 1957, however, only nine farmers reported purchasing ingredients and "home mixing" fertilizer. Percentage Fertilizerused who used specified fertilizers prior to 1958 94 1 78 of farmers 4-10-7-------------------------95 Nitrate of sod a ---------------------------- -----------6-8 -4 - -- --- - - - - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -8 Am monium nitrate ---------------------------- -4-12 -12 -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- Muriate of potash -- 54 54 ------------------------ Ordinary superphosphate------------------50 B asic slag -------------------- =- -------49 0 -14-14 .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --41 6-8 -8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 Ammonium nitrate-limestone mixtures-------.27 Ammonium sulfate ----------------------16 0 -1 2-2 0 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --10 8-8 -8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -7 0 -1 0-2 0 - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 Concentrated superphosphate--------------6 0 -2 0-2 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - -5 Anhydrous ammonia----------------------4 Nitrogen solutions ------------------------ 3 0 -1 6-8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 10-10-10 --- --- -- - - -- -- - --- - - --- - -- - - ---. 14-0 -14 -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -2 14-14 -14 - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1 5-1 5-1 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -1 2 2 1 3 -13-13 -- - - - - -- ---- - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 1 Calcium metaphosphate ------------------Less than 1 per cent: 4-16-8, 6-12-24, 6-24-24, 8-8-2, 8-20-14, 12-12-12, and di-ammonium phosphate. 1 12 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION What were the most common fertilizers purchased in 1957 and how much did farmers buy? Sixty per cent of the farmers in the sample purchased 4-10-7 and 33 per cent bought 4-12-12. The average number of tons of 4-12-12 purchased per farm, however, was 50 per cent greater than that of 4-10-7, Table 4. TABLE 4. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS REPORTING PURCHASES OF MAJOR FERTILIZERS AND AVERAGE AMOUNT PURCHASED PER FARM REPORTING, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Fertilizer 4-10-7 Farming area 4-12-12 Nitrate of soda Ammonium nitrate FarmFarmers re- Amount ers re- Amount ers re- Amount ers re- Amount porting porting porting porting Pct. Tons Pct. Tons Pct. Tons Pct. Tons 3.9 4.3 4.8 4.8 3.1 3.4 7.5 10.4 5.5 Tennessee Valley___ 67 Sand Mountain.------ 50 Limestone Valleys__ 75 Upper Coastal 51 Plain Piedmont ___________.66 47 ..... Black Belt_________ Lower Coastal 62 Plain (West).----. Lower Coastal 68 Plain (East)_-----STATE ._____....... 60 15 53 52 16 17 27 44 32 33 13.0 4.4 4.3 2.6 2.8 8.4 15.2 13.6 8.2 28 32 48 40 45 32 84 49 37 2.5 1.9 2.1 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.2 4.7 2.5 30 33 38 17 28 22 84 44 31 3.1 4.1 3.1 2.1 2.6 2.3 4.8 4.6 3.6 What percentage of farmers reported use of liming materials in 1958?3 About one-third of the farmers who returned a mailed questionnaire reported use of lime and/or basic slag on their farms, Table 5. The average amount used per farm reporting was 16 tons of lime and 5 tons of basic slag. Only 48 per cent of the 463 personally interviewed farmers stated they had used lime on their farm prior to 1958. In view of this fact, the proportion reporting use of lime in 1958 appears high. Possibly a higher percentage of farmers who used lime returned the mailed questionnaire than was true for those who did not use lime. Data on purchases of liming materials were obtained by a mailed questionnaire mailed subsequent to field interviews. Four hundred and sixty-three questionnaires were sent and 108, or 23 per cent, were returned. FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 13 FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 1 TABLE 5. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS REPORTING AND AVERAGE AMOUNT USED PER FARM REPORTING, LIME AND/OR BASIC SLAG, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 19581 Portion o Potono farmers Average amount used prfr eotn Farming area using lime and/or basic slag Lime Basic slag Per cent _--- Tons Tons 6 40 29 Tennessee Valley ---------------------------Sand Mountain --------44 11 44 12 Limestone Valleys---------------------- --6 18 U pper C oastal Plain----------------------------------6 40 Pied mon t-------------- ------ -- -- ------ ------ ---- ----. 1 8 --------------------B lack B e-lt-----------2 Lower Coastal Plain (West)-------_------8----------- 18 45 19 Lower Coastal Plain (East) 8-2 16 -STATE -- ------ ----------- --------- -- 1 2 0 2 0 0 7 ------------------------------- 0 5 Based on 108 replies to 463 mailed questionnaires. Questionnaires were mailed subsequent to obtaining the personal interview data in the summer of 1957. RATES of FERTILIZATION At what rates did farmers use commercial fertilizers on cotton, corn, hay crops and pasture, and peanuts? Cotton. Farmers in the study used an average of 51 pounds of N, 54 pounds of P20 5, and 50 pounds of K20, per acre on cotton in 1957, Table 6. Sand Mountain Area farmers, applied the most fertilizer per acre, whereas those in the Upper Coastal TABLE 6. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS USING FERTILIZER AND AVERAGE AMOUNT APPLIED PER ACRE ON COTTON, 832 FARMS BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Farming area porting Fertilizers used on cotton Total K20 amount N P20 5 Farm- Amount Farm- Amount Farm- Amount of plant pernuret ers reper ers reper ers re1 acre' porting acre porting acre' per acre Pet. Tennessee Valley Sand Mountain Limestone Lb. 43 66 60 Pet. 100 100 100 Lb. 44 70 60 Pet. 100 100 100 Lb. 40 66 56 Lb. 127 202 176 100 100 95 Valleys------- Upper Coastal Plain_____ Piedmont _______ _ Black 98 100 98 100 41 52 44 56 100 100 98 100 48 47 50 59 100 100 98 100 38 89 42 55 127 138 136 170 Belt-------- Lower Coastal Plain (West)---------___----- Lower Coastal Plain (East)__________ 100 99 47 51 100 100 49 54 100 100 61 50 157 155 STATE ----1 Amount used per acre on farms reporting use of this nutrient on cotton. 14 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Plain and Tennessee Valley areas used the least. Almost all farmers used all three primary nutrients on cotton. General fertilizer recommendations 4 for cotton call for 50 to 60 pounds per acre each of the three primary plant nutrients. Therefore, farmers, on the average, were using amounts of tilizer within the general recommendations for cotton. Corn. Farmers used an average of 40 pounds of N, 28 pounds of P2 0 5, and 23 pounds of K20 per acre on corn in 1957, Table 7. General fertilizer recommendations for corn are 60 to 90 pounds of N and 30 pounds each of P20 5 and K20 per acre. Based on the foregoing findings, farmers, as an average, were using from two-thirds to less than half the amount of N generally recommended. They were using nearer the recommended rates of P20 5 and K20. Hay crops and pastures. Farmers who applied fertilizers to hay and pastures used an average of 17 pounds of N, 24 pounds of P20 5, and 24 pounds of K20 per acre, Table 8. About one of three farmers applied N and two out of five applied P205 and K20 to hay crops and pastures. Peanuts. Farmers in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East), who used the three major plant nutrients reported an average fer- ,out TABLE 7. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS USING FERTILIZER AND AVERAGE AMOUNT APPLIED PER ACRE ON CORN, 420 FARMS BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Farming area Fertilizer used on corn P0 5 K20 N Farm- Amount Farm- Amount Farm- Amount per ers reper ers reper ers reporting acre' porting acre' porting acres Total amount of plant nrin per acre Pct. 97 Tennessee Valley .......... Sand Mountain ..... ' .. 100 98 Limestone Valleys...... Upper Coastal Plain 100 Piedmont----100 95 Black Belt Lb. 25 57 49 33 38 31 45 44 40 Pct. 98 100 100 93 96 78 98 100 96 Lb. 26 27 32 24 27 25 34 29 28 Pct. 98 100 100 93 96 73 98 100 95 Lb. 20 22 25 19 20 21 28 23 23 Lb. 71 106 106 76 85 77 107 96 91 Lower CgAstal Plain (West) Lower Coastal Plain (East) STATE 98 100 98 'Amount used per acre on farms reporting use of this nutrient on corn. 4From Special Leaflet, "General Fertilizer Recommendations for Alabama." Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University (The Alabama Polytechnic Institute), Auburn, Alabama. October 1956. FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 15 FERT~ILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 1 TABLE 8. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS USING FERTILIZER AND AVERAGE AMOUNT APPLIED PER ACRE ON HAY CROPS AND PASTURES, 389 FARMS BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Farming area Fertilizer used on hay crops and pastures Total N P 20 5 K20 amount Farm- Amount Farm- Amount Farm- Amount of plant per ers reers re- per1 ers re- per1 acre porting acre porting acre porting-acre' per Pct. Lb. Pct. Lb. Pct. Lb. 21 29 14 Lb. 57 72 35 Tennessee Valley______________ 16 15 39 21 38 Sand Mountain 21 12 34 31 33 Limestone Valleys 28 8 52 13 52 Upper Coastal Plain_________ 22 15 24 25 24 Piedmont --------------------------48 8 48 13 38 Black Belt --------------------------30 18 4 30 7 Lower Coastal Plain (West) -----------59 28 55 35 55 Lower Coastal Plain (East)____________________ 54 19 74 29 72 ------------- ------------ 23 16 6 30 63 37 17 93 30 24 78 65 STATE -----------------------32 17 45 24 43 'Amount used per acre on farms reporting use of this nutrient on hay crops and pastures. of 14 pounds of N, 40 pounds of P20 5, and 52 pounds of K2 0 per acre on peanuts in 1957. Fifty-one per cent of the farmers reported applying N to peanuts and virtually all farmers used P20 5 and K20. The reason given for use of N was "to get the young peanut seedling off to a good start ahead of weeds and grass. General with- other well-fertilized crops are 15 to 20 pounds of P2 0 5 and 30 to 40 pounds of K2 0 per acre. Nitrogen is not recommended. For continuous peanuts, 30 to 60 pounds of P20 5 and 40 to 80 pounds of K2 0 are. recommended. In either case, a calcium deficiency for production of peanuts should be corrected. Was there a relationship between pounds of plant nutrients used per acre and average yields of cotton and corn as reported by farmers? fertilizer recommendations for peanuts in rotation Although many factors influence yields besides fertilizer uise, there was a general over-all increase in yield of cotton and corn as level of fertilizer use increased, Table 9. 16 16 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TABLE 9. AVERAGE POUNDS OF PRIMARY PLANT NUTRIENTS APPLIED PER ACRE AND AVERAGE YIELD OF COTTON AND CORN, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Cotton Fanning area Plant nutrents per acre Lb. - 127 - 202 176 - 127 138 Corn Plant nutrients per acre Lb. 71 106 106 76 77 107 96 91 85 Lint yield Lb. 367 487 426 823 Yield Bu. 29 35 30 24 17 30 30 28 29 Tennessee Valley----------------------Sand Mountain----------------------------Limestone Valleys---------------------Upper Coastal Plain-------------------------Piedmont------------------------------Black Belt---------------------------Lower Coastal Plain (West)-----------------------------Lower Coastal Plain (East)------------------------------STATE ------------------------------ 133 170 157 155 330 314 461 306 375 ACCEPTANCE of CHANGES in FERTILIZERS What proportion of farmers used high analysis mixed fertilizers? A high analysis mixed fertilizer, for purposes of this study, was a grade that contained 30 pounds or more of plant nutrients per 100 pounds of material. Eighty out of 463 farmers, or 17 per cent, said they had used such fertilizers. High analysis tilizers and percentages of farmers who reported having used Percentage farmers who used specified grades ferof such grades are as follows: Grade of fertilizer of high analysis fertilizers 9.7 6.0 4.7 1.5 1.5 .4 .4 0-12-20------- --0-10-20---------0-20-20---------10-10-10____--_14-14-14--------15-15-15---- 13-13-13 -------- ------ 8-20-14------12-12-12------ --- Did farmers using high analysis fertilizers prefer them over conventional grades? Fifty out of the 80 farmers, or 62 per cent, who had used high analysis fertilizers said they preferred them over regular grades. FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 17 Why did farmers prefer high analysis fertilizers? Reasons given for the preference were as follows: Reasonpreferring Reason More plant nutrients per bag Cheaper per pound of plant food Other -_30 Percentageof farmers high anaylsis fertilizers who reported specified reasons 54 16 Did some farmers express preference for high analysis fertilizers on one crop but not on another? Yes. Seven out of 50 farmers, or 16 per cent, indicated that their acceptance and use of high analysis fertilizers depended on the crop. Generally, they preferred high analysis fertilizers for hay and pasture crops but not for field crops. They reported some difficulties in obtaining stands of field crops, and these were associated with the use of high analysis fertilizers. The highest percentage of farmers who had used high analysis fertilizers was in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East), although in that area only 44 per cent said they preferred high analysis fertilizers. This rate of preference was lower than that in any other area. Besides the difficulty of obtaining stands of field crops, another factor influencing the preference of high analysis fertilizers was the leaching problem on sandy soils. In the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East), some farmers followed the practice of splitting fertilizer applications to overcome, at least in part, the leaching problem. How many farmers had used a granulated mixed fertilizer? Only 7 per cent of the farmers interviewed said they had used a granulated mixed fertilizer. Almost three-fourths of these farmers said they preferred granulated over pulverized fertilizer because it was "easy to put out." From what sources did farmers get information about new fertilizers? The fertilizer dealer was mentioned most frequently as the source of information about new fertilizers. The Land-Grant College, neighbors, and farmers relying on their own judgment were the second, third, and fourth most important sources of 18 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION information about new fertilizers. Mass media, such as farm magazines, radio, television, and newspapers, ranked below the previously mentioned sources of information about new fertilizers. As to sources of information about general fertilizer practices, the Land-Grant College and farmers' judgment were first and of equal importance. The fertilizer dealer was next in importance. What sources of N did farmers prefer? Forty per cent of the farmers said they preferred ammonium nitrate and 36 per cent preferred nitrate of soda as a source of N. Five per cent stated no preference. Sources of N preferred other than ammonium nitrate and nitrate of soda included ammonium sulfate, anhydrous ammonia, and ammonium nitratelimestone mixtures. What reasons did farmers give for preference to source of N? The various reasons given are as follows: Reason Percentageof farmers reporting various reasons 30 24 24 1 1 39 18 16 6 19 Ammonium nitrate Higher percentage N------------__ Better resultsCheaper per pound of N ----- --- --- --- - -2 --O ther------------N ot reported ..................................... .I Nitrate of soda Always used this source Better results ....Easier to applyNon-acid forming- --------......... -- Other Not reported --------------------- 2 In what kind and size of bag did farmers purchase mixed fertilizer in 1957? Seventy-three per cent of the farmers interviewed purchased mixed fertilizer in paper bags in 1957, Table 10. A higher proportion of farmers in the Tennessee Valley and Sand Mountain areas purchased fertilizer in 50-pound paper bags than those in other areas. Purchases in 100-pound cloth bags were most common in the Black Belt Area. Only in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East) were purchases in 200-pound cloth bags reported. FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 19 FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES TABLE 10. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS REPORTING PURCHASES OF MIXED FERTILIZERS BY KIND AND SIZE OF BAG, 457 FARMERS, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 1 Kind and size of bag Farming area Paper 50100- Cloth 100- pound Pct. Tennessee Valley----- -----30 pound Pct. 39 pound Pct. 200pound Pct. Not reported Pct. 2 -----1 15 0 52 -- 32 Sand Mountain ------------------------------0 0 15 78 7 Limestone Valleys--------------------------0 82 59 8 Upper Coastal.Plain -------------------------- 1 10 0 0 90 0 ----------------Piedm ont -----------------------0 0 18 0 Black B elt -------------------------- 82 0 0 17 83 0 Lower Coastal Plain (West)-------------. 0 7 0 93 0 Lower Coastal Plain (East)--------------. 1 1 25 62 11 STATE ----------------------------29 0 -------- What kind and size of fertilizer bags did farmers prefer? For the State as a whole, there was no difference between the percentage of farmers who preferred paper and those who preferred cloth fertilizer bags, Table 11. The 100-pound size was more commonly preferred than other size groups; however, farmers in the four farming areas comprising northern Alabama indicated a rather strong preference for 50-pound bags for both paper and cloth. TABLE 11. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS EXPRESSING A PREFERENCE FOR VARIOUS KINDS AND SIZES OF FERTILIZER BAGS, 463 FARMS, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Farming area Paper bag X50- Size and kind of bag preferred Cloth hag 8010050100200- Not ported Pct. 0 16 re- pound pound Pct. Tennessee Sand pound pound pound pound Pct. 11 11 Pct. 1 Pct. 35 14 Pct. 24 20 Pct. 0 0 Mountain----------- Valley 0 8-------0 38 Limestone Valleys Upper Coastal Piedmont --------------- Plain -------- 15 3 3 8-----3 0 2 43 11 62 2 21 3 27 27 21 0 2 4 11 3 7 -----Black Belt---------Lower Coastal Plain (West)----------Lower Coastal Plain 2 0 3 0 0 0 14 47 63 3 2 2 78 46 29 3 5 3 0 0 0 (East)------------ STATE-------------- 17 1 30 11 34 2 5 20 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION To what extent were bulk delivery and spreading available to Alabama farmers? Seventy-four per cent of all farmers indicated that bulk delivery and spreading of fertilizer were available, whereas such services were not available to 7 per cent of the interviewed farmers. Nineteen per cent of the farmers did not know whether bulk delivery and spreading were available. In the Black Belt Area, 49 per cent of the farmers did not know whether bulk delivery and spreading were available. What was average distance that bulk fertilizer was hauled from source to farm? The average distance varied from 15 miles in the Limestone Valley Area to 31 miles in the Black Belt Area. Average for the State was 19 miles. Did farmers prefer bulk delivery and spreading to conventional ways of buying fertilizer? No. For the State as an average, less than 1 per cent of the farmers said they preferred bulk delivery and spreading over conventional methods. Was it cheaper to buy fertilizer in bulk and have it spread or to buy in bags and spread? As to which was cheaper depended on each farm situation. As an average, farmers reported an additional cost of $2.70 per ton for delivery and spreading above the cost of the same grade of fertilizer purchased in bags. This additional cost varied from $1.50 in the Sand Mountain Area to $3.90 per ton in the Piedmont Area. No doubt some farmers cannot spread or "put out" fertilizer for the difference in price per ton, considering all costs, such as gasoline, labor, depreciation, and repairs on machinery and equipment. A farmer's alternative opportunities for use of the cash outlay involved as well as the machinery, equipment, and labor used in "putting out" fertilizer also influenced the answer to this question. FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 21 FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 2 PRACTICES RELATED to FERTILIZER and ITS USE What percentage of farmers reported ever having soil tested on the farm they operated? Thirty per cent, or 137 out of 463 farmers for the State as a whole, had some of their soil tested. Percentages for each farming area are as follows: Farmingarea Percentage farmers who had soil tested Tennessee V alley------------------------------- -23 Sand Mountain .------------------------------------ -30 Limestone Valleys----------------------Pied mo nt .----- of U pper Coastal Plain --------------------------------19 -------35 ------ -- -- -------- ----- ----- 38 Black Belt ---- -- ---- -- ---- -- ---- -- ---- -- ---- -- - -24 31 Lower Coastal Plain (West) --------------------Lower Coastal Plain (East)----------------------42 0-----------STATE ---------- How many farmers had soil tested in 1957? Forty-two of the 463 farmers, or 9 per cent, reported having soil tested in 1957. Variation by farming areas was as follows: Percentage who had soil tested in 1957 Tennessee Valley------------8 Sand Mountain ------------------------------------- -12 Limestone Valleys ---------------------------5 U pper Coastal Plain------------------------------ 3 Piedm ont---------- ---------- -------17 12 Black Belt-Lower Coastal Plain (West)-----------------7 Farmingarea Lower Coastal Plain of farmers (East)------------------ 14 S TA T E - - -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- -- -- -9 On what portion of open land was soil tested in 1957? Based on the acreage of cropland used plus open permanent pasture on all farms, only 4.8 per cent of this acreage was covered by soil tests in 1957. However, for the open land on farms where soil was tested in 1957, almost 36 per cent of the acreage was tested. What crops were planted following soil test in 1957? In 50 per cent of the cases, cotton was planted following the soil test. Corn, peanuts, hay and pasture crops, and truck crops 22 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION were the others planted after the soil test in that order reported by farmers. Did farmers follow soil test recommendations? Apparently most farmers followed soil test recommendations. Fifty-three per cent of the farmers who had soil tested in 1957 stated that they followed recommendations; 26 per cent did not follow recommendations. Fourteen per cent had not received soil test results as of the date they were interviewed, and 7 per cent did not know if they followed the recommendations. What were some reasons given by farmers for not following soil test recommendations? Reasons given by 11 out of 42 farmers, 26 per cent, who did not follow soil test recommendations were as follows: "landlord would not go along in purchasing the fertilizer recommended," "weather did not permit following recommendations," and "had no faith in recommendations." What methods were used to apply mixed fertilizer and N to cotton? Slightly more than 70 per cent of the farmers applied mixed fertilizer immediately under or with the seed, whereas 23 per cent applied the fertilizer in bands to the side and below the seed. Only 4 per cent applied mixed fertilizer as a side dressing. The remaining 3 per cent used a combination of methods. A larger portion of farmers in the Tennessee Valley and in the Lower Coastal Plains areas applied mixed fertilizer to cotton in bands than in the other areas. The practice of applying mixed fertilizer as a side dressing was most prevalent in the Black Belt Area. Seventy-nine per cent of the farmers included in the study who grew cotton in 1957 sidedressed with N. Two-thirds of them sidedressed with a distributor and one-third applied the N by hand methods. Hand methods of application were most common in the Black Belt Area. What methods were used to apply mixed fertilizer and N to corn? Seventy per cent of the farmers applied mixed fertilizer to corn directly under or with the seed, and 25 per cent applied it FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 23 in bands to the side and below the seed. The remaining farmers sidedressed or used a combination of methods in applying mixed fertilizer. Eighty-seven per cent of the farmers who grew corn applied N as a side dressing. Methods of application were similar to those for cotton. What methods were used to apply fertilizer to permanent pastures? A majority of farmers in all areas of the State reported use of a fertilizer spreader in applying fertilizer to permanent pastures. As an average for all farms, 78 per cent used a fertilizer spreader and 22 per cent applied fertilizer by hand. Farmers did not report application of straight nitrogen materials to permanent pastures. In some cases, mixed fertilizer containing nitrogen was used. However, most farmers used mixed fertilizer that contained no nitrogen. Did farmers report any problems in handling and applying fertilizer? Yes. About two out of every five farmers reported a problem in handling and applying fertilizer in 1957. Twenty-five per cent of all farmers reported "clogging in hopper" and 14 per cent "caking in bag" as problems. Less than 1 per cent reported "breaking of bag" as a problem. A higher percentage of farmers in the Sand Mountain and Limestone Valley areas reported problems than in other areas. Did farmers store fertilizer on farm? Sixty-two out of 463 farmers, or 13 per cent, reported storing some fertilizer on the farm. In almost all cases, storing was not planned nor intentional. It was simply the case of fertilizer being "left over" above needs at a given time. That stored on the farm was for a period averaging 292 days. In what kinds of buildings was fertilizer stored on farm? With exception of four, all farmers who stored fertilizer in 1957 said that they kept their carryover in a frame building; 19 per cent of them reported storage having dirt floors, whereas 24 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 77 per cent said storage had wood floors. All farmers holding over fertilizer on dirt floors reported fertilizer in an unsatisfactory condition after storage, while those who used wood-floor storage reported satisfactory condition of the held-over fertilizer. Only two farmers reported storage on a concrete floor. Caking in bags and deterioration of bags were reasons given for unsatisfactory storage of fertilizer on dirt floors. How much fertilizer storage space5 did farmers have? Almost three-fourths of the farmers reported storage space for fertilizer. The average amount reported by these farmers was 465 square feet. Assuming that fertilizer bags are stacked five high, such space would accommodate about 58 tons of fertilizer, which is considerably more than the average amount bought in 1957. Was there a price incentive for off-season purchases to encourage farm storage? Based on data from 41 fertilizer dealers, only 4 gave a discount for off-season purchases. Also, apparently very few farmers bought fertilizers at the end of their tax year in order to get additional cash expenses under the cash basis of filing income tax returns. How many days prior to planting in spring and fall did farmers purchase and receive fertilizer delivery? As an average, farmers bought fertilizer 19 days before planting and received delivery 8 days prior to spring planting. In the fall, average buying was 10 days before planting and delivery was 5 days before the planting date. USE of CREDIT for FERTILIZER PURCHASES What proportion of farmers used credit6 to ;. buy fertilizer in 1957? Fifty-eight per cent, or 268 out of 463 farmers as shown in next table, borrowed funds to buy fertilizer in tIe ;spring qf 1957. In the Black Belt Area, where the percentage 6f tenant farmers was greatest, the largest proportion borrowed to 'buy The question on fertilizer storage space was asked in terms of suital le facili-' ties available. Farmers estimated this-amount of storage space. 6 Purchases on 80-day accounts were not considered in the credit category. FERTILIZER USE AND - PRACTICES 25 FERTILIZER USE 6ND PRACTICES 2 fertilizer. The area in which the smallest percentage-borrowed was the Piedmont. Based on estimates of the cost of fertilizer purchased in the spring and the amount borrowed, 46 per cent of the dollar cost of purchases was on a credit basis. Of the farmers who borrowed, three-fourths obtained loans equal to or greater than the cost of spring fertilizer purchased. One-fourth borrowed less than the cost of fertilizer purchased. For farmers using credit, the amount borrowed for fertilizer purchases averaged 84 per cent of the cost of fertilizer they bought in the spring of 1957. Only three farmers reported use of credit for fall purchases of fertilizer. Apparently farmers finance fall fertilizer purchases out of receipts from the sale of crops. Percentage Farming area Tennessee Valley-------------------55 used credit for spring fertilizer purchases, 1957 of farmerswho Sand M ountain--------------------- --------38 4-----------------------------------Limestone Valleys 62 U pper Coastal Plain------------------------------Piedm ont -- --------------------------- -34 -------- ------------------------------ 9 5 Blac k Belt -------Lower Coastal Plain (west)-----------------------56 Lower Coastal Plain (East)------------------------71 STA TE.----------- ------ -- ------5 8 How much money did farmers borrow for fertilizer purchases in spring of 1957? Sixty-eight per cent of the farmers borrowed less than $1,000 and only 9 per cent borrowed $2,000 or more, Table, 12. Eleven TABLE 12. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS WHO F ORROWED VARIOUS AMOUNTS TO PURCHASE FERTILIZER IN THE SPRING OF 1957, 268 FARMS, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Amount borrowed Less than $1,000 to $2,000 to $4,000 Not $1,000 $1,999 $3,999 and over reported Pet. ?ct. Pct. Pct. Pet. 17 3 3 8 69 Tennessee Valley---------------0 0 0 68 32 Sand Mountain_.---------------15 0 4 0 LU mestone Vi lle,-s--------------81 Farming area U ppe' Coast-al Piain-------------Pi edrn1 3nt -------------------------------- Black Belt Lower C(".stal Plain (West)------. i ower Coastal Plain (East)-------STATE --------------------- --------- 72 90 8 0 0 10 0 0 20 0 62 2 4 7 25 85 45 68 3 22 12 3 21 5 6 5 4 3 7 11 26 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 26 ALABAMA AGRICULTUL EPRMN TTO per cent did not report the amount borrowed. The borrowed amount in many cases was used not only for fertilizer but for purchases of seed and certain other items. The major portion of the borrowed amount was used to purchase fertilizer. From what sources did farmers obtain credit for fertilizer purchases? Commercial banks were the source of credit for 38 per cent of the farmers, Table 13. Fertilizer dealers and landlords were the next two most important sources. TABLE 13. PERCENTAGE OF FARMERS REPORTING VARIOUS SOURCES OF CREDIT FOR FERTILIZER PURCHASES, 268 FARMS, BY FARMING AREAS, ALABAMA, 1957 Source of credit Ferti- LandCA 2 dimercial lizer lord FHA'vidual' bank dealer Pct. Pc. Pct. Pc. Pct. Pct. Tennessee Valley 58 22 3 14 3 0 48 24 0 12 8 4 Sand Mountain ___________________ Limestone Valleys 27 46 11 0 12 4 Upper Coastal 1lain_______-____ 33 33 10 6 10 8 40 40 0 0 0 Piedmont20 2 27 53 0 0 18 Black Belt ----------------------------Lower Coastal 20 15 3 0 0 Plain (West)_____________________ 62 Lower Coastal Plain (East)---------------------- 2 38 10 16 24 5 CorFarming area Pc. 0 --------------- -------------- 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 STATE 20 8 -------------------------38 26 4 3 'ProductionHome Administration. Credit Association. 2Farmers 'Individual other than landlord. What other sources of fertilizer credit did farmers know and would consider using? More than half, 59 per cent, said they knew of no, other sources of credit they would consider using. Besides those used, known sources that farmers would consider using were most frequently reported as commercial banks, and fertilizer dealers. Why did farmers use particular sources of credit? Many reasons were given in response to question. How- ever, the most important was past use, tradition,; orr habit in using a given source, of credit. Other reasons, given, .in order this, of importance, were : "felt obligatedr to, landlord," "low interest rate," "convenient," "only source available," and "fair and just treatment."~ FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 27 FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 2 What annual interest rote did farmers pay on fertilizer loans? The annual rate of interest paid varied with source of funds and prevailing rate in local areas. Farmers who borrowed from landlords paid the highest average annual rate of interest, Table 14. Financing tenants by landlords was frequent in the Black Belt Area. In that area not only was, a relatively high rate of interest paid by tenants to landlords, but interest rates paid to other suppliers of credit were also relatively high. TABLE 14. RANGE AND AVERAGE ANNUAL RATE OF INTEREST PAID ON FERTILIZER LOANS ACCORDING TO SOURCE OF CREDIT, 206 FARMS, ALABAMA, 1957 Soure Source of credit ofcreit Frms Farms Annual interest rate paid Range Average No. Pct. Pct. 11.1 7.3 6.31 28 0-48 Landlord ----------------------------90 6-19 Comm ercial hank----------------------------------------0-18 48 Fertilizer dealer-----------------------------3-6 2 20 Production Credit Association 7 0-14 Individual other than landlord---------------10 4-6 Farmers Home Administration -----------------------3-7 O ther - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- ------------------------6.0 5.6 4.9 .0 1 In calculating rate of interest paid, the principal amount borrowed was based on the credit price for fertilizer, whicb was somewhat higher than the cash price. 2 The 3 per cent considers the dividends received on stock. The rate of interest, in most cases, was calculated from information supplied by farmers. This included the amount borrowed, date borrowed and date repaid, amount paid as interest, loan. Many farmers did or the rate of interest, and the type not know the annual rate of interest they were paying. Fourteen farmers obtained a discouinted loan, or one in which interest was deducted in advance. As a result, the interest rate paid was higher than the stated rate. This is reflected in the interest rates as shown in Table 14. )f Wt1hat security was used by farmers in obtaining fertilizer loans? The security used included uns-ecured notes, crop notes, chatTwenty-five per tel mortgages and real estate who borrowed money for fertilizer incent of the 268 required by the lender. Forty-five dicated that no - ecurity farmers mortgages. per cent reported a chatte1 mortgage, 21 per cent a crop note, 5 per cent a real estate mortgage, and 4 per cent an unsecured was 28 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Did terms of credit for fertilizer loans differ from those prevailing for other production items? No. Credit terms and practices were reported to be the same whether the loan was for purchasing fertilizer or other production items such as seed and insecticides. Actually most loans were production loans and a major portion of the funds was used for fertilizer purchases. What sources of income were used to repay fertilizer loans? Receipts from the sale of crops were reported by 72 per cent of the farmers who borrowed as the source of funds for repayment of fertilizer loans. Receipts from sales of livestock and livestock products as well as Soil Bank payments were also reported used for repayment of loans. Only 5 per cent reported income from off-farm work used to repay fertilizer loans. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS How do farmers decide on the grade and amount of fertilizer to use per acre? Apparently tradition plays a big part in the decision as to grade and amount of fertilizer to use. Farmers were asked how they decided on tie grade of fertilizer to use. Fifty-three per cent replied that they rade the decision as to grade on the basis of past grades u;ed. In other words, they continued to use the same grades it past results had been satisfactory. Twelve per cent of the farriers mentioned general recommendations in connection with decicing on a grade to use and 7 per cent mentioned soil tests. Other factors mentioned were "grade neighbor uses," "grade dbaler recommends," "grade landlord recommends," and "cheapest grade per ton." Answers to the question on amount of fertilizer to use were similar to those for grade. A ,higher percentage (71 per cent) however, said that the amount of fertilizer used depended on past experience. In addition to the foregoing replies, a few farmers mentioned credit o" funds available for fertilizer purchases as a factor influencing the amount of fertilizer used. What costs do farmers consider when purchasing fertilizer? Although cost was not a factor that farmers voluntarily reported as being important in making fertilizer decisions, th FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 29 were asked if they considered cost in deciding on the grade and amount of fertilizer to use. If the answer was affirmative, farmers were asked what cost they considered. The costs were grouped as follows: per ton, per pound of plant food, per bag, or additional cost relative to expected additional return from use of more fertilizer. Fifty per cent of the farmers indicated they considered cost of fertilizer in deciding on grade and amount to buy. When asked what cost they considered, 64 per cent said "cost per ton." Twenty-seven per cent said they considered cost per pound of plant nutrients. Only 5 per cent considered cost per bag and 4 per cent the additional cost relative to expected additional return from use of added amounts of fertilizer. The cost per bag is obviously the same basis as cost per ton. The total pounds of plant nutrients that farmers buy depend on the level of fertilization, acreage of crops fertilized, and many other factors. The decision as to amount of fertilizer to apply to a given crop also depends on several things. If the additional return (additional production X price per pound, per bushel, etc.) is equal to or greater than the additional cost of fertilizer applied, it would be profitable to apply more fertilizer. Possibly more farmers make the decision as to amount of fertilizer to use on the basis described than is reflected in answer to the question on what cost they considered. Also, involved in this question was farmer's recognition of cost per pound of plant nutrients. Tt appears that farmers are influenced most by price per ton. V'ery few figure the actual cost per pound of N, P20 5, and KO that they get in mixed fertilizers or the cost of a single nutr;ent in straight goods. After calculating the cost per pound of plant nutrients, one has the basis for deciding among several grades or kinds of fertilizer to buy. D d farmers recognize the influence of changing prices received and costs on level of Lertilizer used? No. A majority of farmers did not. Farmers were given three alternative answ"rs to the question. "If the price received for a crop increasect and the cost of fertilizer remained the same, what would you do?" Less than half the farmers said they would apply more fertilizer per 9cre. Fifty per ceint said they would make no change in amount of fertilizer used, and 2 per cent id they would apFly less fertilizer. 30 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION On what crops did farmers report that higher rates of fertilization would pay? Although a majority of farmers did not recognize the influence of prices received and costs on level of fertilization, slightly more than 60 per cent were of the opinion that additional fertilizer would pay on cotton and corn. Seventy per cent or more indicated that additional fertilizer would pay on small grain, temporary pasture, and permanent pasture. Did farmers check fertilizer prices at more than one place before buying? Yes; 236, or 51 per cent, reported checking fertilizer prices at more than one place prior to buying. The highest percentage of farmers who checked prices at more than one place was in the Lower Coastal Plain Area (East) and the lowest percentage was in the Black Belt Area. Thirty-five per cent of the farmers in the State who inquired about fertilizer prices before buying checked at two places, 33 per cent at three places, 24 per cent at four places, 7 per cent at more than four places, and 1 per cent did not report the number. What difference was fbund in cash and credit prices for fertilizer in "957? Fifty-three per cent of the farmers who checked fertilizer prices found a difference in the cash and credit prices in 1957. The average difference wy,,S$2.00 per ton in favor of the cash payment. Dealers who n£nd e credit sales charged the credit price per ton in addition t interest. CONCLUSIONS and RECC vMENDATIONS As an average, farmers are doing a better .job of fertilizing cotton than corn or hay and, pasture crops. This is partly attributable to cotton being rccognized as a cash crop and a direct source of income. To a lage extent on Alabama farms corn. hay, and pasture crops mustibe utilized by livestock to produce income. The outcome depends not only on produetion and utilization of these crops but:also on rar other livestock management factors. In both research and educational programs; additional emphasis needs to be placed on. the role of _fertdlizers in producing feed and pastur, crops and the economics invob ed Farmers desire to know the conditiong undo which profits FERTILIZER USE AND PRACTICES 31 be made by producing and utilizing corn, hay, and pasture crops. They also want to know the level of profit that can be expected with various systems of using these crops. A relatively small percentage of farmers have used high analysis mixed fertilizers. Of those who have used a high analysis fertilizer, a majority favored it over regular grades, primarily because it contained more plant nutrients per bag. A number of farmers preferred high analysis fertilizers for hay and pasture crops but not for row crops because they had difficulty in obtaining good stands when high analysis fertilizer was used. Dealers and agricultural workers should better inform farmers about the place and proper use of high analysis fertilizer. The study showed the fertilizer dealer to be the most important source of information to farmers on new fertilizers. Fertilizer manufacturers and dealers need to consider more widespread use and emphasis on packaging fertilizer in 50-pound bags. Twenty-eight per cent of the farmers expressed a preference for this bag size. This preference is significant in view of a larger proportion of farmers in age groups of 55 or over than was true a few years ago. Also, the prominence of part-time farming and the use of fertilizers on lawns, flowers, and gardens by urban residents cannot be o'"erlooked, Lack of credit does not arpear to be problem in connection with fertilizer use. However, farmer- ilo not recognize the various sources of credit available to them Apparently they do not weigh the costs of credit from varior, ources but rely on sources that they have previously used. Th;s ". an acute problem among tenants. It is related to a low form' 1 -ducation level of the farm iter emphasis in research operater and associated factors. d,xtension teaching should be pat red on the role of credit and odern farming operations. the wise ute of credit in financin, Tradi io~ and habit play a mai.,. Fart in farmers' decisions on grade and amount of fertilizer to 'ei Those who consider cost are guided in their decision primarily oy cost per ton rather than cost per pound of plant nutrients. A majority of farmers do not thinL in terms of how mucn they w"l get back from using additio ia1 amounts of fertilizer on a._iven crop. They do not recognize the influence of e.hangmng prc s received and costs on level (f fertilizer use. ' here is a dive need for vastly better informed Alabana farmer; rela':iv e to the e-,nomics of fertilizer use. - 53031