Got most of the farm sampled recently, pH, indicies and Organic matter. Makes quite interesting reading, P and K indicies are generally 3-4, couple of low K values, around 2, in fields cut twice last year which is expected. Most interesting though is the soil OM. A range between 5.1% and 12.4%. I can't quite believe that high one (maybe a dodgy sample?). Anyway, the two highest (12.4% and 8.3%) are fields not ploughed for the last 20+ years. The next three highest (8.2%, 8.1% and 7.2%) are in a two new ley's and one put in 5 years ago, all were slathered, and I mean black, with muck before cultivation which involved ploughing. I was quite suprised as we are these days told ploughing basically takes your OM in the first few inches of topsoil back to square one. It's a fairly crude test as we didn't pay for any of the extras but just wondered if anyone else has tested for OM recently and their findings?
Soil samples
- Thread starter DairyNerd
- Start date
- Location
- Lorette Manitoba
You have some good fertility going on in your soil and with the high organic matter you are in a good position. The higher two samples I’m thinking are basically permanent pasture which could give those type of levels. Also the location in relation to your dairy unit. Years gone by slurry was literally dumped/spread wherever was possible but now the value of it and with better equipment it tends to be managed better. This was the case here,around my yard I have higher organic matter snd P and K as it was a former dairy many moons ago.
ollie989898
Member
Lower than expected K could be because you are taking a lot of it away in silage cuts.
Organic matter levels are a bit more contentious but if you aren't regularly ploughing everything every year, you'd be surprised how much organic matter grass leys put down. Just imagine a very bulky grass silage crop stood up waving in the wind and then consider how much root mass those plants much have to support all that growth?
Organic matter levels are a bit more contentious but if you aren't regularly ploughing everything every year, you'd be surprised how much organic matter grass leys put down. Just imagine a very bulky grass silage crop stood up waving in the wind and then consider how much root mass those plants much have to support all that growth?
My concern would be the index 4 fields. Yes we all think that’s good and I agree it is but in the environment agency eyes they are starting to say you cannot speed slurry on those fields so when you do your nutrient management plans etc you suddenly find you do not have enough land to spread slurry on due to not being allowed to use the higher index fields. Then your problems begin, ironically caused by being a good farmer. 
organicguy
Member
- Location
- North East of the south west
We have had lots of samples taken for a project funded by MacDonalds. At the most basic level the organic matters are proportional to the number of years since last ploughed and the intensity of the cropping when ploughed.
ollie989898
Member
My concern would be the index 4 fields. Yes we all think that’s good and I agree it is but in the environment agency eyes they are starting to say you cannot speed slurry on those fields so when you do your nutrient management plans etc you suddenly find you do not have enough land to spread slurry on due to not being allowed to use the higher index fields. Then your problems begin, ironically caused by being a good farmer.
Which is why I have said for years never let any third party quango do your soil sampling. Take and pay for your own samples so that the ministry doesn't know what the score is.
ollie989898
Member
Why do you think one was as high as 23? That seems unexpectedly high unless it was an organic type of soil perhaps? 
Why do you think one was as high as 23? That seems unexpectedly high unless it was an organic type of soil perhaps?
We have a few field that have very peaty soil hence the high organic matter levels.
- Location
- Wiltshire
I am there now, doing planning for a lagoon and everyone is all over my nutrient management plans. Lots of high P here, officially 4 and above no organic manure, index 3 is crop need only, which is not very much. I’ve used no bag P for over 30 years not even DAP on maize.My concern would be the index 4 fields. Yes we all think that’s good and I agree it is but in the environment agency eyes they are starting to say you cannot speed slurry on those fields so when you do your nutrient management plans etc you suddenly find you do not have enough land to spread slurry on due to not being allowed to use the higher index fields. Then your problems begin, ironically caused by being a good farmer.
This is a massive problem for the industry that most are not aware of. And working with Natural England is problematic. My Catchment Sensitive officers have been great.
In my view nobody with livestock should be using any phosphate from a bag irrespective of index. It’s not long before we will be shipping animal manure like the digester guys are. I can see a point where we may be fighting to for land to spread manure.
Bg
Headless chicken
Member
- Location
- West Wales
My concern would be the index 4 fields. Yes we all think that’s good and I agree it is but in the environment agency eyes they are starting to say you cannot speed slurry on those fields so when you do your nutrient management plans etc you suddenly find you do not have enough land to spread slurry on due to not being allowed to use the higher index fields. Then your problems begin, ironically caused by being a good farmer.
veg is your short term solution and careful consideration of the rb209. Even at 4’s it can require significant levels of P. Obviously depending on weather conditions will determine if your able to complete you planned crop rotation
ollie989898
Member
The problem is that you'll get fields in your area that are isolated but low in say P or K. You then can't really apply shed loads of slurry or manure to these fields in an attempt to correct a problem because you will be seen as applying far too much of the other nutrients, some of them also have poor availability.
I would agree broadly though that most livestock farms should not need to buy much P or K and some probably might not need to buy a lot of N either. This is only true though of farms which have significant numbers of animals relative to their farmed area. Not all land in Somerset is farmed in this way. I drive through the Mendips and I see fields which I know are hungry as hell because they seem yellow and hungry all year round. Go past a dairy farm and everything is green irrespective of the time of year. I'd be willing to bet that some of this land is low in P or K or both.
Our place can be seen for miles, especially against our sheep neighbours, some of them are only green because of the rushes
- Location
- Wiltshire
I wasn’t thinking as much about agronomy as legislation. If you are spreading muck with low indexes then the land is further from it becoming an issue, so it’s best to build slowly to keep issues away. You will have more idea of p indexes over Somerset but if there is a concentration of farms with high indexes I can see issues in the future with numbers of farmers in areas having to find export areas. That is where the low index land may have a use.
Bg
ollie989898
Member
There will definitely be farms that are stocked more highly and who have what you and I class as a nutrient problem in the medium term. Ultimately if serious legislation comes in and you aren't allowed to apply P or K then slurry storage won't be the issue it will be finding people willing to accept your slurry and the cost that comes with it.
For some it may end up being a very real and concrete limit to their stocking rate.
- Location
- Wiltshire
There are alot of dairy farmers worrying about this very problem, the stupid thing is there is ground fairly local to them all that is pee poor and crying out for some manure but for various reasons neighbours/locals cannot work together for mutual benefit.
ollie989898
Member
I don't understand why someone with land they know is low in P and K wouldn't accept nutrients from another farm. If you were concerned about the disease risk then have it applied last thing in the autumn and leave it over winter, the benefit would still be there come the following spring.
The p and k in straw is worth a fortune if you want to buy it from an arable farmer, but put it in a yard and get a cow to dung on it, and all of a sudden, it becomes worthless, and you have to give it back to them. Doesn't help when their agronomists tell them that the nutrients aren't available. That's a good thing, it's slow release, but obviously it's better if it comes out of a bag.