The Fertiliser Action Plan using best practice fertiliser management

for industry and environmental benefits

Supported by WA Government, Western Dairy, WA Farmers, PGA,

Fertiliser Industry Association, and …

What is Fertiliser Action Plan (FAP)?

• FAP then:– phase out of highly water soluble P fertilisers

• FAP now:1. regulated phosphorus content in domestic use

fertilisers;2. ‘best practice’ management of commercial use

fertilisers; • fostering economic benefits for farmers through

improved nutrient management and achieving environmental benefits

• based on industry self regulation around best practice and reduction in bureaucracy

2. enhanced uptake of soil amendments.

Providing the best advice for individual situations

• Fertiliser users will get best advice from Fertcare accredited advisers (major company reps accredited)

• Aim is to apply phosphorus where profitable – reduce use where it is not profitable – Farmers will use P more efficiently

Current soil test P

Environmental soil test P

Agronomic optimum soil test P95%

90%85%80%

Hig

h P

stat

us

reduced soil Preduced offsite risk

reduced fertiliser costs

reduced soil Preduced offsite risk

reduced fertiliser costs

reduced soil Preduced offsite risk

reduced fertiliser costs

reduced soil Preduced offsite risk

reduced fertiliser costs

environmental cost of productionother practices

environmental cost of productionother practices

95% maximum production

Bicarbonate P (mg kg-1)

PBI Low Medium High<5 <7 7-10 >10

≥5-10 <10 10-15 >15≥10-15 <15 15-20 >20≥15-35 <20 20-25 >25≥35-70 <25 25-29 >29≥70-140 <29 29-34 >34≥140-280 <34 34-40 >40≥280-840 <40 40-55 >55

Providing the best advice for individual situations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Co

lwe

ll s

oil t

es

t P

(m

g/k

g)

73

62

52 48

Soil test Pmg/kg

Critical soiltest value~35 mg/kg

No pasture DM responseobtained to applied P

4.9 9.3 12.3 9.6 11.2

t pasture DM/ha consumed per year

No P applied since 2000 (Rodwell farm, Boyanup)

Influence of pH on nutrient availability

Soil acidity

Potassium and Sulphur deficiency

$ wasted on P based fertilisers when it could be spent on other deficient elements

45% also require lime

Fertilised independently of soil test

56% have high P status

Soil test results ignored

$ wasted

LowHigh Plant response

Fertcare - Built in QA

• Fertiliser Industry Federation of Australia has Fertcare program.

• Fertcare involves rigorous training and accreditation system

• Fertcare Accredited Advisers are independently assessed and audited.

• Fertcare advisers bound by rules defining critical P and P retention levels

• Advice must fit with best management guidelines

• Guidelines developed by industry (fertiliser companies and farmer bodies) on the basis of good science and years of WA trial work

• Advice can only be given on the basis of soil/tissue tests

Broad support

New FAP direction backed by: • local and national science (X years trials

on Coastal Plain in WA) • Industry (fertiliser companies and farmer

industry bodies ie Western Dairy) • Government – Dept. Agriculture and Food,

Dept Environment and Dept. Water

Firsthand experience: Ken MacLeay, Blackrock Angus

Blackrock Angus

Located at Vasse

380ha

300 breeders 80 bulls

Traditional application of fertilizer after soil testing of approx 200kg/ha in autumnSpring supplement to hay paddocks to 200kg/ha

Lime application 2.5t/ha every seven years

Fertilizer expense represented our biggest direct cost after labour/drawings

Blackrock Angus

Invited to participate in Fertilizer Management Plan (Nutrient Management Systems) 08/09

One of the best programs we have been involved in.

Why?

Gave me a better understanding of my fertiliser practise including the latest recommendations for P relative to PRI ,

and saved $$$$$.

Blackrock Angus

Spreadsheet Table of Complete Data Set for Extensive Nutrient Analysis - Ken MacLeay

pH 1 5 pH 1 5

EC_1_5

_ H20

dS

Organfc

_

carbon_

Walkley

Slack

Nltrate_

nitrogen

KCI mg

Ammon

i

um_nitr

ogen

KC

Phosph

o

rus_Col

well

mg

Phosph

o

rus_Buff

er

Index

Potassiu

m_Colw

ell mg

Sulfur_K

Cl 40

m

ExchCa_

BaCI2_N H4CI m

PADDOCK_num P a d d o c k D e s c r i p t l o n

C o m m e n t Analyte _ C a C I 2 _H20 m prcnt kg Lmgkg _kg _PBI kg 6kg eqlOOg

ExchMg

_BaCI2_

NH4CI_

meqlOO

g

ExchK_

B

aCI2_N

H

4CI_me

q lOOg

ExchNa

_

BaCI2_

N

H4CI_m

eqlOOg

ExchAI.

BaCI2_N

H4CI_m

eqlOOg ECEC_m

eqlOOg ExchMg

_prcnt ExchNa

_ prcnt

Calcium

_magne

sium_ra

t io

Copper

_

DTPA_

m gkg

Z l n c _ D T P A . m g k g

M a n g a n e s e _ D T

P A _ m g k g

lron_DT

PAjngk

g

Boron_h

otCaCI2

_mgj<g

Chlorlde

_

H2O_mg

k I

Aluminlu

m_CaCI2

_mgkg 8 8 845-846 A S.2 5.8 0.717 3.76 47 14 119 46.3 276 91 7.47 181 0.74 1.98 0.06 12.06 15.01 16.42 4.13 1.12 2.81 2.12 173.16 0.9 4 2

Hay Shed 7 HAY SHED 843-844 A 5.2 5.9 0.101 3.05 12 10 78 45.3 117 6 4.78 0.49 0.27 0.19 0.11 5.84 8.39 3.25 9.76 0.71 3.97 3.22 94.89 0.5 4 1.7 Centra! 3 CENTRAL 834 835 A 5 5.9 0.211 2.43 12 14 34 55.2 113 17.5 4.2 0.64 0.28 0.54 0.22 5.88 10.88 9.18 6.56 0.45 1.14 ',.1! 85.28 0.5 4 4.2 La newsy 6 LANEWAY 840-841-842 A 5.1 6 0.241 3.11 15 9 43 72.2 103 22.6 7.01 0.91 0.23 0.49 0.09 8.73 10.42 5.61 7.7 0.52 2.42 4.38 123.74 0.6 3 1.7 Jindong 2 JINDONG 832-833 A 4.7 5.4 0.479 3.74 12 14 59 89.2 96 82.1 4.37 1.11 0.22 1.63 0.23 7.56 14.68 21.56 3.94 0.63 1.68 5.22 231.6 0.6 5 3.3 Bully 2 11 BULLY 852-853 A 4.6 5.5 01,66 3.3 10 24 73 63.4 92 54.1 4.56 1.42 0.22 2.11 0.13 8.44 16.82 25 3.21 0.58 2.47 5.28 235.59 0.5 5 2.5 Marybrook 16 MONYBROOK 863-864 A 4.5 5.5 0.237 3.36 13 10 69 60.5 87 27.9 4.03 0.99 0.29 0.58 0.24 6.13 16.15 9.46 4.07 0.53 1.85 12.08 239.21 0.5 4 4 Calf 9 CALF- 847 -848 A 4.2 5.2 0.189 3.41 7 12 91 56.4 86 13.7 347 0.36 0.22 0.43 0.44 4.92 7.32 8.74 9.64 1.07 2.67 2.06 163.08 0.5 3 9.7 Paper Bark Central 13 PAPER BARK CENTRAL 856- A 4.8 5.7 0.228 3.1 15 12 45 55.9 80 14.7 6.13 0.86 0.2 0.56 0.16 7.91 10.87 7.08 7.13 0.71 2.5 8.88 138.17 0.6 4 2.1 New House 72 NEW HOUSE 8/7-87R A ' 4.6 5.6 0.079 3 8 6 )2 894 80 5.1 3.71 0.58 0.18 0.22 0.29 4.98 1 1 65 4.47 6.4 0.31 1.2 938 73.76 0.4 5 3.7 Paper Bark North 15 PAPER BARK NORTH 860-81 A 4.7 5.5 0.58 2.29 9 7 45 76.4 75 59.6 3.54 1.29 0.18 1.77 0.17 6.95 18.56 75.47 2.74 0.38 0.95 3.74 257.44 0.5 5 2.1 Potato 1 25 POTATO 1 883-884 A 4.3 5.3 0.099 2.73 5 11 33 50.2 73 5.6 4.28 0.74 0.2 0.28 0.32 5.82 12.71 4.81 5.78 0.39 0.86 4.6 74.01 0.4 3 4 House 1 HOUSE 830-831 A 4.7 5.5 0.209 3.3 18 13 75 64.4 72 16.8 5.06 0.61 0.18 0.47 0.22 6.54 9.33 7.19 8.3 0.71 1.34 5.85 219 0.4 4 3.9 Windmill 19 WINDMILL 871-872 A 4.6 5.4 0.365 3 7 10 39 31.8 72 129 4.38 0.75 0.21 0.75 0.17 6.26 11.98 11.98 5.84 0.68 1.64 4.68 155.96 0.4 3 2.2 Armstrong 20 ARMSTRONG 3 873-874 A 4.3 5.3 0.229 2.53 15 17 28 59.6 72 22.3 2.45 0.38 0.17 0.53 0.31 3.84 9.9 13.8 6.45 0.46 1.2 2.29 166.93 0.3 4 6.6 Pine Tree 21 PINE TREE 875-876 A 4.6 5.6 0087 2.41 3 7 42 57.4 70 6.8 3.43 0.61 0.15 0.27 0.19 4.65 13.12 5.81 5.62 0.41 1.83 9.96 66.74 0.3 3 2.9 20 Acre 12 20AC 854-855 A 4.5 5.5 0.327 2.7 6 13 37 57.4 70 40.9 3.15 1.18 0.16 1.24 0.24 5.97 19.77 20.77 2.67 0.77 1.84 4.95 2059 0.5 4 4 Ward! 23 WARDS 879-880 A 4.6 5.6 0.057 2.14 4 6 34 55.2 70 3.3 3.14 0.41 0.16 0.13 0.28 4.12 9.95 3.16 7.66 0.33 1.38 5.63 47.57 0.3 4 4.5 Dawsons Hay 18 HAY DAWSON 869-870 A 4.9 5.7 0.277 3.76 21 11 46 53.6 69 42.6 7.1 0.7 0.12 0.62 0.11 8.65 8.09 7.17 10.14 0.67 2.61 7.92 177.04 0.5 3 0.8 Roses 17 ROSES 865-866 A 5.2 6 0.274 3.04 11 11 38 71.5 69 34.2 6.22 0.82 0.17 0.72 0.09 8.02 10.22 8.98 7.59 0.51 2.06 4.01 129.31 0.5 4 1.1 Paper Bark South 14 PAPER BARK

SOU TH 858-

8S A 4.7 5.4 0.645 3.54 8 12 42 68.6 66 54.3 4.64 1.77 0.15 1.57 0.16 8.29 21.35 18.94 2.62 0.62 1.42 6.77 247.31 0.6 3 2.1

Yard 24 YARD 881 -882 A 4.4 5.4 0.072 2.56 8 10 24 47.8 66 4.5 4.42 0.63 0.15 0.18 0.31 5.69 11.07 3.16 7.02 0.34 0.88 12.67 90.83 0.3 5 4.1 Bully 1 10 BULLY 850-851 A 4.8 5.5 0.443 2.74 6 9 65 64.6 61 47 4.06 0.85 0.15 1.37 0.15 6.58 12.92 20.82 4.78 0.6 1.18 2.12 238.19 0.4 4 2.4 H a y l 4 HAY 836-838 A 4.7 5.4 0.301 3.61 16 8 27 70.1 50 52.8 5.44 0.65 0.1 0.59 0.18 6.96 9.34 8.48 8.37 0.55 1.99 4.56 100.7 0.6 2 4.1

Spreadsheet also supplied to grower containing data and recommendations based on critical limits.

Blackrock Angus

Blackrock Angus

For the last two seasons 09 and 10 fertilizer applications have been reduced dramatically.

Current recommendations suggest application rates from zero to 70kg/ha are adequate.

The savings have more than compensated for doubling annual lime application to 300t.

This has resulted in big savings with no loss of production.

Blackrock Angus

Conclusion:

Ensure sufficient soil and tissue testing carried out to enable precise fertilizer application. Acknowledgements to: John Lucey DAFWA, Sam Taylor Agvivo, Andrew Wherrett UWA

Soil testing 2010

2010 program overview

• 835 samples from 31 farms• Average of 27 samples per farm• Range from 3 to 89 samples per farm• As of today, we have results back for 785

samples

High P status and other deficiencies

See Neroli for a SPANA

Summary

• 835 samples from 31 farms– Beef in Peel Harvey, Dairy in Geographe

• 87% have pH<5.5• 65% have low to marginal K, 20% low K• 61% have high P status95

– increases to 91% high P status at 80% production– most high P for higher PBI soils– 52% have high P and low pH– 31% have high P and low K– 28% have high P, low K and low pH

• Maps are a big hit

Are you interested?

• Is your farm located on the Swan Coastal or Scott River Plain?

• Do you graze cattle for Beef?• Please contact us to lodge your

Expression Of Interest for the 2011 soil sampling program.

• Tilwin Westrup 9780 6165 (Swan Coastal South)

• Peta Richards 9777 0144 (Scott River)• Heidi Blackburn 9733 7713(Swan

Coastal North)